the resurrection, and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, was he manifested, and believed on in the world that he is the Son of God." 5. Photius. A.D. 858. Kai óμoλoyovμévws μéya е. T. T. E. μ., θεὸς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, κ. τ. λ. This is quoted by Nolan 1 from a MS., but without the connection or comment; so that we cannot judge of its value. Τὸν ἐν σαρκὶ φανέντα θεόν.2 "God, who appeared in the flesh." We subjoin a number of real or supposed references to this passage, from which, in our opinion, little or nothing can be gathered as to the early text; but as many of them have been before quoted on one side or the other, we add them for the sake of completeness. 1. Epistle of Barnabas. Ιδὲ πάλιν Ἰησοῦς οὐχ, ὁ υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου, ἀλλ' ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ τύπῳ καὶ ἐν σαρκὶ φανερωθείς. "Behold again Jesus, not the Son of Man, but the Son of God, and in a figure manifested in the flesh." 'Еv σаρxì ovv αὐτοῦ μέλλοντος φανεροῦσθαι [i.e. κυρίου]. “ When the Lord was about to be manifested in the flesh.” ἐν σαρκὶ μέλλοντα φανεροῦσθαι ὑμῖν Ἰησοῦν. who is about to be manifested to you." σαρκὶ φανεροῦσθαι [i.e. κύριος].4 about to be manifested in the flesh." Ελπίσατε ἐπὶ τὸν “Trust in Jesus, "Отi ëμeλλev èv "Because the Lord was 2. Ignatius. A.D. 101. Εἷς Ιατρός ἐστιν, σαρκικός τε καὶ πνευματικός, γεννητὸς καὶ ἀγέννητος, ἐν σαρκὶ γενόμενος θεός. "There is one Physician, both corporeal and spiritual, begotten and unbegotten, God made in the flesh." Here there is no certain allusion to this passage. Ius ovv épav ερώθη τοῖς αἰῶσιν ; "How then was he made manifest to the ages? A star shone in heaven, etc." Seoû ȧvρwπivws 1 Nolan's Greek Vulgate, p. 290. Phot. comment. in 1 Tim. E. cod. MS. Cantab. n. 2430. 250. 2 Basnage's Thesaurus, Tom. II. p. 436. φανερομένου εἰς καινότητα ἀϊδίου ζωῆς, “ when God in a bodily form was manifested in the newness of an eternal life." But the Syriac here reads vioû for deoû, ¡¡? o?? The interpreted form of Ignatius reads in this place, coû ὡς ἀνθρώπου φαινομένου, καὶ ἀνθρώπου ὡς θεοῦ ἐνεργοῦντος.3 "God appearing as man, and man working as God." Whatever may have been the original of Ignatius, there is no probable allusion to this text. 3. Valentinus. A.D. 120. "Intelligetis deum in corpore apparuisse ac spectatum esse."4 4. Justin Martyr. A.D. 140. Οὗ χάριν ἀπέστειλε Λόγον, ἵνα κόσμῳ φανῇ· ὃς ὑπὸ λαοῦ ἀτιμασθείς, διὰ ἀποστόλων κηρυχθείς, ὑπὸ ἐθνῶν ἐπιστεύθη. “For which reason he sent the Word, that he might appear to the world; who, having been dishonored by the people, and preached by the apostles, was believed on by the Gentiles." The authenticity of this epistle has been questioned. 5. Apostolic Constitutions. Θεός κύριος, ὁ ἐπιφανεὶς ἡμῖν Ev σaρki. "God the Lord, who appeared to us in the flesh." 6. Clement of Alexandria. A.D. 192. "Ω μυστήριον· μεθ ἡμῶν εἶδον οἱ ἄγγελοι τὸν Χριστόν, πρότερον οὐχ ὁρῶντες. "O the mystery! with us the angels saw Christ, whom before they had not seen." 7. Hippolytus. A.D. 220. Οὗτος προελθὼν εἰς κόσμον θεὸς ἐν σώματι ἐφανερώθη, ἄνθρωπος τέλειος προελθών. 1 Epist. ad Eph., Cap. XIX. 2 Cureton's Corpus Ignatianum, p. 287. 8 Ed. Dressel, p. 336. Apud Leontius Byzant. adv. Fraud. Apollinist., Basnage's Thesaurus, Tom. I. p. 603. 6 7. 26. Epist. ad Diogn. 'Quoted by Oecumenius, in 1 Tim. iii. 16 (Paris, 1631), Tom. II. p. 228. Chrysostom, John of Damascus, and Theophylact read тòv vidy Toû Deoû instead οἱ τὸν Χριστόν, though some manuscripts of the latter author have τὸ μυστήριον. Scholia of Codd. 19 and 20 have, according to Wetstein, Oi ayyeλoi μed' qμŵr εἶδον τὸ μέγα τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον, & form which forbids θεός. 8 Cont. Noct., Cap. XVII. A similar passage is quoted by Theodoret, Dial. 2, Tom. IV. p. 89, although professing to be taken from a commentary on the "This God coming into the world was manifested in the body, coming as a perfect Man." 8. Eudorius of Constantinople. A.D. 360. "There were not in Christ two natures, for he was not a complete man, but instead of a soul, God in the flesh," axx' ȧvtì ¥ʊxês θεὸς ἐν σαρκί.. 9. Basil. A.D. 370. Αὐτὸς ἐφανερώθη ἐν [i.e. kúptos] was manifested in the flesh." ἡμῖν τοῦτο τὸ μέγα τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον. us this great mystery of godliness.” "He σαρκί. "Con 10. Euthalius. A.D. 458. Iepì delas σаpróσews. cerning the divine incarnation.". This title is given to the seventh Euthalian division of 1 Tim., which includes our text. Some have improperly quoted the MSS. which have these divisions, as if their reading was sanctioned by his authority. 11. Pseudo-Gregory Thaumaturgus. A.D. 475, or later. Οὐχ ἡμῶν γνῶναι τὸ πῶς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον τοῦτο μέγα ἐστίν. " It is not for us to know how the Son of God became man, for this is the great mystery." 12. Hesychius. Πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν αὐτῆς οὐκ ἤγγισε, τὸν ἐν " second Psalm : Οὗτος ὁ προελθὼν εἰς κόσμον θεὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος ἐφανερώθη. “ He who came into the world was manifested as God and man." 2 Ap. Anast. de Verb. Incarn. Script. Vet. Vat. Coll. (ed. Mai), Tom. VII. p. 17. 3 Ep. 261 (ed. Bened.), Tom. III. p. 402 A. Tischendorf and Scholz, following Wetstein, refer to this as Ep. 65, although professing to use the Benedictine edition, which numbers the epistles differently from the Paris edition of 1638. They also misquote the words of Basil, or rather of Wetstein. 4 ♦ Ep. 261, Tom. p. 678 B. The mystery here, however, has reference to the Lord's supper, rather than to Christ. • Zacagni Collect., p. 689. Anath. Cap. XII., Basnage's Thesaurus, Tom. I. p. 33. In Zophon. 3. 2. Quoted from Wetstein. We have failed to discover and verify this quotation. It certainly is not found in Hesychius's Sticheron, Crit. Sac., Tom. VII. Part 111. p. 26, the only work of Hesychius which Wetstein refers to in his Prolegomena. It may be a scholium found attached to some MS. of the Old Testament. σapki pavévтa ȧvry. She did not approach to her God, who appeared to her in the flesh." 13. Leontius Hierosolymitanus. A.D. Aókηois de vý φανέρωσις τῆς σαρκὸς τοῦ κυρίου;1 “Was the manifestation of the Lord in the flesh a mere semblance?" 14. Elias Cretensis. A.D. 787. EiTóνTOS yàp ToÛ ȧπоσΕἰπόντος τοῦ ἀποστόλου περὶ Χριστοῦ ὅτι ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, καὶ ὤφθη ἀνθρώποις.2 TOLS.2 "For when the apostle says of Christ that he was manifested in the flesh and was seen of men," etc. It will be seen from a comparison of the citations which have now been given from the various Fathers that both readings were certainly current in the fourth century, and, what would seem unexpected, neither reading seems to be geographically provincial. It might have been supposed from the remarkable unison of the versions in defence of os, that the other reading would prove in the early centuries to have been restricted to some small area, from which it had spread through the church. But instead of this, we find the reading Deós not only in Constantinople and the East, but quoted by Didymus in Alexandria itself, nearly fifty years before the time of Cyril. Nothing can save us from this conclusion, except the assumption, resting on no proof, that Didymus has here been interpolated. On the other hand, the bishops of Constantinople, Chrysostom, and Nestorius seem to have os, as well as Origen or Cyril. A comparison with these citations will also satisfy any one how much credit is to be attached to the story told of Macedonius by Liberatus, and repeated by Hincmar. The former says: "At this time Macedonius, bishop of Constantinople, is said to have been banished by the emperor Anastasius for having falsified the gospels, and especially that saying of the apostle, 'Who appeared in the flesh, was justified in the spirit.' For he is said to have changed os, a Greek monosyllable, by the alteration of O into , and 1 Cont. Theoph. Script. Vet. Vat. Coll. (ed. Mai), Tom. VII. p. 146. 2 Quoted by Wetstein, who took it from a manuscript source. thus made eos, so that it would read 'God appeared in the flesh.' Being therefore accused as a Nestorian, he was expelled by the Monk Severus." With this story, told by Liberatus not half a century after the occurrence recorded, must be compared the conflicting statement made a few years later by Victor Tununensis, in which he stigmatizes Anastasius as having himself tampered with the sacred text. "In the year 506, at the command of the emperor Anastasius, the holy gospels are revised and corrected, as if composed by ignorant evangelists."2 The first version of this charge, laying the blame on Macedonius, is repeated by Hincmar, almost in the very words of Liberatus.3 There can be little doubt that there is some foundation for this story. At the same time Macedonius must be acquitted of any intention to corrupt the text; for we have shown that it was read with Deós by Gregory of Nyssa, more than a century before. Very likely he may have innocently altered some MSS. from ős to deós, and this may have made 1 Hoc tempore Macedonius Constantinopolitanus episcopus ab imperatore Anastasio dicitur expulsus tanquam evangelia falsasset, et maxime illud apostoli dictum Quia [lege qui] apparuit in carne, justificatum est in Spiritu. Hunc enim mutasse ubi habet ős, id est qui, monosyllabum Graecum, litera mutata O in Overtisse, et fecisse Deós id est, ut esset, Deus apparuit per carnem. Tanquam Nestorianus ergo culpatus expellitur per Severum Monachum. - Concil. Coll. (ed. Mansi), Tom. IX. col. 692. The printed editions read ős and &s, but the true reading is evident. Indeed, it has been said that the Greek letters were supplied by the first editor, because wanting in the MS. It will be seen that Hinemar has Seós clearly, and not ås. 2 Messalla V. C. Cos. Constantinopoli jubente Anastasio Imperatore, sancta evangelia, tanquam ab idiotis evangelistis composita, reprehenduntur et emendantur. 3 Quidam nimirum ipsas scripturas verbis inlicitis imposturaverunt, sicut Macedonius Constantinopolitanus episcopus, qui ab Anastasio Imperatore ideo a civitate expulsus legitur, quoniam falsavit evangelia, et illum apostoli locum ubi dicit: Quod apparuit in carne, justificatum in Spiritu, per cognationem Graecarum literarum O et O, hoc modo mutando falsavit. Ubi enim habuit qui, hoc est, OC, monosyllabum Graecum, litera mutata O in O vertit et fecit OC, id est, ut esset, Deus apparuit per carnem ; qua propter tanquam Nestorianus fuit expulsus. - Opusc. XXXIII. Cap. XVIII. (cd. Sismond, Paris, 1645), Tom. II. p. 449. Similar statements are found, Cap. XXII. p. 465; also cf. Concil. Duziacense, I. Mansi, Tom. XVI. col. 595. |