| |  |
PARALLEL HISTORY BIBLE - Leviticus 23:22
CHAPTERS: Leviticus 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 
VERSES: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44
TEXT: BIB | AUDIO: MISLR - MISC | VIDEO: BIB
ENGLISH - HISTORY - INTERNATIONAL - FACEBOOK - GR FORUMS - GODRULES ON YOUTUBE
HELPS: KJS - KJV - ASV - DBY - DOU - WBS - YLT - HEB - BBE - WEB - NAS - SEV - TSK - CRK - WES - MHC - GILL - JFB
|
LXX- Greek Septuagint - Leviticus 23:22 και 2532 οταν 3752 θεριζητε τον 3588 θερισμον 2326 της 3588 γης 1093 υμων 5216 ου 3739 3757 συντελεσετε το 3588 λοιπον 3063 του 3588 θερισμου 2326 του 3588 αγρου 68 σου 4675 εν 1722 1520 τω 3588 θεριζειν 2325 5721 σε 4571 και 2532 τα 3588 αποπιπτοντα του 3588 θερισμου 2326 σου 4675 ου 3739 3757 συλλεξεις τω 3588 πτωχω 4434 και 2532 τω 3588 προσηλυτω υπολειψη αυτα 846 εγω 1473 κυριος 2962 ο 3588 3739 θεος 2316 υμων 5216
Douay Rheims Bible And when you reap the corn of your land, you shall not cut it to the very ground: neither shall you gather the ears that remain; but you shall leave them for the poor and for the strangers. I am the Lord your God.
King James Bible - Leviticus 23:22 And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God.
World English Bible "'When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not wholly reap into the corners of your field, neither shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest: you shall leave them for the poor, and for the foreigner. I am Yahweh your God.'"
World Wide Bible Resources
Leviticus 23:22
Early Christian Commentary - (A.D. 100 - A.D. 325) Anf-02 vi.iv.ii.xviii Pg 21.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.ii.xviii Pg 22.1
Npnf-201 iii.xv.ix Pg 24
Npnf-201 iv.vi.i.xxxviii Pg 12
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1
Anf-02 vi.ii.viii Pg 17.1
Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
Isa. xl. 18; 25. Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with God. God is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371 2371 Denique. you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372 2372 Excidet. from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373 2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2. in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374 2374 Scilicet. who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375 2375 Graduum. to Him) the very summit,2376 2376 Culmen. as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377 2377 Minutalibus regnis. prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378 2378 Undique. into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379 2379 Substantiis. and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380 2380 Eliquetur. to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1
Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
Isa. xl. 18; 25. Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with God. God is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371 2371 Denique. you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372 2372 Excidet. from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373 2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2. in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374 2374 Scilicet. who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375 2375 Graduum. to Him) the very summit,2376 2376 Culmen. as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377 2377 Minutalibus regnis. prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378 2378 Undique. into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379 2379 Substantiis. and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380 2380 Eliquetur. to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.
Anf-02 v.ii.ix Pg 5.1
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Anf-01 viii.iv.xxvii Pg 2
Isa. lviii. 13, 14.
Anf-01 ix.vii.xxxv Pg 9
Isa. lviii. 14. This is what the Lord declared: “Happy are those servants whom the Lord when He cometh shall find watching. Verily I say unto you, that He shall gird Himself, and make them to sit down [to meat], and will come forth and serve them. And if He shall come in the evening watch, and find them so, blessed are they, because He shall make them sit down, and minister to them; or if this be in the second, or it be in the third, blessed are they.”4754 4754
Anf-03 iv.ii Pg 171
Catal. Scrippt. Eccles. c. 18. and on Ezek. xxxvi.;55 55 P. 952, tom. iii. Opp. ed. Bened. and by Gennadius of Marseilles.56 56 De Ecclesiæ dogmatibus, c. 55.
Anf-01 ix.vi.xxvii Pg 22
Num. xvi. 15. In this way, too, Samuel, who judged the people so many years, and bore rule over Israel without any pride, in the end cleared himself, saying, “I have walked before you from my childhood even unto this day: answer me in the sight of God, and before His anointed (Christi ejus); whose ox or whose ass of yours have I taken, or over whom have I tyrannized, or whom have I oppressed? or if I have received from the hand of any a bribe or [so much as] a shoe, speak out against me, and I will restore it to you.”4167 4167
Anf-03 iv.ii Pg 49
See Judg. ix. 2 sqq. and perhaps, too, to the “thistle” of Jehoash’s.31 31
Npnf-201 iii.xv.ix Pg 24
Npnf-201 iv.vi.i.xxxviii Pg 12
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1
Anf-02 vi.ii.viii Pg 17.1
Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
Isa. xl. 18; 25. Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with God. God is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371 2371 Denique. you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372 2372 Excidet. from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373 2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2. in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374 2374 Scilicet. who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375 2375 Graduum. to Him) the very summit,2376 2376 Culmen. as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377 2377 Minutalibus regnis. prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378 2378 Undique. into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379 2379 Substantiis. and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380 2380 Eliquetur. to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1
Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
Isa. xl. 18; 25. Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with God. God is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371 2371 Denique. you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372 2372 Excidet. from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373 2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2. in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374 2374 Scilicet. who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375 2375 Graduum. to Him) the very summit,2376 2376 Culmen. as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377 2377 Minutalibus regnis. prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378 2378 Undique. into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379 2379 Substantiis. and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380 2380 Eliquetur. to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.
Anf-02 v.ii.ix Pg 5.1
Anf-03 v.iv.v.xiv Pg 31
Isa. lxv. 13, 14. And recognise these oppositions also in the dispensation of Christ. Surely gladness and joyous exultation is promised to those who are in an opposite condition—to the sorrowful, and sad, and anxious. Just as it is said in the 125th Psalm: “They who sow in tears shall reap in joy.”3963 3963
Anf-01 v.xvi.i Pg 8
Eccl. ii. 25 (after LXX.); Zech. ix. 17. Give attention to reading,1273 1273
Anf-01 ix.vii.xiii Pg 2
Isa. xxv. 8, LXX. And again, “God has wiped away every tear from every face.” Thus that former life is expelled, because it was not given by the Spirit, but by the breath.
Anf-03 v.iv.vi.x Pg 52
Suggested by the ἰσχυσας of Sept. in Isa. xxv. 8. “O death, where is thy sting?”5676 5676
Anf-03 v.iv.vi.x Pg 54
Isa. xxv. 8 and (especially) Hos. xiii. 14. —to Him will belong the gift, that is, the kingdom, who proclaimed the word which is to be accomplished in the kingdom. And to none other God does he tell us that “thanks” are due, for having enabled us to achieve “the victory” even over death, than to Him from whom he received the very expression5678 5678
Anf-03 v.viii.lviii Pg 3
Isa. xxxv. 10. Well, there is nothing eternal until after the resurrection. “And sorrow and sighing,” continues he, “shall flee away.”7729 7729
Anf-03 v.viii.lviii Pg 4
Ver. 10. The angel echoes the same to John: “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes;”7730 7730
Anf-01 viii.iv.xxv Pg 5
Isa. lxiii. 15 to end, and Isa. lxiv.
Anf-03 v.viii.xxxi Pg 4
Isa. lxvi. 14. because the grass also is renewed by the dissolution and corruption of the seed. In a word, if it is contended that the figure of the rising bones refers properly to the state of Israel, why is the same hope announced to all nations, instead of being limited to Israel only, of reinvesting those osseous remains with bodily substance and vital breath, and of raising up their dead out of the grave? For the language is universal: “The dead shall arise, and come forth from their graves; for the dew which cometh from Thee is medicine to their bones.”7492 7492
Npnf-201 iii.xv.ix Pg 24
Npnf-201 iv.vi.i.xxxviii Pg 12
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1
Anf-02 vi.ii.viii Pg 17.1
Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
Isa. xl. 18; 25. Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with God. God is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371 2371 Denique. you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372 2372 Excidet. from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373 2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2. in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374 2374 Scilicet. who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375 2375 Graduum. to Him) the very summit,2376 2376 Culmen. as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377 2377 Minutalibus regnis. prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378 2378 Undique. into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379 2379 Substantiis. and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380 2380 Eliquetur. to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1
Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
Isa. xl. 18; 25. Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with God. God is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371 2371 Denique. you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372 2372 Excidet. from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373 2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2. in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374 2374 Scilicet. who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375 2375 Graduum. to Him) the very summit,2376 2376 Culmen. as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377 2377 Minutalibus regnis. prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378 2378 Undique. into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379 2379 Substantiis. and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380 2380 Eliquetur. to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.
Anf-02 v.ii.ix Pg 5.1
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9
Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37
Anf-01 viii.iv.xxvii Pg 2
Isa. lviii. 13, 14.
Anf-01 ix.vii.xxxv Pg 9
Isa. lviii. 14. This is what the Lord declared: “Happy are those servants whom the Lord when He cometh shall find watching. Verily I say unto you, that He shall gird Himself, and make them to sit down [to meat], and will come forth and serve them. And if He shall come in the evening watch, and find them so, blessed are they, because He shall make them sit down, and minister to them; or if this be in the second, or it be in the third, blessed are they.”4754 4754
Anf-03 iv.ii Pg 171
Catal. Scrippt. Eccles. c. 18. and on Ezek. xxxvi.;55 55 P. 952, tom. iii. Opp. ed. Bened. and by Gennadius of Marseilles.56 56 De Ecclesiæ dogmatibus, c. 55.
Anf-01 ix.vi.xxvii Pg 22
Num. xvi. 15. In this way, too, Samuel, who judged the people so many years, and bore rule over Israel without any pride, in the end cleared himself, saying, “I have walked before you from my childhood even unto this day: answer me in the sight of God, and before His anointed (Christi ejus); whose ox or whose ass of yours have I taken, or over whom have I tyrannized, or whom have I oppressed? or if I have received from the hand of any a bribe or [so much as] a shoe, speak out against me, and I will restore it to you.”4167 4167
Anf-03 iv.ii Pg 49
See Judg. ix. 2 sqq. and perhaps, too, to the “thistle” of Jehoash’s.31 31
Npnf-201 iii.xv.ix Pg 24
Npnf-201 iv.vi.i.xxxviii Pg 12
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1
Anf-02 vi.ii.viii Pg 17.1
Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
Isa. xl. 18; 25. Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with God. God is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371 2371 Denique. you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372 2372 Excidet. from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373 2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2. in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374 2374 Scilicet. who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375 2375 Graduum. to Him) the very summit,2376 2376 Culmen. as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377 2377 Minutalibus regnis. prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378 2378 Undique. into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379 2379 Substantiis. and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380 2380 Eliquetur. to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1
Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
Isa. xl. 18; 25. Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with God. God is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371 2371 Denique. you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372 2372 Excidet. from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373 2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2. in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374 2374 Scilicet. who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375 2375 Graduum. to Him) the very summit,2376 2376 Culmen. as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377 2377 Minutalibus regnis. prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378 2378 Undique. into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379 2379 Substantiis. and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380 2380 Eliquetur. to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.
Anf-02 v.ii.ix Pg 5.1
Anf-03 v.iv.v.xiv Pg 31
Isa. lxv. 13, 14. And recognise these oppositions also in the dispensation of Christ. Surely gladness and joyous exultation is promised to those who are in an opposite condition—to the sorrowful, and sad, and anxious. Just as it is said in the 125th Psalm: “They who sow in tears shall reap in joy.”3963 3963
Anf-01 v.xvi.i Pg 8
Eccl. ii. 25 (after LXX.); Zech. ix. 17. Give attention to reading,1273 1273
Anf-01 ix.vii.xiii Pg 2
Isa. xxv. 8, LXX. And again, “God has wiped away every tear from every face.” Thus that former life is expelled, because it was not given by the Spirit, but by the breath.
Anf-03 v.iv.vi.x Pg 52
Suggested by the ἰσχυσας of Sept. in Isa. xxv. 8. “O death, where is thy sting?”5676 5676
Anf-03 v.iv.vi.x Pg 54
Isa. xxv. 8 and (especially) Hos. xiii. 14. —to Him will belong the gift, that is, the kingdom, who proclaimed the word which is to be accomplished in the kingdom. And to none other God does he tell us that “thanks” are due, for having enabled us to achieve “the victory” even over death, than to Him from whom he received the very expression5678 5678
Anf-03 v.viii.lviii Pg 3
Isa. xxxv. 10. Well, there is nothing eternal until after the resurrection. “And sorrow and sighing,” continues he, “shall flee away.”7729 7729
Anf-03 v.viii.lviii Pg 4
Ver. 10. The angel echoes the same to John: “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes;”7730 7730
Anf-02 vi.iv.ii.xviii Pg 21.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.ii.xviii Pg 22.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.ii.xviii Pg 21.2
Anf-02 vi.iv.ii.xviii Pg 21.1
Anf-02 vi.iv.ii.xviii Pg 22.1
Edersheim Bible History Temple xiii Pg 3.3
Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, Chapter 23VERSE (22) - Le 19:9,10 De 16:11-14; 24:19-21 Ru 2:3-7,15,16-23 Job 31:16-21
|
|
PARALLEL VERSE BIBLE
|
