{"collection":"chr","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/chr/ecf/005/footnote/fn19.htm","path":"chr/ecf/005/footnote/fn19.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/005/footnote/fn19.htm","text":"70 These are lines 55-57 in Karsten's edition of a collection of the. Empedociean verses.\n71 These are lines 110, 111, in Stein's edition of Empedocles.\n73 Line 7 (Karsten), 381 (Stein).\n74 Line 4 (Karsten), 372, 373 (Stein).\n75 Line 5 (Karsten), 374 (Stein).\n76 Line 6 (Karsten), 375, 376 (Stein).\n77 Lines 16-19 (Karsten),377-380(Stein).\n78 Lines 1, 2 (Karsten), 369, 370(Stein).\n79 The text of these verses,as given by Hippolytus, is obviously corrupt, and there(ore obscure. Schneidewin has furnished an emended copy of them (Philol., vi. 166), which the translator has mostly adopted. (See Stein's edition of the Empedoclean Verses, line 222 et seq.)\n80 o kolobodaktuloj. Bunsen [more suo, vol. i., p. 89] considers this a corrupt reading, and suggests kalwn logwnv didaskalos, i.e., \"a teacher of good words,\" i.e., an evangelist, which word, as just used, he does not irish to repeat. The Abbe Cruice denies the necessity for any such emendation, and refers us to an article in the Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology(Cambridge, March, 1855), the writer of which maintains, on the authority of St. Jerome, that St. Mark bad amputated his thumb, in order that he might be considered disqualified for the priesthood.\n82 What Hippolytus communicates concerning Prepon is quite new. The only writer who mentions him is Theodoret (Haer. Fab., i. 25). in his article on Apelles.\n83 Schneidewin gives a restored version of these lines. They are found (at 1ines 338-341)in Stein's edition of the Empedoclean Verses.\n84 Tertullian combats these heretical notions in his De Carne Christi[vol. viii. p. 521, two series].\n86 Matt. xix. 17; Mark x. 18; Luke xviii. 19.\n87 See [vol. i. p. 350] Irenaes, i. 25; [vol. iii. p. 203] Tertullian, De Anima, c. xxiii.-xxv., and Praescript., c. xlviii.; Eusebius. Hist. Ecclesiast., iv. 7, Epiphanius, Haer., xxvii. see.2; Theodoret, Haer. Fab.,i. 5; and St.Augustine, Haer., c. vii. The entire of this article is taken from Irenaes, and equally coincides with the account given of Carpocrates by Epiphanius.\n90 Epiphanius alludes in the same manner to these images.\n91 See [vol. i. pp. 351, 415] Irenaeus, i. 26, iii. 2, 3; [vol. iii. p. 631] Tertullian, Praescript.,c. xlviii.; Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., iii. 28, vii. 25; Epiphanius, Haer., xxviii.; Theodoret, Haer.Fab., ii. 3; St. Augustine, Haer.,c. viii.; and Sr. Jerome, Ep., ixxxix. We have here, as in the preceding articles, Irenaeus in the Greek, as Hippolytus' text corresponds with the Latin version of this portion of Irenaeus' work.\n94 See [vol. i. p. 352] Irenaes, i. 26; [vol. iii. p. 651] Tertullian, Praescript., c. xlviii.; [vol. iv. p. 429, this series] Origen, Contr. Cels. ii. r; Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., iii, 27; Epiphanius, Haer., xxx,; and Theodoret, Haer. Fab., ii. 2. Hippolytus is indebted in this article partly to Irenaes, and partly to original sources.\n95 Or, \"that the Christ o( God was named Jesus\" (Bunsen).\n96 See [vol. iii. p. 654, \"two Theodoti \"] Tertullian, Praescript., c. liii.: Eusebuis, Hist. Ecclesiast, v. 27; Epiphanius, Haer.,liv.; and Theodoret, Haer. Fab., ii. 5. Clemens Alexandrinus seems to have been greatly indebted to Theodotus, whose system he has explained and commented upon.\n97 Concerning the younger Theodotus, see [vol. iii. p. 654] Tertutllian. Praescript., c. liii.; Epiphanius, Haer., lv.; and Theodoret, Haer. Fab., ii. 6.","title":"chr/ecf/005/footnote/fn19.htm","type":"page"}