Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

which Photius gives of them, who had read his work abovementioned, is this: "He teaches that

the God of the Jews is evil; that the God preached by Jesus Christ is good. He speaks of God by the names of Father and Son: he says that Christ was not really man, though he ap• peared to be so; that he appeared to the disciples differently, sometimes young, sometimes old, · and less at one time than another, and sometimes so high as to touch the heavens with his head: • he says

that Christ was not crucified, but another in his room; that marriage is evil in itself, and of the evil one; that God is not the creator of dæmons. In the Acts of John he seems to argue against images.'

From this account, though possibly Photius is not exact, and may have misrepresented some things, it may be concluded that " Leucius agreed in divers respects with the Manichees, or rather they with him. For we may hence argue that, as he said the God of the Jews was evil

, he did not receive the books of the Old Testament. We likewise perceive that he was one of them who are called Docetæ, and that he did not believe Christ to be man really, but in appearance only: he likewise had a disadvantageous opinion of marriage, and highly extolled perpetual virginity: he denied that dæmons were made by God, and condemned the use of pictures and images. Beausobre o has carefully examined the forecited extract of Photius, and made just remarks upon it, for discovering the real sentiments of Leucius.

(3) I am to consider the time of Leucius. Mr. Jones was positive that • Leucius was a Manichee, and that he did not live before the latter part of the third, or the beginning of the fourth, century after Christ: and many others undoubtedly are of the same opinion. But . Grabe placeth him in the second century, as does' Mill; who supposeth that he flourished about the year of Christ 140, and has a great many just observations upon this man and his works, to whom I refer the reader; not judging it needful to transcribe a modern author who is, or ought to be, in every body's hands. Beausobre is exactly of the same mind with the two last mentioned writers: and says that, unless by a Manichee be meant one who held the same or like opinions with them, it is certain that Leucius was not a Manichee, be having lived more than a hundred years before Mani was born. He then proceeds to mention divers arguments for that supposition, which appears to me very considerable: but I may not now stay to transcribe or abridge them.

4. Lastly, I am to mention some observations upon the works of Leucius, and the apocryphal writings made use of by the Manichees.

(1) It seems to me not improbable that all the preceding quotations of apocryphal books in Augustine are taken out of one and the same book, called Acts or Travels of the Apostles, and composed by Leucius.

(2) So much I said formerly. I now add : It seems to me that the Apocryphal Acts of Andrew, Thomas, Peter, John, and even Paul, were not distinct books, but parts of one and the same work called Acts of the Apostles. Photius, as before quoted, calls the work of Leucius, Travels of the Apostles. That very title might lead us to suppose there was somewhat in that piece concerning all

, or most of the apostles. In his article of Agapius he says, “ that Mani- . chæan author makes use of The Acts of the twelve Apostles, especially those of Andrew.' It does not follow that The Acts of Andrew or Thomas, or the like, were distinct works, because they are sometimes quoted severally and alone. We have a proof of this in the article of Leucius, just now transcribed from Photius, where at the end he mentions the Acts of John distinctly whilst yet, unquestionably, they were a part only of the work before described by the general title of The Travels of the Apostles: which also he expressly said contained The Acts of Peter, John, Andrew, Thomas, Paul. Mill likewise · allows it to be one work which contained Acts of several apostles. 2 φησι γαρ αλλον ειναι τον των Ιεδαιων θεον και κακον Concerning the opinions of Leucius, see Beaus. T. i. po -αλλον δε τον Χριςον, όν φησιν αγαθον

384 390.

Ib. p. 384-390. αυτον και πατερα και υίον λεγει δε μηδ' ενανθρωπήσαι αληθως, , d Ib. V. i. p. 303, &c. αλλα δοξαι και πολλα πολλακις φανηναι τοις μαθηταις, νεον e-figmentum Leucii hæretici, seculo secundo plura και πρεσβυτην παλιν, και παλιν παιδα, και μειζονα και ελατ- ejusmodi cudentis. Grabe Spic. Τ. Ι. p. 58.- Leucius, τονα, και μεγιςον, ώςε την κορυφην διηκειν εσθ' οτε μεχρις ερανα sive Lucius, Marcionis successor. Sec. ii. ib. p. 78,

και τον Χριςον μη ταυρωθηναι, αλλ' έτερον αντ' αυτο. quæ Lucium seculi ii. hæreticum auctorem habere videntur.

Γαμος δε νομιμες αθετει, και πασαν γενεσιν πονηραν τε ib. p. 324. ' Proleg. n. 333–340. και το πονηρε' και πλασης των δαιμονων αλλον εκκληροι

& Hist. de Man. T. i. p. 349, 350. δοκει δε κατ' εικόνων τους εικονομαχοις εν ταις Ιωαννε πραξεσι " Ib. p. 350, 351. dory Matitely. Phot. Cod. 114, p. 292.

i Consarcinati quoque erant ab eodem Charino, teste, qui

και καλει

[ocr errors]

(3) Another observation to be mentioned here is, that there is no good reason to think, as some have done, that the apocryphal scriptures, made use of by the Manichees, were forged by them. No, they had no occasion to forge books of that sort: for they found most of their sentiments encouraged by apocryphal books, composed by authors of earlier antiquity. Those a books favoured their sentiments concerning the seeming humanity of Jesus, the merit of virginity or celibacy, and the imperfection of the marriage-state. They therefore took the advantage of those writings, and sometimes quoted or appealed to them.

Cyril, above quoted, says the gospel of Thomas was written by a disciple of Mani, so called. But • Beausobre well argues that this gospel was not forged by the Manichees; forasmuch as it was in being before the rise of Manichæism; and is mentioned among spurious writings, not only by o Eusebius, but also by " Origen, in the preface to his Commentary upon St. Luke's Gospel

. He adds, that the gospel of Thomas is placed among apocryphal books in the Synopsis, which is in the works of Athanasius, without imputing it to the Manichees. Gelasius likewise contents himself with saying of this gospel, that it was used by the Manichees, without adding that ' it was forged by them.

The same may be shewn to be probable with regard to other books made use of by the Manichees.

Eusebius among spurious books written by heretics, reckons & Acts of Andrew, John, and other apostles. Epiphanius says that The Acts of Andrew, John, and Thomas, were used by the Encratites: The Acts of Andrew and Thomas by the apostolics: The * Acts of Andrew and other apostles by the Origenists: all three sects, which are supposed to be older than the Manichees.

Augustine particularly observes of " a hymn used by the Priscillianists, that it was among the apocryphal scriptures: and then adds, Not that these apocryphal scriptures are peculiarly theirs; for there are several sects of very different opinions from each other, who delight in is those books, as fetching thence some support for some of their notions.'

(4) I add but one observation more, which is, that these apocryphal books confirm the history of the genuine and authentic scriptures of the New Testament. They do not directly contradict them; they indirectly confirm and establish them. For they are composed and written in the names of such as our authentic scriptures say were apostles, or companions of apostles. They all suppose the dignity of our Lord's person, and the power of working miracles, together with a high degree of authority, to have been conveyed by him to his apostles.

SECT. VII.

Various readings, and select passages, in Faustus the Manichee. I shall here take some notice of various readings in the New Testament, or the texts of scripture made use of by the Manichees, and likewise some select passages, or observations, in Faustus the Manichee.

1. The catholics, as " Faustus observes, asserted the integrity of the books of the New Testament, and could not endure the supposition that they had been corrupted and interpolated. librum ipsum diligenter perlustrarat, Photio, Ilepioso. Aposto- See before ch. xli. p. 588, &c. lorum. -Complectebatur autem istud volumen 1. Acta m Hymnus sane, quem dicunt esse Domini nostri Jesu Petri. 2. Acta Joannis.- -3. Acta Andrex..

Christi, in scripturis solet apocryphis inveniri. Quæ non 4. Acta Thomæ. Mill. Proleg n. 337, 338.

proprie Priscillianistarum sunt, sed alii quoque hæretici eis • Beaus T. i. p. 424. b Ib. p. 345.

nonnullarum sectarum impietate vanitatis utuntur, inter se ? Hist. Ec. I. 3, c. 25, p. 97. D.

quidem diversa sentientes, unde suas quisque varias hæreses The passage of Origen, with remarks upon it, may be seen sunt secuti. Sed scripturas istas habent in suâ diversitate in the first Vol. of this work, p. 551, &c.

communes, easque illi præcipue frequentare assolent, qui legem • Athan. T. 2, p. 202.

veterem et prophetas canonicos non accipiunt. Ep. 237, a). Evangelium nomine Thomæ, quo utuntur Manichæi, 253, n. 2. apocryphum. Gelas. ap. Labb. Conc. T. 4, p. 1264.

*. Sed quia vobis ita placet, qui nunquam sine stomacho 8 H. E. 1. 3, c. 25, p. 97. D. Epiph. H. 47, n. 2. auditis aliquid esse in Apostolo cauponatum, ne lioc quidem i H. 61, n. 1. k H. 63, n. 2.

nobis sciatis esse contrarium. Faust. 1. xi. c. 1.

2. Faustus says that the gospel of Jesus Christ is nothing but the preaching, or the doctrine and commandments, of Christ. Beausobre assents to this explication as right, and prefers it to Augustine's: though that great writer did not forget to allege 2 Tim. ii. 8.

3. We evidently perceive, from the work of Faustus, that “ both the catholic and the Manichæan copies of the New Testament had the two genealogies in St. Matthew and St. Luke:

4. It looks as if · Faustus understood the beatitude, Matt. v. 3, of worldly poverty, and the mourning in ver. 4, of afflictions in this life; and ver. 6, of bodily hunger and thirst for the sake of righteousness: though, as it seems, this last mentioned text, which we render “ hunger and thirst after righteousness,” was read' as it is now in our present copies.

5. Faustus had Matt. xxviii. 19, in his / copies.
6. He likewise quotes the beginning of St. Mark's and St. John's gospels.

7. There is some reason to think that Faustus read Luke xxiii. 43, as Origen did : • This * day shalt thou be with me in the paradise of God,' or of my Father.'

8. Faustus ' has the history of the woman taken in adultery, which is at the beginning of the eighth chapter of St. John's gospel.

9. Mani, in The Dispute with Archelaus, understands our Lord to say " in John viii. 44, that the devil is a liar, as is also his father.' Upon this text the curious may consult " Mill, and · Beausobre.

10. Augustine in his work against Faustus, says, that, in some Latin copies they had, Rom. i. 3,- Which was born of the seed of David;' instead of made, which is in the Greek.

11. Faustus ' and ' Secundinus quote St. Paul's epistle to the Ephesian's by that title. 12. I put in the margin the definitions which · Faustus gives of schism and heresy.

b

i

c. 1.

et interrogas, utrum accipiam Evangelium ? nisi & Et alibi ad discipulos: Ite, docete omnes gentes, baptiadhuc nescis, quid sit quod Evangelium nuncupatur. Est zantes eos in nomine Patris, Filii, et Spiritûs Sancti,enim nihil aliud, quam prædicatio et mandatum Christi. Faust. F. I. 5, c. 3. 1. 5, c. 1. Vides in me Christi beatitudines illas, quæ Evan- h At denique Marcus, vide quam sit competenter exorgelium faciunt, et interrogas, utrum accipiam? ibid. Quia sus: Evangelium, inquit, Jesu Christi Filii Dei. Faust. 1. 2, evangelium quidem a prædicatione Christi et esse cæpit et c. i. Sed Joannes quidem in principio fuisse Verbum dicit, et nominari. -Id. 1. 2, c. 1. Scias me, ut dixi, accipere Evan- Verbum fuisse apud Deum, et Deum fuisse Verbum. Marcus gelium, id est, prædicationem Christi. ib.

vero, Evangelium, inquit, Jesu Christi, Filii Dei. 1. 3, c. 1. Cependant je dois rendre justice à Fauste. Il n'explique Cur ergo credunt Joanni dicenti, In principio erat Verbum? pas mal, et si je l'ose dire, il explique mieux que S. Augustin, Aug. C. Faust. 1.,7, c. 2. k See before V. i. p. 566. ce que veut dire le mot d'Evangile. Il entend par là, non -Cum latronem Christus de ligno secum introduxerit I histoire de la naissance, et des actions de J. Christ, niais la in paradisum Patris sui. Faust. 1. 14, c. 1:- et ipso eodem doctrine que Jésus Christ a prêchée. Et quoique S. Au- die secum futurum dixit eum in paradiso patris sui. Id. 1. 33, gustin eût raison dans le fond, il n'en avoit pas néanmoins de * soutenir, comme il fasoit, que l'histoire de la naissance de J. | In injustitiâ namque et in adulterio deprehensam mulieChrist est comprise dans l'idée de ces mots, Evangile de J.Christ, rem quamdam Judæis accusantibus absolvit, ipse præcipiens ei qui ne signifioit autre chose, que la doctrine prêchée par Jésus ut jam peccare desineret. Faust. 1. 33, c. 1. Christ. Beaos. Hist. de Manich. T. i. p. 298, 299.

- cum loquitur mendacium, de suis propriis loquitur; hanc scilicet causam subjiciens, quia generatio Christi quoniam mendax est, sicut et pater ejus. ap. Arch. c. 29, p. non pertinet ad. Evangelium. Quid ergo respondebis Apos- 48. Conf. c. 33, p. 56, et c. 13, p. 24, f. tolo dicenti, Memor esto Christum Jesum resurrexisse a mor- n Ad Joh. viii. 44, et Proleg. 793. tuis, ex semine David secundum Evangelium meum? Aug. Hist. de Manich. T. i. p. 105, 388. T. 2, p. 263. contr. Faust. 1. 2, c. 2.

p Etsi enim in quibusdam Latinis exemplaribus non legitur Quid enim scripsit? Liber generationis Jesu Christi filii factus, sed, natus ex semine David, cum Græca factus habeDavid, &c. Faust. 1. 2, c. 1. Sed offensus duorum maxime ant, &c. Contr. Faust, 1. xi. c. 4. Evangelistarum dissensioné, qui genealogiam ejus scribunt, 9 Dicit ad Ephesios. Faust. 1. 24, c. 1. Lucæ et Matthæi, bæsi, &c. 1. 3, c. I. Vid. et 1. 7, c. 1, et Contra quos se Apostolus in Ephesiorum epistolâ certamen 1. 23, c. 1, 2

subiise fatetur. Secundin. ad Aug. c. 1. Vides pauperem, vides mitem, -lugentem, esurientem, • Schisma, nisi fallor, est eodem opinantem atque eodem sitientem, persecutiones et odia sustinentem propter justitiam. ritu colentem quo cæteri, solo congregationis delectari discidio. 1. 5. c. 1. -beati qui lugent, beati qui esuriunt, beati qui Secta vero est longe alia opinantem quam caeteri, alio etiam persecutionem patiuntur propter justitiam. ib. c. 3.

sibi ac longe dissimili rilu divinitatis instituisse culturam, !--quomodo esurientem et sitientem justitiam, quam Faust. 1. 20, c. 3. Porro autem sectas si quæras, non plus Faustus in scriptis suis non addidit.' Avg. Contr. Faust. 1. 5, erunt quam duæ, id est, Gentium et nostra, qui eis longe 'c. 7.

diversa sentimius. ib. c. 4; in fin.

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

SECT. VIII.

THE CONCLUSION OF THE HISTORY OF THE MANICHEES.

In composing this chapter I have made much use of Beausobre's History of Manichee and Manichæism; and I have often quoted him as I have gone along. Nevertheless it was fit to make this renewed and final acknowledgment of my obligations. Sometimes

, however, I have differed from him; whether with reason or not, others have a right to judge. That work of Beausobre contains not only a laboured history of the Manichees, but likewise several entertaining and useful digressions concerning the opinions of the heathen philosophers, and the most early Christian sects. I wish some learned man might have sufficient leisure and encouragement to give us a handsome edition of it in English.

It may be thought by some that, in writing the history of this people, I have taken a great deal of liberty with the ancient writers of the Christian church. Nevertheless, I know that I have not designed to disparage them: and I humbly hope that I have not lessened their just credit and authority. No men are infallible. In controversial writings, especially where the difference of opinion is very great, it is difficult for the best of men to keep themselves entirely free from the influence of prejudice and passion. Moreover, Manichæism is in itself an abstruse and intricate subject; and had its rise in Persia, a country remote from most of those ecclesiastical writers who have come down to us; which makes a good apology for them, though they should be supposed to have made some mistakes, and to have been guilty of some misrepresentations. It is acknowledged by such as have looked into this matter, that the history of Mani and his followers has long lain in great obscurity and uncertainty. This may be allowed to be a good reason why I should take some more than ordinary pains about it, and endeavour to avoid and correct the errors which others seem to have fallen into.

It may be easily supposed that for several reasons I could wish this history had been shorter. However I presume it will be found upon trial that the length of it is not altogether unp . And I persuade myself it will afford my readers divers useful and agreeable reflections. I propose to mention some, not doubting but that others of taste and judgment will think of more.

1. The rise of Manichæism in Persia is a proof of the early planting the gospel in that country. If Christianity had not been there before, Mani could not have formed a new sect of Christians. • Heresies and schisms,' as · Augustine says, “ break the gospel-nets. Some in one

place, some in another: the Donatists in Africa, the Arians in Egypt,—the Manichees in • Persia. According to Abulpharagius, Mani - was at first a Christian priest, and he preached and explained the scriptures, and disputed against the Jews, the Magi, and the heathens. Beausobre o has an article on purpose concerning the planting the gospel in Persia.

2. We cannot avoid recollecting, in the next place, the just observation of Socrates, taken notice of by us at our entrance into this field : It is no unusual thing for cockle to grow up amongst good grain.' It is no other than what our Lord foresaw, and likewise forewarned the

* What is to be expected of Beausobre, may be concluded rint tum veterum, tum recentiorum plures, neque ea adhuc from what he says of himself, when he en-ers upon the exa- satis dilucide exposita sit, non abs re erit illam paullo accuratius mination of the scandalous story of the Manichæan eucharist: et explicatius enarrare. Cav. H. L. in Manete. T. i. p. 140. As for me,' says he, 'whom heaven has preserved from the Oxon. spirit of the church, who know no greater good than free- • Disruptis retibus, hæreses et schismata facta sunt. Retia dom of thought, nor any more delightful employment than quidem omnes concludunt. Sed impatientes pisces, ubi the search of truth, nor greater pleasure than that of finding possunt, impingunt se, et rumpunt, et exeunt.- -Et retia and speaking it, I have studied ecclesiastical history with as quidem illa per totum expanduntur. Qui rumpunt autem, * little prejudice as possible. Pour moi, que le ciel a préservé per loca rumpunt. Donatistæ ruperunt in Africa, Ariani' rude l'esprit de l'église, qui ne connois point de plus grand bien perunt in Ægypto, Photiniani ruperunt in Pannonia, Cataque la liberté de penser, de plus douce occupation que la phryges ruperunt in Phrygia, Manichæi ruperunt in Perside. recherche de la vérité, ni de plus grand plaisir que celui de la Aug. Serm. 252, n. 4. T. y. al. in Dieb. Pasch. Serm. 23, trouver et de la dire, &c. Hist. de Manichée et du Mani- Mic primo Christianismum præ se tulit, et sacerdos factus chéisme. T. 2, p. 730.

est Ehwazi, docuitque et interpretatus est libros, [sacros,) et Hæc nos compendio, et pro more nostro, de Manete, cum Judæis, Magis, et Ethnicis disputavit. Gregor. Abulph. ejusque scriptis. Cum vero Manetis historiam mire turbave- Dynast. p. 82. T. i. p. 180-196.

[ocr errors]

The Manichees. Sect. VIII.

235 disciples of, that they might not be too much surprised at the event. « The kingdom of heaven," he said, “ is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field : but while men slept his enemy came, and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.

-Matt. xiii. 24,-30. Again: “ The kingdom of heaven is like unto a net that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:” ver. 47. “ Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but offences will come; but woe unto him by whom they come:" Luke xvii. 1. And St. Paul says to the Corinthians : “ There must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you:” 1 Cor. xi. 19. Indeed before the apostles left this world they saw divers corruptions getting into the churches, or actually brought into them.

3. There were early two very different opinions concerning Christ. • Some,' as ? Augustine observes, • believed Christ to be God, and denied him to be man. Others believed he was a man, sand denied him to be God.' Of this opinion b was Augustine for a while, at his first getting out of Manichæism, as he says, till " he became acquainted with some Platonie writings. And it has been thought by some that this last was likewise the notion which the Jews of old had of their expected Messiah. Therefore Athanasius says that the apostles of Christ, well knowing the * Jewish prejudices upon this head, with great wisdom first instructed them in our Saviour's « humanity. The former was the opinion of the Manichees, and of many others before them. Jerom says, that whilst the apostles were still living, and when the blood of Christ was scarce • cold in Judea, there were men who taught that his body was no more than a phantom.'

This opinion is more than once censured by Ignatius in his epistles, written soon after the beginning of the second century; which, as“ Cotelerius observes, plainly shews the early rise of this false doctrine,

4. We may now discern the true character of the Manichees. I formerly said they were rather a sect of reasoners and philosophers than enthusiasts. But they were very indifferent critics; otherwise they would not have treated the New Testament as they did; nor have pretended that those books were falsely inscribed, and greatly interpolated, which had such evidences of genuineness and integrity. Faustus, so celebrated a teacher among them, does not appear to have been a man of much reading. He had a plausible way of speaking, and an agreeable manner

[ocr errors]

b

a Sic enim quidam Deum credendo Christum, et hominem was not made flesh.” De Sent. Dionys. p. m. 432. These negando erraverunt. Et rursus quidam hominem putando, et « Jews were not the unbelieving Jews, but such as made proDeum negando, aut contemserunt, aut in bomine

spem suam

'fession of Christianity. But though they agreed so far, they ponentes, in illud maledictuin inciderunt. Contr. Faust. I. 13, were not all of the same mind concerning the nativity of C. 8. Ait enim, Christus. Deus est. tantum, omnino hominis our Saviour. Some believed that he was the Son of Joseph nihil habens. Hoc Manichæi dicunt. Photiniani, homo

• and Mary:- -Others acknowledged that he was born of a tantum; Manichæi, Deus tantum. Ili nihil divinum in virgin, and conceived by the sole operation of the Holy Domino confitentur; isti quasi totum divinuin..Serm. 37, “Spirit. Neither the one nor the other refused him the title C. 12.

of the Son of God; but they imagined that it was given Ego vero aliud putabam, tantumque sentiebam de Do- * him on account of the eminence of his office, the excellence mino Christo meo, quantum de excellentis sapientiæ viro, cui of his gifts, his glorious resurrection, the sovereign authority nullus posset æquari: præsertim qnia mirabiliter natus ex and dominion to which he was advanced by the Father : to virgine, ad exemplum contemnendorum temporalium pro all which, these last added his miraculous nativity. These adipiscendâ immortalitate, divinâ pro nobis curà tantam kept the name of Nazarenes which bad been given to the auctoritatem magisterii meruisse videbatur. Quid autem first believers. The others were called Ebionites. These sacramenti baberet, Verbum caro factum est, ne suspicari qui- • two are the most ancient heresies of Christianity. Antiquisdem poteram. Confess. l. 7, c. 19, n. 25.

• sima hæresis ista fuit, et ab ipso religionis Christianæ c Et primo volens ostendere mihi,quod Verbum tuum • exordio grassari cæpit. Petav. Dogm. Th. T. v. De Incarn. caro factum est, et habitavit inter homines, procurâsti mihi ]. 1, 2. sect. 3. In a short time arose another quite opposite per quemdam hominem Platonicorum libros ex Græcà but not less pernicious than the former.' Hist. Manich. T. lingua in Latinam versos. Et ibi legi, non quidem his verbis, 2, p. 517, sed hoc idem omnino multis et multiplicibus suaderi rationibus, * Επειδη γαρ οι τοτε Ιεδαιοι-ενομιζον τον Χριςον ψιλον quod in principio erat Verbum, &c. Confess. l. 7, c. 9, n. 13, ανθρωπον μονον, εκ σπερματος Δαβιδ ερχεσθαι--τοτε ένεκα et 14. Vid. ib. 1. 8, c.2, n. 3.

μετα πολλης της συνεσεως οι μακαριοι αποσολοι τα ανθρωπινα d. Beausobre's account of that matter is to this purpose : At τ8 σωτηρος πρωτον εξηγυντο τους Ιεδαιοις. Athan, de Sent. the beginning of Christianity, there arose two opposite errors Dion. T. i. p. 248. C. concerning the person of our Saviour. The first obtained Apostolis adhuc in seculo superstitibus, adhuc apud among the Christians that came out of Judaism. Many per. Judæam Christi sanguine recenti, phantasma Domini corpus suaded themselves that the Christ was but a mere man, asserebatur. Hier. adv. Lucif. T. 4, p. 304, in.

distinguished from others by the abundance of divine gifts 8 Ει δε ωσπερ τινες αθεοι οντες, τοτεςιν απιςοι, λεγεσιν, το conferred upon him, and by his incomparable virtues. “In POVELY WETOYDEVai aurov, X. a. Ign. ad Trall. c. x. et passim, the time of the apostles," says Athanasius, “ the Jews were " Solem negaret meridie lucere, qui Docetas seu phantain this error, and drew the Gentiles into it: that the Christ siastas hæreticos temporibus apostolorum inficiaretur erupisse. is only a mere man, that he is not God, and that the Word Cotel. ad. Ign. Ep. ad. Trall. c. x.

« ElőzőTovább »