{"collection":"chr","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/chr/ecf/005/footnote/fn18.htm","path":"chr/ecf/005/footnote/fn18.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/005/footnote/fn18.htm","text":"16 Or, \"the question is discussed.\"\n17 [This word, not yet technical, as with us, is thus noted as curious. Of its force see Professor Caird, Encyc. Britannic., sub voce\"Metaphysic.\"]\n18 See Aristotle, De Anim., ii. r.\n20 These works must be among Aristotle's lost writings (see Fabricius' Bibl. Graec., t. iii. pp. 232, 404). We have no work of Aristotle's expressly treating \"of God.\" However, the Stagyrite's theology, such as it is, is unfolded in his Metaphysics. See Macmahon's analysis prefixed to his translation of Aristotle's Metaphysics, Bohn's Classical Library.\n21 Aristotle composed three treatises on ethical subjects: (r ) Ethics to Nicomachus; (2) Great Morals; (3) Morals to Eudemus.\n22 Miller erroneously reads \"Matthew.\"\n23 (See Bunsen, i. v. 86. A fabulous reference may convey a truth. This implies that Matthias was supposed to have preached and left results of his teachings.]\n24 This emendation is made by Abbe Cruice. The ms. has \"incomposite,\" an obviously untenable reading.\n25 Or, \"of what sort of material substance,\" etc.\n28 John i. 9. [See translator's important note (I), p. y, supra.,]\n31 See Plato, vol. i. p. 75 et seq., ed. Bekker. Miller do; \"an obvious mistake\".\n32 [Foretaste of Cent.IV.] Miller's text has, instead of tou ouk ontos (non-existent), oikountos (who dwells above).\n36 Miller's text has\"-the soul,\" which Duncker and Cruice properly correct into \"body.\"\n37 Megaleiuthtos, a correction from megalhs.\n38 A correction from \"Arrhetus.\"\n39 This passage is very obscure, and is variously rendered by the commentators. The above translation follows Schneidewin's version, which yields a tolerably clear meaning.\n48 kat autouj. Ulhorn fills up the ellipsis thus: \"And in reference to these localities of the Arghons,\" etc.\n49 This is a more correct form than that occasionally given, viz., Abraxas. See Beausobre, Hist. Manich., lib. ii. p. 51.\n53 Miller's text has \"judgment,\" which yields no meaning. Roeper suggests \"Ogdoad.\"\n55 Or, \"their own peculiar locality\" (Bunsen).\n56 This word is added by Bunsen.\n59 See Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom., ii. p. 375, ed. Sylburg. [Comp, cap. viii. vol. ii. p. 355, this series.]\n60 Bernays and Bunsen read ton Peripaton, which Abbe Cruice and Duncker consider erroneous, referring us to Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., iv. 7.\n61 See [vol. i. p. 348, this series, where it is Saturninus]; Irenaeus, i. 24; [vol. iii., this series, p. 649]; Tertullian, Praescript. xlvi.; Epiphanius, Haer., xxiii.; Theodoret, Haer. Fab., i. 3; St. Augustine, Haer., iii. Eusebius styles this heretic Saturninus.\n62 Epiphanius makes Basilides and Saturnilus belong to the same school.\n63 Faeinhs: Millet reads Fwnhs.\n67 See [vol. i. p.352. this series]; Irenaeus i. 27; [vol. iii., this series especially p. 257], Tertullian, Adv. Marc., and Praescript., xxx.; Epiphanius, Haer., xlii.: /Theodoret, Haer. Fab., i. 24; Eusebius., Hist. Ecclesiast., v.13, 16; and St.Augustine, Haer., xxii.\n68 Or, \"quarelsome,\" or, \"frantic.\"\n69 Hippolytus' discussion respecting the heresy of Marcion is, chiefly interesting from the light which it throws on the philosophy of Empedocles.","title":"chr/ecf/005/footnote/fn18.htm","type":"page"}