| 3751 Philo may have claimed that God authored only the Ten Commandments by himself, to allow Moses more involvement in authoring other components of the law (Myre, «Caractéristiques»). Gnostics may have developed Philonic thought in constructing their view that God is not the source of all the law (Fallon, «Law»). 3752 See Whitacre, Polemic, 51. Cf. the contrast between Moses the servant and Christ the king of 1in Augustine Tract. Ev. Jo. 3.16. 3755 Greek views seem to have varied (cf., e.g., Xenophon Mem. 1.4.9; Epictetus Diatr. 1.6.19; Plutarch Isis 9, Mor. 354D; Isis 75, Mor. 381B; Chariton 1.14.1; Maximus of Tyre Oration 8.10 in Grant, Religions, 168; PGM 13.62 in Grant, Religions, 47; cf. Plutarch Isis 78, Mor. 383A; Dio Cassius frg. 1.6.3; Hippolytus Haer. 1.16); for deities» selective revelations, see, e.g., Callimachus Hymns 2.9–10 (cf. Acts 10:41); for the danger of seeing them, e.g., Callimachus Hymns 5.98–102,111–116. Cf. some analogous ideas of God " s transcendence in traditional societies (Mbiti, Religions, 64). 3756 1QS 11.20; 2 En. 48:5; " Abot R. Nat. 2, 39 A; Sipra VDDen. pq. 2.2.3.2–3; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 16:13 ; Tg. Neof. on Exod 33:23; Tg. Onq. on Exod 33:20,23; see further under «Vision of God» in our introduction. This could apply even despite partial throne revelations (1 En. 14:19,21). 3757 Rissi, «Word,» 401, thinks John 1 " is directed against» those who claim «another and direct access to God» besides Jesus. See in more detail DeConick, Mystics, though she focuses on the Thomas tradition. 3758 Names 7; Creation 69; Spec. Laws 1.47; 2.165; see further Hagner, «Vision,» 82–84; Isaacs, Spirit, 30; Lee, Thought, 17; citing Cherubim 101; Names 2; Rewards 40 as direct parallels, and close parallels in Dreams 1.67; Unchangeable 56; Alleg. Interp. 2.36; Names 9–10; Rewards 44. 3759 Sib. Or. 3.12 (αρατος), 17 (probably pre-Christian); frg. 1, lines 8–11 (date unclear). 3761 Also, e.g., Rom 1:20 ; 1Tim 1:17 ; Aristobulus frg. 4 (second century B.C.E., in Eusebius Praep. ev. 13.13.5, in OTP 2:840); Orphica long version 11–12 (OTP 2:799); a line attributed to Euripides but possibly from a Jewish work in Clement of Alexandria (OTP 2:828, in «Fragments of Pseudo-Greek Poets,» third to second century B.C.E., intr. and trans. H. Attridge, 2:821–30); T. Ab. 16:4A. Cf. the danger of beholding death in T. Ab. 17:9–18:1A; 13:15–14(cf. the Greek Medusa?). |
| 130 This section is based on Lev. 13 , a long discussion of the diagnosis and treatment of leprosy. 131 Num. 25:6–9. 132 See Num. 25 :14f. Maximus’ interpretation of Zambri (in English bibles Zimri) is traditional: see Wutz (1914–15), 420. Chasbi (English bibles: Cozbi) is usually interpreted as meaning ‘deceitful’ (see Wutz 1914–15 , 951). 133 Cf. Matt. 10:10, Luke 9:3, 10:4, though the text as Maximus cites it agrees exactly with none of these. 134 Following the emendation suggested in Migne. 135 See Matt. 17:14–21. 136 For the word translated ‘epileptic’ literally means ‘pertaining to the moon’ (and therefore ‘lunatic’ in older English translations). 137 Cf. Denys the Areopagite, Divine Names II.11; IV.7, 10, 14; X.1. 138 Cf. the teaching in Ep. 2, above, esp. 396A (p.86). DIFFICULTY 41 1 There is a translation of most of this Difficulty (all apart from the final contemplation) in Hausherr (1952), 164–70, which I have found helpful. 2 From St Gregory Nazianzen’s Sermon 39.13, on the Feast of Lights (i.e., the Theophany, or Epiphany) (PG 36.348D). 3 For these divisions, cf. Gregory of Nyssa, ContraEunomium I.270–2, III. 6.62–7 (Jaeger 1960 , 1.105–6, 2.66–7), and elsewhere, and the discussion above, Introduction, chapter 5. Amb. 10.26, above, also develops the notion of the divisions of being and alludes to similar texts in Gregory of Nyssa. 4 See Gregory of Nyssa, On human creation 2 (PG 44:133A). 5 Syndesmos: a key term in Maximus’ theology, used by Nemesius, On human nature 1 (Morani 1987 , 5). 6 Diastema: another key term of Maximus’. 7 Cf. Gregory of Nyssa, On human creation 16 (PG 44:181 AB). 8 It sounds odd to refer to the human person as ‘it’, but Maximus is talking about a human person transcending sexual differentiation, which would be obscured by the use of ‘he’ or ‘she’. 9 Cf. Gregory of Nyssa, On human creation 17 (PG 44and D), and frequently elsewhere. 10 Perichoresas: used also in the Greek tradition to express the interpenetration of the natures of Christ, and the Persons of the Trinity (cf. Latin: circumincessio). |
| 2886 Aristotle Rhet. 3.8.1, 1408b; Cicero Or. Brut. 50.168–69.231; cf. Rowe, «Style,» 154; balanced clauses in Anderson, Glossary, 90–91. Mythical language would fit poetry (Menander Rhetor 1.1, 333.31–334.5; cf., e.g., Isa 51:9) but does not require it (cf., e.g., Rev 12:1–9). 2888 See Cicero Or. Brut. 20.67 (though complaining that poetry can emphasize euphony over intelligible content, 20.68). 2890 Even very careful syllabic structures may represent prose rhetoric rather than poetry per se; e.g., the parallelism characteristic of isocolon and homoeoteleuton; see Rhet. Alex. 27.1435b.39–40; 1436a.1–4; Rowe, «Style,» 137 (citing Isocrates Paneg. 4.39; Cicero Mur. 9; Gorgias He1. 7); Porter, «Paul and Letters,» 580; Anderson, Glossary, 90–91 (citing, e.g., Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.27–28; Demetrius 25). 2894 Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 24. Rhetorical handbooks already insisted that the introduction should summarize the arguments the speech would use (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 19; LCL 1:512–513 n. 1 cites Rhet. Alex. 29), though there were some exceptions in spoken rhetoric (Seneca Dial, 1.pref.21). 2896 Quintilian 4.1.5; cf. Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 17; Cicero Or. Brut. 40.137; also Heath, «Invention,» 103. 2897 Artemidorus Onir. 1.pref.; 2Macc 2(at the end of a long prologue). This is not to deny the possibility of long introductory sections after various sorts of prologues (e.g., Polybius 1–2; cf. 2.71.7; Luke 1:5–4:30; Matt 1:18–2:23; probably John 1:1–51 ). 2899 E.g., Xenophon Agesilaus 1.2; Plutarch Themistocles 1.1; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades), 1.2; but this was not necessary (Philostratus Vit. soph, pref.480). Noble ancestry (especially from deities) helped define a person " s heroic power (Homer II. 20.215–241); it did not, however, guarantee positive outcome in the end (Sallust Cati1. 5.1). 2902 Käsemann, Questions, 164; cf. comments on the Logos " s mythical language in Kümmel, Theology, 282. 2904 An inclusio surrounding a proem appears in a widely read Greek classic, Homer Od. 1.1–10, where 1.1–2 and 1.10 invoke the Muse to tell the story while 1.2–9 summarizes the whole book " s plot, inclusio is frequent (e.g., Catullus 52.1,4; 57.1,10). Cf. also repetition of a refrain in narratives ( Judg 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25 ); or especially poetry: the wedding invocation to Hymen in Catullus 61.4–5, 39–40, 49–50, 59–60; 62.4–5, 10, 19, 25,31,38, 48,66 (with to added, 61.117–118, 137–138, 142–143, 147–148, 152–153, 157–158, 162–163, 167–168, 172–173, 177–178, 182–183); the bridal summons (Catullus 61.96,106,113); invocation to the Fates (Catullus 64.327, in briefer form thereafter in 333, 337, 342, 347, 352, 356, 361, 365, 371, 375, 381); or a summons to love (Perv. Ven. 1, 8, 27, 36, 48, 57–58, 68, 75, 80, 93). |
| Although tribulation is occasionally a punishment for errorists (Rev 2:22), it usually applies to believers (Rev 1:9; 2:9–10; 7:14; John 16:21, 33 ). Perseverance (Rev 2:3,19; 3:10; 13:10; 14:12) and endurance (Rev 2:3, 25), are at least implied for both. In Revelation believers are overcomes (2:7,11,17,26; 3:5,12,21; 12:11; 17:14; 21:7; cf. 11:7; 13:7; cf. «make war» in 2:16; 11:7; 12:11, 17; 17:14; 19:11, 19; 20:8); in 1 John, believers are overcomers (5:4–5) through a decided event (2:14; 4:4), the finished work of Christ (also John 16:33 ). Both documents have «descent» language (Rev 3:12; John passim) and are permeated by an overriding vertical dualism. Opened heavens signify revelation (Rev 4:1; 11:19; 19:11; cf. 3:20; 5:2–3; 15:5; 20:12; John 1:51 ). Jesus wipes away tears (Rev 7:17; 21:4; 1107 cf. John 20:15–16 ); his followers «go out» (Rev 3:12; John 10:9 ); the righteous eat eschatological food (Rev 2:7, 17; 3:20, 19; cf. John 2, 6, 21 ). The true rest (Rev 14vs. 14:11) of the eschatological Sabbath (Rev 20:2–6; 1108 cf. 1:10; 1109 John 5 ), the eschatological hour (Rev 3:3,10; 14:7, 15; 17:12; 18:10,17, 19; ; vs. Jesus» hour in John, e.g., 2:4), 1110 and the eschatological inversion of the true and false (Rev 2:9, 3:17–18; John 9:39, 41 ) are developed in different directions but found in both. The wilderness motif of the new exodus is also common to both works and seems to cover the entire period between Jesus» first and second comings (Rev 12:5–6; John 1:23; 3:14; 6:31 ; cf. 11:54). Glasson notes the wilderness parallels, and lists the tabernacle, water and light, manna (Rev 2:17; John 6:31–33 ), and palms (Rev 7:9; John 12:13 ); but he also observes that these motifs are present in John but future in Revelation. 1111 While the wilderness itself certainly refers to the present rather than the future age in Revelation (12:6,14), and his contrast between John " s past antichrist (17:12) and Revelation " s future one (Rev 13) is questionable, 1112 Glasson is not mistaken about the different orientation; as he points out, Zech 12applies to the cross in John 19:37 , but to the second coming in Rev 1:7. 1113 The two books are relatively consistent in their different orientations, despite the presence of some future es-chatology in John; but as we have argued above, these differences of orientation need not be (though could be) a decisive argument for separate authors. |
| 3382 As Smith, John (1999), 48, notes, it is appropriate there. But such patterns appear elsewhere, e.g., Demosthenes Against Conon 19; Sipre Deut. 161.1.3; b. c Abod. Zar. 20b; p. Šeqa1. 3:3; Ber. 61a; Rom 5:3–5 ; Jas 1:14–15; 2Pet 1:5–7 (similar to Wis 6:17–20). For similar kinds of repetition, see, e.g., Demetrius 5.268 (for anaphora), 270; Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.25.34–35. 3383 Jonas, Religion, 57–58; Bultmann, Epistles, 16 (stressing gnosticism but also mentioning OT, Judaism, and other Hellenistic sources). Dodd, Interpretation, 36, points out that the divine is both life and light in the Hermetica, especially Poimandres; Lee, Thought, 37, stresses Poimandres as well (Corp. herm. 1.5,6,12,21; 13.7–9,18; also Ginza, R. 5.2,179, 22–27 in Mandean literature). 3384 Minear, Images, 129, contends that the NT image of light draws from all streams of ancient thought (OT, rabbinic, apocalyptic, Essene, hermetic, and gnostic literature), and lists many references in the NT itself (Images, 128; cf. Manson, Paul and John, 118–19). 3385 E.g., Seneca Ep. Luci1. 48.8 (lumen); Plutarch Lect. 17, Mor. 47C (πολ φως); cf. Philo Creation 53; Porphyry Marc. 13.224; 20.329–330; 26.403,406,415; darkness as ignorance in Valerius Maximus 7.2.ext.la; Maximus of Tyre Or. 29.5; Porphyry Marc. 13.223–225; Acts 17:27; 26:18; Eph 4:18 . 3387 E.g., Maximus of Tyre Or. 34.1; see comment on 20:12. Orators also praised the brilliance of deities (e.g., Menander Rhetor 2.17,438.12–13, 20–24); writers also used light to symbolize the divine nature or care (Iamblichus Myst. 1.9,13). 3388 See on this theme pp. 247–51, above; cf. Platós parable of the shadows in the cave and the necessity of facing the light. 3389 Enz, «Dualism,» thinks the dualism originates ultimately from the good-evil dualism of Israel " s history. 3391 E.g., 1QS 3.3 and passim; 1Q27 1.5–6; 4Q183 2.4–8 (and perhaps 4Q185 1–2 2.6–8); Γ. Job 43:6/4; Sib. Or. frg. 1.26–27 (in Charles, Pseudepigrapha, 2:377); cf. 1 En. 108:12–14. 3393 E.g., 1QS 3.19–22; 1QM 13.5–6, 14–15. The DSS added dualism to the OT images (Brown, John, 1:340; cf. Charlesworth, «Comparison»); these are now often used as Johannine background here (e.g., Ellis, World, 27–28). Treves, «War,» 421, acknowledges OT influence on the Scrolls» «light» imagery, but thinks the imagery is «ultimately of Iranian origin.» Hebrew emphasis on contrasting opposites (like «day» and «night») to represent a whole (cf. Gordon, East, 35 n. 3), and poetic use of metaphoric language, suggest to us that the imagés Jewish roots lay in the OT, though probably accentuated under Persian influence during the exile (cf. similarly Manson, Paul and John, 118–19). |
| Again it appears that Jesus does not trust the crowds (cf. 2:23–25), for their misunder-standings (12:29, 34) have proved them unreliable; by continuing to walk in darkness, be-coming ignorant of where they are going (12:35; 1 John 2:11), they show that they have rejected the light of the world (12:46; cf. 8:12; 1 John 1:6 ). (By contrast, those who are of the light do know their origin and destination; see 3:8; 8:14.) Hence Jesus hides himself (12:36), just as he did when others sought to kill him (8:59). 7938 They had failed to believe the light while he was among them (12:36); now where he was going they could not come (8:21–23; 13:33). Nevertheless, his final words to them remained an invitation: they could still become children (cf. 1:12) of light through faith (12:36). Israel " s Unbelief (12:37–43) In 12:37–50 John concludes the sign section of his Gospel; 7939 this passage may provide a «rhetorical " braké» preparing the reader for the more detailed depiction of Jesus» passion–the hour of his glorification. 7940 Many find in 12:37–43 a theological summary of peoplés responses to Jesus» public ministry, as many find in 12:44–50 an anthology of representative sayings. 7941 If Jesus proved unable to trust the crowds (12:36), 12:37–43 show why: they habitually misunderstood (12:29, 34) because they were blind by nature (12:38–40). The signs (12:37) and revelations of glory made sense only to those with eyes to see, like Isaiah the prophet (12:41). Some did believe, but were unwilling to confess him openly (12:42), because in contrast to Isaiah who proclaimed the glory of God that he witnessed (12:41), they loved human glory for themselves rather than God " s (12:43). 1. Isaiah " s Revelation (12:37–41) Jesus» rejection by his own (1:11) is detailed in 1:19–12and explained in 12:37–43. 7942 Although John elsewhere sometimes may prefer eclectic texts, here he follows the LXX of Isa 53(which represents the Hebrew fairly accurately), perhaps in deference to what had become early Christian tradition ( John 12:38 ). 7943 The appeal to this Servant Song confirms John " s source of imagery for being «lifted up» and «glorified» earlier in the context (12:23, 32; Isa 52LXX). 7944 |
| 5, Mor. 411F, taking νματα in its most common sense; cf. Acts 2:17); philosophers could similarly speak of an internal πηγ του γαθο (Marcus Aurelius 7.59), or of education as a πηγ of all goodness (Plutarch Educ. 7, Mor. 4C), or of «springs» (πηγς) of philosophy (Eunapius Lives 460–461; Porphyry Marc. 4.54) or virtue (Maximus of Tyre Or. 34.4). Egyptian religion linked Nile water with life after death in some sense (Wild, Water, 97–99); the fountain is praise in Odes So1. 40(a Christian work). 5408 Akiba in Sipre Deut. 48.2.7. Cf. disciples as «cisterns» that never lose a drop (m. " Abot 2:8). Pancaro, Law, 482–85, sees Jacob " s well as a symbol of Torah. 5409 CD 6.3–5. Whoever rejects this well forfeits life (CD 3.16–17). Others also cite CD 19.34 (which tends to revise an earlier text) and 3.6 for Torah as the source of living waters (Coetzee, «Life,» 64; Driver, Scrolls, 518). 5410 Cf. Odeberg, Gospel, 150–51; Brown, John, 1:176; Coetzee, «Life,» 64; Whitacre, Polemic, 86–87. In some manuscripts of T. Jud. 24:4, πηγ ζων refers to the Messiah, but this may well be a Christian interpolation. 5412 Among Greek philosophers, cf., e.g., Socratics Ep. 25 (allegedly from Phaedrus to Plato): Phaedrus δψων for philosophy. The biblical worship tradition speaks of thirsting for God ( Ps 42:1–2; 63:1 ); cf. Matt 5:6. 5415 Cf., e.g., drinking as a surrogate for an immersion pool, in which she as a nonconverting Samaritan would be unwelcome (Derrett, «Purity»); cf. the argument for drinking as baptism in 1Cor 12 (Cuming, «Epotisthèmen») and (rightly) against it (Rogers, «Epotisthêmen»); drinking from a mythical river (Pausanias 9.39.8) after initiatory purifications (9.39.5–7). 5416 Presumably with Torah. Boring et a1., Commentary, 263, who cite this text, date its final redaction to the fourth century C.E. 5418 See comment on 2:6; Avigad, Jerusalem, 139; Yadin, Masada, 166; Sanders, Jesus to Mishnah, 31–32, 214–27. Aseneth requires δατι ζντι to purify her hands and feet when converting (Jos. |
| 175 This calls into question early form-critical studies that supposed that the tradition " s tendency was nearly always expansive; see Sanders, Tendencies, 19,46–87, 88–189,272; cf. Stein, ««Criteria,»» 238–40. Even oracles, which were considered divine utterances, could be expanded; see Aune, Prophecy, 58. 180 Progymn. 3.224–240. In Progymn. 2.115–123, Theon compares elaborations in earlier historical sources. Elaboration (εργασα) was especially useful for rebuttal (Progymn. 1.172–175). 182 Theon Progymn. 5.39–43, 52–53; Phaedrus 2.pro1.l2–13; 3, epi1. 8–9; 4, epi1.7–9; Philostratus Hrk. 29.6; in speeches, e.g., Diogenes Laertius 7.1.20; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 55; Demosth. 18, 20, 24; Lysias 5; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.4.569. One could, however, be too brief at times (Phaedrus 3.10.59–60; Dionysius of Halicarnassus 2 Amm. 2). 183 In Jewish sources, cf., e.g., " Abot R. Nat. 7, §21 Β (for a pseudonymous claim to have personally witnessed something that earlier tradition simply reports). For a halakic example, cf. Hoenig, «Kinds of Labor.» Amplification and embellishment are thus more characteristic of the apocryphal gospels (Carmignac, «Pré-pascal»). 184 Cf. Blomberg, «Thomas,» 195, especially on the Gospel of Thomas (in which additions primarily reflect gnostic themes, but which was especially abbreviated to streamline, as were Matthew and Mark). 185 Theon Progymn. 4.73–79, on adding narrative to a fable or the reverse (although the narrative is added as a parallel, not as a setting, for the fable). Authors could add maxims to narratives (Progymn. 5.388–425) or combine preexisting narratives to relate two or more of them at once (5.427–441). The alternative to combining narratives was simply to relate them in episodic fashion, as Mark sometimes does; this was acceptable for most readers, if not according to the highest literary fashions (Drury, Design, 30; cf. Smith, Magician, 109). 186 Quintilian 9.2.60–61. Cf. the discussion of catchwords in Gerhardsson, Memory, 145–49, 153; in the Gospels, cf. Bultmann, Tradition, 325–26. |
| Овца. Taken from Faber, Dominica 2 Post Pascha, No. 6 «Signa ovium Christi, seu praedestinatorum». The poem summarises the whole sermon, as follows: 11. 1–10 is lossely based on the Thema: «Et quoniam Christus suos electos ovibus comparavit, non obscure insinuavit, fore nos de illorum numéro, si habuerimus indicia ilia, e quibus noscitur ovis.» 11. 11–22 cf sect. 1 «Mansuetudo»: «Agnoscitur ovis ex mansuetudine, quia sola ex animantibus omnino inermis est, пес utitur aliquo defensionis genere; nec enim cornibus ferit, nec unguibus lacerat, nec dentibus mordet, nec calcibus icit, quantum vis male tractetur. ... Ita etiam ovis Christi noscitur ex eo, si quis proximum suum etiam inimicum non contemptim tractet, adeoque cornibus superbiae non feriat, si vindictae appetitu non laceret, si dentibus detractionis non mordeat, si dicta factaque eius non male interpretetur, etc.» 11. 23–32 cf sect. 2 «Patientia»: «Ex patientia, quia ligari et tonderi se patitur, nec répugnât sicut canes et feles.» The remainder of this part of the poem is not taken from Faber. 11. 33–38 cf sect. 3 «Eleemosynae Studium»: «Ex multiplici sua utilitate; pascit enim homines came sua, potat lacte, vestit lana. ... Sic etiam oves Christi agnoscuntur ex liberalitate, si pascunt esurientes, si potum dant sitientibus, si vestiunt nudos.» 11. 39–42 cf sect. 5 «Appetitus verbi Dei»: «Ex salis appetitu, avide enim salem comedit et ex eius frequenti comestione foecundior fit. Similiter oves Christi agnoscuntur ex eo si salem appetant doctrinae salutaris, et verbi Dei praecones, de quibus Matth. dicitur; Vos estis sal terrae, libenter audiant.» 11. 43–52 cf sect. 6 «Frequens et debitus usus Sacramentorum»: «Ex pastu, quia avide valde et quasi insatiabiliter praesertim ingruente pabulatur hyeme, ut refert sanctus Ambrosius in hexam. quasi sciens paulo post herbas frigore adurendas. Ita ovis Christi dignoscitur ex frequenti usu Sacramentorum Confessionis et Eucharistiae. ... Quod si igitur avide comedas herbas horum Sacramentorum, dum nunc pascua durant, antequam veniat hyems mortis, ubi herbae illae non erunt amplius, indicium praebes tuae praedestinationis.» 11. 53–56 cf sect. 7 «Timor, et fuga peccati»: «Ex timiditate et pavore quia non tantum lupum timent, sed etiam omnem luporum speciem, et qui lupis aliquantum similes sunt. Ita et oves Christi noscuntur ex timoré et fuga peccatorum et quidquid peccati speciem repraesentat.» 11. 57–60 cf sect. 8 «Studium orationis»: «Ex crebro balatu: sic ovis Christi et praedestinatus ex studio orationis, si iuxta praeceptum Apostoli sine intermissione Thess. 5.17] oret, hoc est, frequenter et quandocumque fert occasio et nécessitas.» Simeon has not summarised sects. 4 «Poenitentia et mortificatio» and 9 «Humilitas». |
| Обрезание духовное . Taken from Faber, In Festo Circum cisionis, No. 4 «De spirituali totius hominis circumcisione». The poem summarises the whole sermon, as follows: 11. 1–12 cf Thema: «Causa inter alias una erat, cur instituta a Deo circum cisio fuerit, ut videlicet intelligeremus hominibus adeo depravatis necessarian) esse circum cisionem spiritualem... Id enim praecepit Apostolus ad Col. dicens: Mortificate membra vestra, quaesunt super terram.» 11. 19–34 cf sect. 2 «Oculi». All the exmaples in this part of the poem are Simeon " s own, except the reference to Job (11. 31–2): «Proinde lob sciens oculorum vagorum pericula, eos circum cidit, cum ait: Pepigi foedus cum oculis meis, ut ne cogitarem quidem de virgine [ Job 31.1 ].» 11. 35–44 cf sect. 3 «Nares»: «Nares oblongiores sunt suspiciones et iudicia temeraria, quae omnia subodorantur, rimaniur et diiudicare non verentur etiam longe dissita et occulta.» 11. 45–50 cf sect. 4 «Os»: «Os oblongius habent adinstar equorum et boum, qui nulla temperantiae lege utuntur, nec certis et usitatis diei horis prandent et coenant.» 11. 51–6 cf sect. 5 «Lingua seu loquacitas»: «Labia et linguam incircum cisam habent. Loquarculi, qui earn non custodiunt, sed undique liberam dimittunt ad suam et aliorum perniciem, instar mordacis alicuius canis, qui catena non alligatur sed vagari sinitur.» 11. 57–62 cf sect. 6 «Aures seu curiositas»: «Aures incircumcisas habent et longas nimis curiosuli illi, qui inutilia, noxia et nova semper, et aliorum gesta satagunt audire.» 11. 63–70 cf sect. 7 «Collum seu bibacitas»: «Collum nimis longum aut crassum quinam alii habent nisi peccatores, qui magnis delectantur haustibus?» 11. 71–4 cf sect. 8 «Digiti seu rapacitas»: «Digitos longiores, et incircum cisos habent non fures tantum, ut dicere solemus, sed etiam, qui festinant ditari.» 11. 75–80 cf sect. 10 «Cor seu cogitationes malae»: «Corde incircum ciso sunt, qui malas cogitationes ab eo non extirpant.» 11. 81–6 cf sect. 11 «Venter seu gula»: «Ventrem incircum cisum an non illi habent, qui nihil illi detrahere volunt quantumvis angusto tempore, et rerum penuria instante?» 11. 87–92: this section has no equivalent in Faber. 11. 93–100 cf sect. 12 «Pedes seu superbia»: «Pedes incircum cisos habent superbi, qui pedibus suis composite gradu ambulant, ut dicitur Isai. 11. 107–16 cf sect. 1 «Circumcidendi capilli, hoc est, opes»: «Capilli incircum cisi et longiores sunt opes et divitiae superfluae, cum tenacius retinentur et amaniur... Quemadmodum Ioseph non prius adductus est in conspectum regis Pharaonis, quant longi et horridi eius capilli detonsi essent, Genes. 41.[I4]... Quemadmodum capillis Absalon, quia eos longiores aluit, ad extremum in quercu illaqueatus est et suspensus, 2 Reg. 22.[ 2Sam. 18.9 ].» 11. 117–22 cf sect. 9 «Ungues seu iracundia»: «Ungues longiores, et incircum cisos, habent passionati et iracundi, qui levi verbo irritantur et ungues exserunt in proximos suos.» |
|
|
