Footnotes

¹⁵⁹⁸This passage more nearly resembles Zech. xi. 12 and 13 than anything in Jeremiah, although the transaction in Jer. xxxii. 7-15 is noted by the commentators, as referred to. Tertullian had good reason for mentioning Jeremiah and not Zechariah, because the apostle whom he refers to (Matt. xxvii. 3-10) had distinctly attributed the prophecy to Jeremiah ("Jeremy the prophet," ver. 9). This is not the plcae to do more than emrely refer to the voluminous controversy which has arisen from the apostle's mention of Jeremiah instead of Zechariah. It is enough to remark that Tertullian's argument is unaffected by the discrepancy in the name of the particular prophet. On all hands the prophecy is admitted, and this at once satisifes our author's argument. For the ms. evidence in favour of the unquestionably correct reading, to/te e0plhrw/qh to\ r9hqe\n dia\ 9Ieremi/ou tou\ profh/tou, k.t.l., the reader is referred to Dr. Tregelles' Critical Greek Testament, in loc.; only to the convincing amount of evidence collected by the very leraned editor must now be added the subsequently obtained authority of Tischendorf's Codex Sinaiticus.

¹⁵⁹⁹Appretiati vel honorati. There is nothing in the original or the Septuagint to meet the second word honorati, which may refer to the "honorarium," or "fee paid on admission to a post of honour,"-a term of Roman law, and referred to by Tertullian himself.

¹⁶⁰⁰Luke xxii. 19. [See Jewell's Challenge, p. 266, supra.]

¹⁶⁰¹Corpus veritatis: meant as a thrust against Marcion's Docetism.

¹⁶⁰²Ad vanitatem Marcionis. [Note 9, p. 289.]

¹⁶⁰³Peponem. In his De Anima, c. xxxii., he uses this word in strong irony: "Cur non magis et pepo, tam insulsus."

¹⁶⁰⁴[This text, imperfectly quoted in the original, is fulled out by Dr. Holmes.]

¹⁶⁰⁵So the Septuagint in Jer. xi. 19, Cu/lon ei0j to\n a!rton au0tou= (A.V. "Let us destroy the tree with the fruit"). See above, book iii. chap. xix. p. 337.

¹⁶⁰⁶Illuminator antiquitatum. This general phrase includes typical ordinances under the law, as well as the sayings of the prophets.

¹⁶⁰⁷Luke xxii. 20.

¹⁶⁰⁸Isa. lxiii. 1 (Sept. slightly altered).

¹⁶⁰⁹In Juda.

¹⁶¹⁰Gen. xlix. 11.

¹⁶¹¹Luke xxii. 22.

¹⁶¹²Ipse.

¹⁶¹³This is an argumentum ad hominem against Marcion for his cavil, which was considered above in book ii. chap. v.-viii. p. 300.

¹⁶¹⁴Obstitit peccaturo.

¹⁶¹⁵Si ignorabat. One would have expected "si non ignorabat," like the "si sciebat" of the next step in the argument.

¹⁶¹⁶The original of this not very clear sentence is: "Nam et Petrum praesumptorie aliquid eloctum negationi potius destinando zeloten deum tibi ostendit."

¹⁶¹⁷Luke xxii. 34 and 54-62.

¹⁶¹⁸Luke xxii. 47-49.

¹⁶¹⁹Isa. xxix. 13.

¹⁶²⁰Luke xxii. 66, 67.

¹⁶²¹Oehler's admirable edition is also carefully printed for the most part, but surely his quaesisset must here be quaesissent.

¹⁶²²Luke xxii. 67.

¹⁶²³Supersedit ostendere.

¹⁶²⁴i.e., not to answer that question of theirs. This seems to be the force of the perfect tense, "occultasse se."

¹⁶²⁵He makes Jesus stretch forth His hand, porrigens manum inquit.

¹⁶²⁶Luke xxii. 69.

¹⁶²⁷Dan. vii. 13.

¹⁶²⁸Ps. cx. 1.

¹⁶²⁹Luke xxii. 70.

¹⁶³⁰Luke xxii. 70.

¹⁶³¹Or does he suppose that they repeated this same question twice? His words are, "dum rursus interrogant."

¹⁶³²Either, "Art thou," or, "Thou art, then the Son of God."

¹⁶³³Oblique.

¹⁶³⁴Ut, quia...sic senserunt.

¹⁶³⁵Aperte.

¹⁶³⁶Aeque ita et ille confirmative respondit.

¹⁶³⁷Ut perseveraverint in eo quod pronuntiatio sapiebat...See Luke xxii. 71.

This document (last modified February 03, 1998) from the Christian Classics Electronic Library server, at Wheaton College