{"collection":"chr","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/chr/ecf/006/footnote/fn69.htm","path":"chr/ecf/006/footnote/fn69.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/006/footnote/fn69.htm","text":"220 There may be here some echo of the words (John xvii. 3), \"This is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God,\" etc.; but there is certainly not sufficient similarity to found a direct reference on, as has been done by Orelli and others.\n222 This passage presents no difficulty in itself, its sense being obviously that, as by God's grace life is given to those who serve Him, we must strive to fit ourselves to receive His blessing. The last words, however, have seemed to some fraught with mystery, and have been explained by Heraldus at some length as a veiled or confused reference to the Lord's Supper, as following upon baptism and baptismal regeneration, which, he supposes, are referred to in the preceding words, \"laying aside,\" etc. [It is not, however, the language of a mere catechumen.]\n223 These \"thin plates,\" laminae, Orelli has suggested, were amulets worn as a charm against serpents.\n225 So the edd., reading instit-oribus for the ms. instit-ut-oribus, \"makers.\"\n226 Lit., \"that colds and violent suns may not,\" etc.\n229 So the ms., first ed., Gelenius, Canterus, Hildebrand, reading ex commodi sensu, for which all the other edd., following Ursinus and Meursius, read ex communi-\"from common sense,\" i.e., wisely.\n230 Perhaps, as Orelli evidently understands it, \"prefer Him to our own souls\"-animis praeponimus.\n231 So Oehler, reading ea for the ms. ut, omitted in all edd.\n232 Lit., \"by your own and internal exertion.\"\n234 Lit., \"wings will be at hand.\"\n235 The ms. reads di-cimus, \"say;\" corrected du, as above.\n236 The first four edd. read res, \"things above,\" for which Stewechius reads, as above, sedes.\n238 Here, as in c. 7, p. 436, n. 3, the edd. read Phaedone, with the exception of the first ed., LB., Hildebrand, and Oehler, who follow the ms. as above.\n239 Lit., \"to the end of promising.\"\n240 Meursius suggests numini, \"deity,\" on which it may be well to remark once for all, that nomen and numen are in innumerable places interchanged in one or other of the edd. The change, however, is usually of so little moment, that no further notice will be taken of it.\n241 So the ms., according to Rigaltius and Hildebrand, reading vitae aeternitate, while Crusius asserts that the ms. gives vita et-\"with life and eternity.\"\n242 The ms. reading is, mortalis est qualitatis. The first five edd. merely drop est-\"of mortal, of neutral,\" etc.; LB. and the others read, es et, as above.\n244 So the ms., according to Crusius, the edd. reading cred-id-imus-\"have believed.\"\n245 Lit., \"if we believe that.\"\n246 So the ms., reading ad modum obsecutionis paratum-\"prepared to the mode of compliance;\" for which the edd. read adm. executioni-\"quite prepared for performing,\" except Hildebrand, who gives adm. obsecutioni-\"for obedience.\"\n247 So the ms., according to Crusius, but all edd. read sequ-a-tur (for i)-\"Is there anything which He has willed which it does not follow,\" etc.\n248 So all edd., reading mutabiles, except the two Roman edd. and Oehler, who gives, as the reading of the ms., nu.-\"tottering.\"\n249 Lit., \"in the doubtful condition of their lot.\"\n250 Lit., \"which may have been of a name.\"\n251 LB., followed by the later edd., inserted si, \"if they are,\" which is certainly more consistent with the rest of the sentence.\n252 The ms. reading is utterly corrupt and meaningless-immortalitatis largiter est donum dei certa prolatis. Gelenius, followed by Canterus, Oberth\u00fcr, and Orelli, emended largi-tio...certe, as above. The two Roman edd. read, -tatem largitus...certam-\"bestowed, assured immortality as God's gift on,\" etc.\n253 i.e., who must therefore have received it if they have it at all.\n254 Lit., \"out, reduced to nothing with annihilation, not to be returned from.\"\n255 Lit., \"they are held in a lasting bond,\" i.e., of being.\n256 Plato makes the supreme God, creator of the inferior deities, assure these lesser gods that their created nature being in itself subject to dissolution, His will is a surer ground on which to rely for immortality, than the substance or mode of their own being (Timaeus, st. p. 41; translated by Cicero, de Univ., xi., and criticised de Nat. Deor., i. 8 and iii. 12).\n257 The ms. and both Roman edd. read neque ullo ab-olitio-nis unintelligibly, for which Gelenius proposed nexusque aboltitione-\"and by the destruction of the bond;\" but the much more suitable reading in the margin of Ursinus, translated above, ullo ab alio nis-i, has been adopted by later edd.\n258 Lit., \"be gifted with a saving order.\" So the ms., reading salutari iussione, followed by both Rom. edd.; LB. and Orelli read vinctione-\"bond;\" Gelenius, Canterus, Elmenh., and Oberth\u00fcr, m-issione-\"dismissal.\"\n259 Lit., \"that to the gods themselves the natures are intermediate.\"\n260 Lit., \"supreme\"-principali.\n261 Cf. i. 48. On this passage Orelli quotes Irenaeus, i. 21, where are enumerated several gnostic theories of the creation of the world and men by angels, who are themselves created by the \"one unknown Father.\" Arnobius is thought, both by Orelli and others, to share in these opinions, and in this discussion to hint at them, but obscurely, lest his cosmology should be confounded by the Gentiles with their own polytheistic system. It seems much more natural to suppose that we have here the indefinite statement of opinions not thoroughly digested.\n263 Canterus, Elmenhorst, Oberth\u00fcr, and Orelli omit ut, which is retained as above by the rest.\n265 Elmenhorst endeavours to show that Arnobius coincides in this argument with the Epicureans, by quoting Lucr. v. 165 sqq. and Lact. vii. 5,where the Epicurean argument is brought forward, What profit has God in man, that He should have created him? In doing this, it seems not to have been observed that the question asked by Arnobius is a very different one: What place has man in the world, that God should be supposed to have sent him to fill it?\n266 i.e., so far from this being the case.\n267 i.e., from one horse to another-desultores.\n268 Rationibus et constitutionibus.\n269 Lit., \"it should be believed.\"\n270 Lit., \"unless there were joined.\"\n271 So the ms., reading contentio, which Orelli would understand as meaning \"contents,\" which may be correct. LB. reads conditio-\"condition,\" ineptly; and Ursinus in the margin, completio-\"the filling up.\"\n272 So the later edd., from the margin of Ursinus, reading quod temeritatis est maximae for the ms. quem-\"whom it shows the greatest rashness to speak of.\"\n274 So Gelenius (acc. to Orelli), reading as in the margin of Ursinus, terrenae circumscriptionis, for the unintelligible reading of the ms., temerariae, retained in both Roman edd., Canterus, and (acc. to Oehler) Gelenius. LB. reads metariae-\"a limiting by boundaries.\"\n276 Cf. Lucr., v. 229 sq. The same idea comes up again in iv. 21.\n278 According to Hildebrand, the ms. reads dissimular-ent circumscribere, so that, by merely dropping nt, he reads, \"to dissemble and cheat;\" but according to Crusius, iri is found in the ms. between these two words, so that by prefixing m Sabaeus in the first ed. read m-ent-iri as above, followed by all other edd.\n279 Lit., \"to roll...in the mind.\"\n280 Rigaltius and Hildebrand regard decipere as a gloss.\n281 So the ms., reading formari, followed by Hildebrand and Oehler; but all the other edd. give the active form, -are.\n283 The condition, i.e., of freedom.\n284 LB., seemingly received by Orelli, though not inserted into his text, reads poscerent eos for the ms. -entur, which Hildebrand modifies -ent ea as above.\n287 Lit., \"the sad necessity should be laid upon them, that,\" etc.\n288 Lit., \"for the want of daily things,\" diurnorun egestati, for which Stewechius would read diurna egestate-\"from daily necessity.\"\n290 Lit., \"poured forth all their blood.\"\n292 Lit,, \"at last by force of.\"\n293 So the ms. and edd., reading vilitatem, for which Meursius proposed very needlessly utilitatem-\"and at an advantage.\"\n294 So, adhering very closely to the ms., which gives e-t sanguine supputandis augere-t insomnia milibus, the t of e-t being omitted and n inserted by all. The first five edd. read, -tandi se angerent insania: millibus-\"harass themselves with the madness of reckoning; by miles should extend,\" etc.,-the only change in Heraldus and Orelli being a return to insomnia-\"harass with sleeplessness,\" etc.\n295 So restored by Cujacius, followed by LB. and Orelli, reading in grat-i-am (ms. wants i) voluptatemque, while the first five edd. merely drop -que-\"to the grateful pleasure,\" etc.\n297 Lit., \"among,\" in oris, the ms. reading, and that of the first four edd., for which the others have received from the margin of Ursinus moribus-\"(indulging) in so fierce and savage customs.\"\n301 In the ms. this clause follows the words \"loss of their purity,\" where it is very much in the way. Orelli has followed Heraldus in disposing of it as above, while LB. inserts it after \"tips of their ears.\" The rest adhere to the arrangement of the ms., Ursinus suggesting instead of his-\"with these,\" catenis-\"with chains;\" Heraldus, linis-\"with strings (of pearls);\" Stewechius, taeniis- \"with fillets.\"\n302 So LB. and Orelli reading, con-fic-iendis corporibus for the ms. con-sp-iendis, for which the others read -spic-, \"to win attention.\" A conjecture by Oudendorp, brought forward by Orelli, is worthy of notice-con-spu-endis, \"to cover,\" i.e., so as to hide defects.\n305 So the later edd., reading botulos; the ms. and early edd. give boletos-\"mushrooms.\"\n306 For his, Heinsius proposes hiris-\"with the intestines.\"\n307 Lit., \"in a frozen condition.\" As to the meaning of this there is difference of opinion: some supposing that it means, as above, preserved by means of ice, or at least frozen; while others interpret figuratively, \"as hard as ice.\" [Our Scottish translators have used their local word, \"iced haggises:\" I have put puddings instead, which gives us, at least, an idea of something edible. To an American, what is iced conveys the idea of a drink. The budinarius, heretofore noted, probably made these iced saucisses.]\n309 Scabilla were a kind of rattles or castanets moved by the feet.","title":"chr/ecf/006/footnote/fn69.htm","type":"page"}