CHAPTER VI: APPENDIX: THE CHRISTIANITY OF THE JEWISH CHRISTIANS.
APPENDIX: THE CHRISTIANITY OF THE JEWISH CHRISTIANS.
I. Original Christianity was in appearance Christian Judaism, the creation of a universal religion on Old Testament soil. It retained, therefore, so far as it was not hellenised, which never altogether took place, its original Jewish features. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was regarded as the Father of Jesus Christ, the Old Testament was the authoritative source of revelation, and the hopes of the future were based on the Jewish ones. The heritage which Christianity took over from Judaism shews itself on Gentile Christian soil, in fainter or distincter form, in proportion as the philosophic mode of thought already prevails, or recedes into the background. [403] To describe the appearance of the Jewish, Old Testament, heritage in the Christian faith, so far as it is a religious one, by the name Jewish Christianity, beginning at a certain point quite arbitrarily chosen, and changeable at will, must therefore necessarily lead to error, and it has done so to a very great extent. For this designation makes it appear as though the Jewish element in the Christian religion were something accidental, while it is rather the case that all Christianity, in so far as something alien is not foisted into it, appears as the religion of Israel perfected and spiritualised. We are therefore not justified in speaking of Jewish Christianity where a Christian community, even one of Gentile birth, calls itself the true Israel, the people of the twelve tribes, the posterity of Abraham; for this transfer is based on the original claim of Christianity and can only be forbidden by a view that is alien to it. Just as little may we designate Jewish Christian the mighty and realistic hopes of the future which were gradually repressed in the second and third centuries. They may be described as Jewish, or as Christian; but the designation Jewish Christian must be rejected; for it gives a wrong impression as to the historic right of these hopes in Christianity. The eschatological ideas of Papias were not Jewish Christian, but Christian; while, on the other hand, the eschatological speculations of Origen were not Gentile Christian, but essentially Greek. Those Christians who saw in Jesus the man chosen by God and endowed with the Spirit, thought about the Redeemer not in a Jewish Christian, but in a Christian manner. Those of Asia Minor who held strictly to the 14th of Nisan as the term of the Easter festival, were not influenced by Jewish Christian, but by Christian or Old Testament considerations. The author of the "Teaching of the Apostles," who has transferred the rights of the Old Testament priests with respect to the first fruits to the Christian prophets, shews himself by such transference not as a Jewish Christian, but as a Christian. There is no boundary here; for Christianity took possession of the whole of Judaism as religion, and it is therefore a most arbitrary view of history which looks upon the Christian appropriation of the Old Testament religion, after any point, as no longer Christian, but only Jewish Christian. Wherever the universalism of Christianity is not violated in favour of the Jewish nation, we have to recognise every appropriation of the Old Testament as Christian. Hence this proceeding could be spontaneously undertaken in Christianity, as was in fact done.
2. But the Jewish religion is a national religion, and Christianity burst the bonds of nationality, though not for all who recognised Jesus as Messiah. This gives the point at which the introduction of the term "Jewish Christianity" is appropriate. [404] It should be applied exclusively to those Christians who really maintained in their whole extent, or in some measure, even if it were to a minimum degree, the national and political forms of Judaism and the observance of the Mosaic law in its literal sense, as essential to Christianity, at least to the Christianity of born Jews, or who, though rejecting these forms, nevertheless assumed a prerogative of the Jewish people even in Christianity (Clem., Homil. XI. 26: ea`n o allo'phulos to`n no'mon pra'xe, Ioudaio's estin, me` pra'xas de' E'llen; "If the foreigner observe the law he is a Jew, but if not he is a Greek"). [405] To this Jewish Christianity is opposed, not Gentile Christianity, but the Christian religion, in so far as it is conceived as universalistic and anti-national in the strict sense of the term (Presupp. § 3), that is, the main body of Christendom in so far as it has freed itself from Judaism as a nation. [406]
It is not strange that this Jewish Christianity was subject to all the conditions which arose from the internal and external position of the Judaism of the time; that is, different tendencies were necessarily developed in it, according to the measure of the tendencies (or the disintegrations) which asserted themselves in the Judaism of that time. It lies also in the nature of the case that, with one exception, that of Pharisaic Jewish Christianity, all other tendencies were accurately parallelled in the systems which appeared in the great, that is, anti-Jewish Christendom. They were distinguished from these, simply by a social and political, that is, a national element. Moreover, they were exposed to the same influences from without as the synagogue and as the larger Christendom, till the isolation to which Judaism as a nation, after severe reverses condemned itself, became fatal to them also. Consequently, there were besides Pharisaic Jewish Christians, ascetics of all kinds who were joined by all those over whom Oriental religious wisdom and Greek philosophy had won a commanding influence. (See above, p. 242 f.)
In the first century these Jewish Christians formed the majority in Palestine, and perhaps also in some neighbouring provinces. But they were also found here and there in the West.
Now the great question is whether this Jewish Christianity as a whole, or in certain of its tendencies, was a factor in the development of Christianity to Catholicism. This question is to be answered in the negative, and quite as much with regard to the history of dogma as with regard to the political history of the Church. From the stand-point of the universal history of Christianity, these Jewish Christian communities appear as rudimentary structures which now and again, as objects of curiosity, engaged the attention of the main body of Christendom in the East, but could not exert any important influence on it, just because they contained a national element.
The Jewish Christians took no considerable part in the Gnostic controversy, the epoch-making conflict which was raised within the pale of the larger Christendom about the decisive question, whether and to what extent the Old Testament should remain a basis of Christianity, although they themselves were no less occupied with the question. [407] The issue of this conflict in favour of that party which recognised the Old Testament in its full extent as a revelation of the Christian God, and asserted the closest connection between Christianity and the Old Testament religion, was so little the result of any influence of Jewish Christianity, that the existence of the latter would only have rendered that victory more difficult unless it had already fallen into the background as a phenomenon of no importance. [408] How completely insignificant it was is shewn not only by the limited polemics of the Church Fathers, but perhaps still more by their silence, and the new import which the reproach of Judaising obtained in Christendom after the middle of the second century. In proportion as the Old Testament, in opposition to Gnosticism, became a more conscious and accredited possession in the Church, and at the same time, in consequence of the naturalising of Christianity in the world, the need of regulations, fixed rules, statutory enactments etc., appeared as indispensable, it must have been natural to use the Old Testament as a holy code of such enactments. This procedure was no falling away from the original anti-Judaic attitude, provided nothing national was taken from the book, and some kind of spiritual interpretation given to what had been borrowed. The "apostasy" rather lay simply in the changed needs. But one now sees how those parties in the Church, to which for any reason this progressive legislation was distasteful, raised the reproach of "Judaising," [409] and further, how conversely the same reproach was hurled at those Christians who resisted the advancing hellenising of Christianity, with regard, for example, to the doctrine of God, eschatology, Christology, etc. [410] But while this reproach is raised, there is nowhere shewn any connection between those described as Judaising Christians and the Ebionites. That they were identified off-hand is only a proof that "Ebionitism" was no longer known. That "Judaising" within Catholicism which appears, on the one hand, in the setting up of a Catholic ceremonial law (worship, constitution, etc.), and on the other, in a tenacious clinging to less hellenised forms of faith and hopes of faith, has nothing in common with Jewish Christianity, which desired somehow to confine Christianity to the Jewish nation. [411] Speculations that take no account of history may make out that Catholicism became more and more Jewish Christian. But historical observation, which reckons only with concrete quantities, can discover in Catholicism, besides Christianity, no element which it would have to describe as Jewish Christian. It observes only a progressive hellenising, and in consequence of this, a progressive spiritual legislation which utilizes the Old Testament, a process which went on for centuries according to the same methods which had been employed in the larger Christendom from the beginning. [412] Baur's brilliant attempt to explain Catholicism as a product of the mutual conflict and neutralising of Jewish and Gentile Christianity, (the latter, according to Baur, being equivalent to Paulinism) reckons with two factors, of which the one had no significance at all, and the other only an indirect effect, as regards the formation of the Catholic Church. The influence of Paul in this direction is exhausted in working out the universalism of the Christian religion, for a Greater than he had laid the foundation for this movement, and Paul did not realise it by himself alone. Placed on this height Catholicism was certainly developed by means of conflicts and compromises, not, however, by conflicts with Ebionitism, which was to all intents and purposes discarded as early as the first century, but as the result of the conflict of Christianity with the united powers of the world in which it existed, on behalf of its own peculiar nature as the universal religion based on the Old Testament. Here were fought triumphant battles, but here also compromises were made which characterise the essence of Catholicism as Church and as doctrine. [413]
A history of Jewish Christianity and its doctrines does not therefore, strictly speaking, belong to the history of dogma, especially as the original distinction between Jewish Christianity and the main body of the Church lay, as regards its principle, not in doctrine, but in policy. But seeing that the opinions of the teachers in this Church regarding Jewish Christianity throw light upon their own stand-point, also that up till about the middle of the second century Jewish Christians were still numerous and undoubtedly formed the great majority of believers in Palestine, [414] and finally, that attempts--unsuccessful ones indeed--on the part of Jewish Christianity to bring Gentile Christians under its sway did not cease till about the middle of the third century, a short sketch may be appropriate here.
[415]
Justin vouches for the existence of Jewish Christians, and distinguishes between those who would force the law even on Gentile Christians and would have no fellowship with such as did not observe it, and those who considered that the law was binding only on people of Jewish birth and did not shrink from fellowship with Gentile Christians who were living without the law. How the latter could observe the law and yet enter into intercourse with those who were not Jews is involved in obscurity, but these he recognises as partakers of the Christian salvation and therefore as Christian brethren, though he declares that there are Christians who do not possess this large-heartedness. He also speaks of Gentile Christians who allowed themselves to be persuaded by Jewish Christians into the observance of the Mosaic law, and confesses that he is not quite sure of the salvation of these. This is all we learn from Justin, [416] but it is instructive enough. In the first place, we can see that the question is no longer a burning one: "Justin here represents only the interests of a Gentile Christianity whose stability has been secured." This has all the more meaning that in the Dialogue Justin has not in view an individual Christian community, or the communities of a province, but speaks as one who surveys the whole situation of Christendom. [417] The very fact that Justin has devoted to the whole question only one chapter of a work containing 142, and the magmanimous way in which he speaks, shew that the phenomena in question have no longer any importance for the main body of Christendom. Secondly, it is worthy of notice that Justin distinguishes two tendencies in Jewish Christianity. We observe these two tendencies in the Apostolic age (Presupp. § 3); they had therefore maintained themselves to his time. Finally, we must not overlook the circumstance that he adduces only the e'nnomos politei'a, "legal polity," as characteristic of this Jewish Christianity. He speaks only incidentally of a difference in doctrine, nay, he manifestly presupposes that the dida'gmata Christou, "teachings of Christ," are essentially found among them just as among the Gentile Christians; for he regards the more liberal among them as friends and brethren. [418]
The fact that even then there were Jewish Christians here and there who sought to spread the e'nnomos politei'a among Gentile Christians has been attested by Justin and also by other contemporary writers. [419] But there is no evidence of this propaganda having acquired any great importance. Celsus also knows Christians who desire to live as Jews according to the Mosaic law (V. 61), but he mentions them only once, and otherwise takes no notice of them in his delineation of, and attack on, Christianity. We may perhaps infer that he knew of them only from hearsay, for he simply enumerates them along with the numerous Gnostic sects. Had this keen observer really known them he would hardly have passed them over, even though he had met with only a small number of them. [420] Irenæus placed the Ebionites among the heretical schools,
[421] but we can see from his work that in his day they must have been all but forgotten in the West. [422] This was not yet the case in the East. Origen knows of them. He knows also of some who recognise the birth from the Virgin. He is sufficiently intelligent and acquainted with history to judge that the Ebionites are no school, but, as believing Jews, are the descendants of the earliest Christians, in fact he seems to suppose that all converted Jews have at all times observed the law of their fathers. But he is far from judging of them favourably. He regards them as little better than the Jews (Ioudaioi kai` oi oli'go diaphe'rontes auton Ebionaioi, "Jews and Ebionites who differ little from them"). Their rejection of Paul destroys the value of their recognition of Jesus as Messiah. They appear only to have assumed Christ's name, and their literal exposition of the Scripture is meagre and full of error. It is possible that such Jewish Christians may have existed in Alexandria, but it is not certain. Origen knows nothing of an inner development in this Jewish Christianity. [423] Even in Palestine, Origen seems to have occupied himself personally with these Jewish Christians, just as little as Eusebius. [424] They lived apart by themselves and were not aggressive. Jerome is the last who gives us a clear and certain account of them. [425] He, who associated with them, assures us that their attitude was the same as in the second century, only they seem to have made progress in the recognition of the birth from the Virgin and in their more friendly position towards the Church. [426] Jerome at one time calls them Ebionites and at another Nazarenes, thereby proving that these names were used synonymously.
[427] There is not the least ground for distinguishing two clearly marked groups of Jewish Christians, or even for reckoning the distinction of Origen and the Church Fathers to the account of Jewish Christians themselves, so as to describe as Nazarenes those who recognised the birth from the Virgin and who had no wish to compel the Gentile Christians to observe the law, and the others as Ebionites. Apart from syncretistic or Gnostic Jewish Christianity, there is but one group of Jewish Christians holding various shades of opinion, and these from the beginning called themselves Nazarenes as well as Ebionites. From the beginning, likewise, one portion of them was influenced by the existence of a great Gentile Church which did not observe the law. They acknowledged the work of Paul and experienced in a slight degree influences emanating from the great Church. [428] But the gulf which separated them from that Church did not thereby become narrower. That gulf was caused by the social and political separation of these Jewish Christians, whatever mental attitude, hostile or friendly, they might take up to the great Church. This Church stalked over them with iron feet, as over a structure which in her opinion was full of contradictions throughout ("Semi-christiani"), and was disconcerted neither by the gospel of these Jewish Christians nor by anything else about them. [429] But as the Synagogue also vigorously condemned them, their position up to their extinction was a most tragic one. These Jewish Christians, more than any other Christian party, bore the reproach of Christ.
The Gospel, at the time when it was proclaimed among the Jews, was not only law, but theology, and indeed syncretistic theology. On the other hand, the temple service and the sacrificial system had begun to lose their hold in certain influential circles. [430] We have pointed out above (Presupp. §§ I. 2. 5) how great were the diversities of Jewish sects, and that there was in the Diaspora, as well as in Palestine itself, a Judaism which, on the one hand, followed ascetic impulses, arid on the other, advanced to a criticism of the religious tradition without giving up the national claims. It may even be said that in theology the boundaries between the orthodox Judaism of the Pharisees and a syncretistic Judaism were of an elastic kind. Although religion, in those circles, seemed to be fixed in its legal aspect, yet on its theological side it was ready to admit very diverse speculations, in which angelic powers especially played a great rôle. [431] That introduced into Jewish monotheism an element of differentiation, the results of which were far-reaching. The field was prepared for the formation of syncretistic sects. They present themselves to us on the soil of the earliest Christianity, in the speculations of those Jewish Christian teachers who are opposed in the Epistle to the Colossians, and in the Gnosis of Cerinthus (see above, p. 247). Here cosmological ideas and myths were turned to profit. The idea of God was sublimated by both. In consequence of this, the Old Testament records were subjected to criticism, because they could not in all respects be reconciled with the universal religion which hovered before men's minds. This criticism was opposed to the Pauline in so far as it maintained, with the common Jewish Christians and Christendom as a whole, that the genuine Old Testament religion was essentially identical with the Christian. But while those common Jewish Christians drew from this the inference that the whole of the Old Testament must be adhered to in its traditional sense and in all its ordinances, and while the larger Christendom secured for itself the whole of the Old Testament by deviating from the ordinary interpretation, those syncretistic Jewish Christians separated from the Old Testament, as interpolations, whatever did not agree with their purer moral conceptions and borrowed speculations. Thus, in particular, they got rid of the sacrificial ritual and all that was connected with it by putting ablutions in their place. First the profanation, and afterwards the abolition of the temple worship after the destruction of Jerusalem, may have given another new and welcome impulse to this by coming to be regarded as its Divine confirmation (Presupp. § 2). Christianity now appeared as purified Mosaism. In these Jewish Christian undertakings we have undoubtedly before us a series of peculiar attempts to elevate the Old Testament religion into the universal one, under the impression of the person of Jesus; attempts, however, in which the Jewish religion, and not the Jewish people, was to bear the costs by curtailment of its distinctive features. The great inner affinity of these attempts with the Gentile Christian Gnostics has already been set forth. The firm partition wall between them, however, lies in the claim of these Jewish Christians to set forth the pure Old Testament religion, as well as in the national Jewish colouring which the constructed universal religion was always to preserve. This national colouring is shewn in the insistance upon a definite measure of Jewish national ceremonies as necessary to salvation, and in the opposition to the Apostle Paul, which united the Gnostic Judæo-Christians with the common type, those of the strict observance. How the latter were related to the former, we do not know, for the inner relations here are almost completely unknown to us. [432]
Apart from the false doctrines opposed in the Epistle to the Colossians, and from Cerinthus, this syncretistic Jewish Christianity which aimed at making itself a universal religion meets us in tangible form only in three phenomena: [433] in the Elkesaites of Hippolytus and Origen; in the Ebionites with their associates of Epiphanius, sects very closely connected, in fact to be viewed as one party of manifold shades; [434] and in the activity of Symmachus. [435] We observe here a form of religion as far removed from that of the Old Testament as from the Gospel, subject to strong heathen influences, not Greek, but Asiatic, and scarcely deserving the name "Christian," because it appeals to a new revelation of God which is to complete that given in Christ. We should take particular note of this in judging of the whole remarkable phenomenon. The question in this Jewish Christianity is not the formation of a philosophic school, but to some extent the establishment of a kind of new religion, that is, the completion of that founded by Christ, undertaken by a particular person basing his claims on a revealed book which was delivered to him from heaven. This book which was to form the complement of the Gospel, possessed, from the third century, importance for all sections of Jewish Christians so far as they, in the phraseology of Epiphanius, were not Nazarenes.
[436] The whole system reminds one of Samaritan Christian syncretism;
[437] but we must be on our guard against identifying the two phenomena, or even regarding them as similar. These Elkesaite Jewish Christians held fast by the belief that Jesus was the Son of God, and saw in the "book" a revelation which proceeded from him. They did not offer any worship to their founder, [438] that is, to the receiver of the "book," and they were, as will be shewn, the most ardent opponents of Simonianism. [439]
Alcibiades of Apamea, one of their disciples, came from the East to Rome about 220-230, and endeavoured to spread the doctrines of the sect in the Roman Church. He found the soil prepared, inasmuch as he could announce from the "book" forgiveness of sins to all sinful Christians, even the grossest transgressors, and such forgiveness was very much needed. Hippolytus opposed him, and had an opportunity of seeing the book and becoming acquainted with its contents. From his account and that of Origen we gather the following: (1) The sect is a Jewish Christian one, for it requires the no'mou politei'a (circumcision and the keeping of the Sabbath), and repudiates the Apostle Paul; but it criticises the Old Testament and rejects a part of it. (2) The objects of its faith are the "Great and most High God," the Son of God (the "Great King"), and the Holy Spirit (thought of as female); Son and Spirit appear as angelic powers. Considered outwardly, and according to his birth, Christ is a mere man, but with this peculiarity, that he has already been frequently born and manifested (polla'kis gennethe'nta kai` genno'menon pephene'nai kai` phu'esthai, alla'ssonta gene'seis kai` metensomatou'menon, cf. the testimony of Victorinus as to Symmachus). From the statements of Hippolytus we cannot be sure whether he was identified with the Son of God, [440] at any rate the assumption of repeated births of Christ shews how completely Christianity was meant to be identified with what was supposed to be the pure Old Testament religion. (3) The "book" proclaimed a new forgiveness of sin, which, on condition of faith in the "book" and a real change of mind, was to be bestowed on every one, through the medium of washings, accompanied by definite prayers which are strictly prescribed. In these prayers appear peculiar Semitic speculations about nature ("the seven witnesses: heaven, water, the holy spirits, the angels of prayer, oil, salt, earth"). The old Jewish way of thinking appears in the assumption that all kinds of sickness and misfortune are punishments for sin, and that these penalties must therefore be removed by atonement. The book contains also astrological and geometrical speculations in a religious garb. The main thing, however, was the possibility of a forgiveness of sin, ever requiring to be repeated, though Hippolytus himself was unable to point to any gross laxity. Still, the appearance of this sect represents the attempt to make the religion of Christian Judaism palatable to the world. The possibility of repeated forgiveness of sin, the speculations about numbers, elements, and stars, the halo of mystery, the adaptation to the forms of worship employed in the "mysteries," are worldly means of attraction which shew that this Jewish Christianity was subject to the process of acute secularization. The Jewish mode of life was to be adopted in return for these concessions. Yet its success in the West was of small extent and short-lived.
Epiphanius confirms all these features, and adds a series of new ones. In his description, the new forgiveness of sin is not so prominent as in that of Hippolytus, but it is there. From the account of Epiphanius we can see that these syncretistic Judæo-Christian sects were at first strictly ascetic and rejected marriage as well as the eating of flesh, but that they gradually became more lax. We learn here that the whole sacrificial service was removed from the Old Testament by the Elkesaites and declared to be non-Divine, that is non-Mosaic, and that fire was consequently regarded as the impure and dangerous element, and water as the good one. [441] We learn further, that these sects acknowledged no prophets and men of God between Aaron and Christ, and that they completely adapted the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew to their own views. [442] In addition to this book, however, (the Gospel of the 12 Apostles), other writings, such as Peri'odoi Pe'trou dia` Kle'mentos Anabathmoi` Iako'bou and similar histories of Apostles, were held in esteem by them. In these writings the Apostles were represented as zealous ascetics, and, above all, as vegetarians, while the Apostle Paul was most bitterly opposed. They called him a Tarsene, said he was a Greek, and heaped on him gross abuse. Epiphanius also dwells strongly upon their Jewish mode of life (circumcision, Sabbath), as well as their daily washings, [443] and gives some information about the constitution and form of worship of these sects (use of baptism: Lord's Supper with bread and water). Finally, Epiphanius gives particulars about their Christology. On this point there were differences of opinion, and these differences prove that there was no Christological dogma. As among the common Jewish Christians, the birth of Jesus from the Virgin was a matter of dispute. Further, some identified Christ with Adam, others saw in him a heavenly being (a'nothen o'n), a spiritual being, who was created before all, who was higher than all angels and Lord of all things, but who chose for himself the upper world; yet this Christ from above came down to this lower world as often as he pleased. He came in Adam, he appeared in human form to the patriarchs, and at last appeared on earth as a man with the body of Adam, suffered, etc. Others again, as it appears, would have nothing to do with these speculations, but stood by the belief that Jesus was the man chosen by God, on whom, on account of his virtue, the Holy Spirit--o`per esti'n o Christo's--descended at the baptism. [444] (Epiph. h. 30. 3, 14, 16). The account which Epiphanius gives of the doctrine held by these Jewish Christians regarding the Devil, is specially instructive (h. 30. 16): Du'o de` tinas sunistosin ek theou tetagme'nous, e'na me`n to`n Christo`n, e'na de` to`n dia'bolon. kai` to`n me`n Christo`n le'gousi tou me'llontos aionos eilephe'nai to`n kleron, to`n de` dia'bolon touton pepisteusthai on aiona, ek prostages dethen tou pantokra'toros kata` ai'tesin ekate'ron auton. Here we have a very old Semitico-Hebraic idea preserved in a very striking way, and therefore we may probably assume that in other respects also, these Gnostic Ebionites preserved that which was ancient. Whether they did so in their criticism of the Old Testament, is a point on which we must not pronounce judgment.
We might conclude by referring to the fact that this syncretistic Jewish Christianity, apart from a well-known missionary effort at Rome, was confined to Palestine and the neighbouring countries, and might consider it proved that this movement had no effect on the history and development of Catholicism [445] were it not for two voluminous writings which still continue to be regarded as monuments of the earliest epoch of syncretistic Jewish Christianity. Not only did Baur suppose that he could prove his hypothesis about the origin of Catholicism by the help of these writings, but the attempt has recently been made on the basis of the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions and Homilies, for these are the writings in question, to go still further and claim for Jewish Christianity the glory of having developed by itself the whole doctrine, worship and constitution of Catholicism, and of having transmitted it to Gentile Christianity as a finished product which only required to be divested of a few Jewish husks. [446] It is therefore necessary to subject these writings to a brief examination. Every-thing depends on the time of their origin, and the tendencies they follow. But these are just the two questions that are still unanswered. Without depreciating those worthy men who have earnestly occupied themselves with the Pseudo-Clementines, [447] it may be asserted, that in this region everything is as yet in darkness, especially as no agreement has been reached even in the question of their composition. No doubt such a result appears to have been pretty nearly arrived at as far as the time of composition is concerned, but that estimate (150-170, or the latter half of the second century) not only awakens the greatest suspicion, but can be proved to be wrong. The importance of the question for the history of dogma does not permit the historian to set it aside, while, on the other hand, the compass of a manual does not allow us to enter into an exhaustive investigation. The only course open in such circumstances is briefly to define one's own position.
1. The Recognitions and Homilies, in the form in which we have them, do not belong to the second century, but at the very earliest to the first half of the third. There is nothing, however, to prevent our putting them a few decades later. [448]
2. They were not composed in their present form by heretical Christians, but most probably by Catholics. Nor do they aim at forming a theological system, [449] or spreading the views of a sect. Their primary object is to oppose Greek polytheism, immoral mythology, and false philosophy, and thus to promote edification. [450]
3. In describing the authors as Catholic, we do not mean that they were adherents of the theology of Irenæus or Origen. The instructive point here, rather, is that they had as yet no fixed theology, and therefore could without hesitation regard and use all possible material as means of edification. In like manner, they had no fixed conception of the Apostolic age, and could therefore appropriate motley and dangerous material. Such Christians, highly educated and correctly trained too, were still to be found, not only in the third century, but even later. But the authors do not seem to have been free from a bias, inasmuch as they did not favour the Catholic, that is the Alexandrian, apologetic theology which was in process of formation
4. The description of the Pseudo-Clementine writings, naturally derived from their very form, as "edifying, didactic romances for the refutation of paganism," is not inconsistent with the idea that the authors at the same time did their utmost to oppose heretical phenomena, especially the Marcionite church and Apelles, together with heresy and heathenism in general, as represented by Simon Magus.
5. The objectionable materials which the authors made use of were edifying for them, because of the position assigned therein to Peter, because of the ascetic and mysterious elements they contained, and the opposition offered to Simon, etc. The offensive features, so far as they were still contained in these sources, had already become unintelligible and harmless. They were partly conserved as such and partly removed.
6. The authors are to be sought for perhaps in Rome, perhaps in Syria, perhaps in both places, certainly not in Alexandria.
7. The main ideas are: (1) The monarchy of God. (2) the syzygies (weak and strong). (3) Prophecy (the true Prophet). (4) Stoical rationalism, belief in providence, good works, philanthropi'a, etc. = Mosaism. The Homilies are completely saturated with stoicism, both in their ethical and metaphysical systems, and are opposed to Platonism, though Plato is quoted in Hom. XV. 8, as Elle'non topho's tis (a wise man of the Greeks). In addition to these ideas we have also a strong hierarchical tendency. The material which the authors made use of was in great part derived from syncretistic Jewish Christian tradition, in other words, those histories of the Apostles were here utilised which Epiphanius reports to have been used by the Ebionites (see above). It is not probable, however, that these writings in their original form were in the hands of the narrators; the likelihood is that they made use of them in revised forms.
8. It must be reserved for an accurate investigation to ascertain whether those modified versions which betray clear marks of Hellenic origin were made within syncretistic Judaism itself, or whether they are to be traced back to Catholic writers. In either case, they should not be placed earlier than about the beginning of the third century, but in all probability one or two generations later still.
9. If we adopt the first assumption, it is most natural to think of that propaganda which, according to the testimony of Hippolytus and Origen, Jewish Christianity attempted in Rome in the age of Caracalla and Heliogabalus, through the medium of the Syrian, Alcibiades. This coincides with the last great advance of Syrian cults into the west, and is at the same time the only one known to us historically. But it is further pretty generally admitted that the immediate sources of the Pseudo-Clementines already presuppose the existence of Elkesaite Christianity. We should accordingly have to assume that in the West this Christianity made greater concessions to the prevailing type, that it gave up circumcision and accommodated itself to the Church system of Gentile Christianity, at the same time withdrawing its polemic against Paul.
10. Meanwhile the existence of such a Jewish Christianity is not as yet proved, and therefore we must reckon with the possibility that the remodelled form of the Jewish Christian sources, already found in existence by the revisers of the Pseudo-Clementine Romances, was solely a Catholic literary product. In this assumption, which commends itself both as regards the aim of the composition and its presupposed conditions, we must remember that, from the third century onwards, Catholic writers systematically corrected, and to a great extent reconstructed, the heretical histories which were in circulation in the churches as interesting reading, and that the extent and degree of this reconstruction varied exceedingly, according to the theological and historical insight of the writer. The identifying of pure Mosaism with Christianity was in itself by no means offensive when there was no further question of circumcision. The clear distinction between the ceremonial and moral parts of the Old Testament, could no longer prove an offence after the great struggle with Gnosticism. [451] The strong insistance upon the unity of God, and the rejection of the doctrine of the Logos, were by no means uncommon in the beginning of the third century; and in the speculations about Adam and Christ, in the views about God and the world and such like, as set before us in the immediate sources of the Romances, the correct and edifying elements must have seemed to outweigh the objectionable. At any rate, the historian who, until further advised, denies the existence of a Jewish Christianity composed of the most contradictory elements, lacking circumcision and national hopes, and bearing marks of Catholic and therefore of Hellenic influence, judges more prudently than he who asserts, solely on the basis of Romances which are accompanied by no tradition and have never been the objects of assault, the existence of a Jewish Christianity accommodating itself to Catholicism which is entirely unattested.
11. Be that as it may, it may at least be regarded as certain that the Pseudo-Clementines contribute absolutely nothing to our knowledge of the origin of the Catholic Church and doctrine, as they shew at best in their immediate sources a Jewish Christianity strongly influenced by Catholicism and Hellenism.
12. They must be used with great caution even in seeking to determine the tendencies and inner history of syncretistic Jewish Christianity. It cannot be made out with certainty, how far back the first sources of the Pseudo-Clementines date, or what their original form and tendency were. As to the first point, it has indeed been said that Justin, nay, even the author of the Acts of the Apostles, presupposes them, and that the Catholic tradition of Peter in Rome and of Simon Magus are dependent on them (as is still held by Lipsius); but there is so little proof of this adduced that in Christian literature up to the end of the second century (Hegesippus?) we can only discover very uncertain traces of acquaintance with Jewish Christian historical narrative. Such indications can only be found to any considerable extent in the third century, and I do not mean to deny that the contents of the Jewish Christian histories of the Apostles contributed materially to the formation of the ecclesiastical legends about Peter. As is shewn in the Pseudo-Clementines, these histories of the Apostles especially opposed Simon Magus and his adherents (the new Samaritan attempt at a universal religion), and placed the authority of the Apostle Peter against them. But they also opposed the Apostle Paul, and seem to have transferred Simonian features to Paul, and Pauline features to Simon. Yet it is also possible that the Pauline traits found in the magician were the outcome of the redaction, in so far as the whole polemic against Paul is here struck out, though certain parts of it have been woven into the polemic against Simon. But probably the Pauline features of the magician are merely an appearance. The Pseudo-Clementines may to some extent be used, though with caution, in determining the doctrines of syncretistic Jewish Christianity. In connection with this we must take what Epiphanius says as our standard. The Pantheistic and Stoic elements which are found here and there must of course be eliminated. But the theory of the genesis of the world from a change in God himself (that is from a probole'), the assumption that all things emanated from God in antitheses (Son of God--Devil; heaven--earth; male--female; male and female prophecy), nay, that these antitheses are found in God himself (goodness, to which corresponds the Son of God--punitive justice, to which corresponds the Devil), the speculations about the elements which have proceeded from the one substance, the ignoring of freedom in the question about the origin of evil, the strict adherence to the unity and absolute causality of God, in spite of the dualism, and in spite of the lofty predicates applied to the Son of God--all this plainly bears the Semitic Jewish stamp.
We must here content ourselves with these indications. They were meant to set forth briefly the reasons which forbid our assigning to syncretistic Jewish Christianity, on the basis of the Pseudo-Clementines, a place in the history of the genesis of the Catholic Church and its doctrine.
Bigg, The Clementine Homilies (Studia Biblica et Eccles. II., p. 157 ff.), has propounded the hypothesis that the Homilies are an Ebionitic revision of an older Catholic original (see p. 184: "The Homilies as we have it, is a recast of an orthodox work by a highly unorthodox editor." P. 175: "The Homilies are surely the work of a Catholic convert to Ebionitism, who thought he saw in the doctrine of the two powers the only tenable answer to Gnosticism. We can separate his Catholicism from his Ebionitism just as surely as his Stoicism"). This is the opposite of the view expressed by me in the text. I consider Bigg's hypothesis well worth examining, and at first sight not improbable; but I am not able to enter into it here. __________________________________________________________________
[403] The attitude of the recently discovered "Teaching of the twelve Apostles" is strictly universalistic, and hostile to Judaism as a nation, but shews us a Christianity still essentially uninfluenced by philosophic elements. The impression made by this fact has caused some scholars to describe the treatise as a document of Jewish Christianity. But the attitude of the Didache is rather the ordinary one of universalistic early Christianity on the soil of the Græco-Roman world. If we describe this as Jewish Christian, then from the meaning which we must give to the words "Christian" and "Gentile Christian," we tacitly legitimise an undefined and undefinable aggregate of Greek ideas, along with a specifically Pauline element, as primitive Christianity, and this is perhaps not the intended, but yet desired, result of the false terminology. Now, if we describe even such writings as the Epistle of James and the Shepherd of Hermas as Jewish Christian, we therewith reduce the entire early Christianity, which is the creation of a universal religion on the soil of Judaism, to the special case of an indefinable religion. The same now appears as one of the particular values of a completely indeterminate magnitude. Hilgenfeld (Judenthum und Judenchristenthum, 1886; cf. also Ztschr. f. wiss. Theol. 1886 H. 4.) advocates another conception of Jewish Christianity in opposition to the following account. Zahn. Gesch. des N.T.-lich. Kanons, II. p. 668 ff. has a different view still.
[404] Or even Ebionitism; the designations are to be used as synonymous.
[405] The more rarely the right standard has been set up in the literature of Church history for the distinction of Jewish Christianity, the more valuable are those writings in which it is found. We must refer, above all, to Diestel, Geschichte des A. T. in der Christl. Kirche, p. 44, note 7.
[406] See Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1883. Col. 409 f. as to the attempt of Joel to make out that the whole of Christendom up to the end of the first century was strictly Jewish Christian, and to exhibit the complete friendship of Jews and Christians in that period ("Blicke in die Religionsgesch." 2 Abth. 1883). It is not improbable that Christians like James, living in strict accordance with the law, were for the time being respected even by the Pharisees in the period preceding the destruction of Jerusalem But that can in no case have been the rule. We see from Epiph. h. 29. 9. and from the Talmud what was the custom at a later period.
[407] There were Jewish Christians who represented the position of the great Church with reference to the Old Testament religion, and there were some who criticised the Old Testament like the Gnostics. Their contention may have remained as much an internal one as that between the Church Fathers and Gnostics (Marcion) did, so far as Jewish Christianity is concerned. Their may have been relations between Gnostic Jewish Christians and Gnostics not of a national Jewish type, in Syria and Asia Minor, though we are completely in the dark on the matter.
[408] From the mere existence of Jewish Christians, those Christians who rejected the Old Testament might have argued against the main body of Christendom and put before it the dilemma: either Jewish Christian or Marcionite. Still more logical indeed was the dilemma: either Jewish, or Marcionite Christian.
[409] So did the Montanists and Antimontanists mutually reproach each other with Judaising (see the Montanist writings of Tertullian). Just in the same way the arrangements as to worship and organisation, which were ever being more richly developed, were described by the freer parties as Judaising, because they made appeal to the Old Testament, though, as regards their contents, they had little in common with Judaism. But is not the method of claiming Old Testament authority for the regulations rendered necessary by circumstances nearly as old as Christianity itself? Against whom the lost treatise of Clement of Alexandria "kano'n ekklesiastiko`s e` pros tou`s Ioudai'zontas" (Euseb.
H. E. VI. 13. 3.) was directed, we cannot tell. But as we read, Strom., VI. 15. 125, that the Holy Scriptures are to be expounded according to the ekklesiastiko`s kano`n, and then find the following definition of the Canon: kano`n de` ekklesiastiko's e sunodi'a kai` sumphoni'a no'mou te kai` propheton te kata` te`n tou kuri'ou parousi'an paradidome'ne diathe'ke, we may conjecture that the Judaisers were those Christians who, in principle or to some extent, objected to the allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament. We have then to think either of Marcionite Christians or of "Chiliasts," that is, the old Christians who were still numerous in Egypt about the middle of the third century (see Dionys. Alex. in Euseb., H. E. VII. 24). In the first case, the title of the treatise would be paradoxical. But perhaps the treatise refers to the Quarto-decimans, although the expression kano`n ekklesiastiko's seems too ponderous for them (see, however, Orig., Comm. in Matth. n. 76, ed. Delarue III., p. 895). Clement may possibly have had Jewish Christians before him. See Zahn, Forschungen, vol. III., p. 37 f.
[410] Cases of this kind are everywhere, up to the fifth century, so numerous that they need not be cited. We may only remind the reader that the Nestorian Christology was described by its earliest and its latest opponents as Ebionitic.
[411] Or were those western Christians Ebionitic who, in the fourth century, still clung to very realistic Chiliastic hopes, who, in fact, regarded their Christianity as consisting in these?
[412] The hellenising of Christianity went hand in hand with a more extensive use of the Old Testament; for, according to the principles of Catholicism, every new article of the Church system must be able to legitimise itself as springing from revelation. But, as a rule, the attestation could only be gathered from the Old Testament, since religion here appears in the fixed form of a secular community. Now the needs of a secular community for outward regulations gradually became so strong in the Church as to require palpable ceremonial rules. But it cannot be denied that from a certain point of time, first by means of the fiction of Apostolic constitutions (see my edition of the Didache, Prolegg. p. 239 ff.), and then without this fiction, not, however, as a rule, without reservations, ceremonial regulations were simply taken over from the Old Testament. But this transference (see Bk. II.) takes place at a time when there can be absolutely no question of an influence of Jewish Christianity. Moreover, it always proves itself to be catholic by the fact that it did not in the least soften the traditional anti-Judaism. On the contrary, it attained its full growth in the age of Constantine. Finally, it should not be overlooked that at all times in antiquity certain provincial churches were exposed to Jewish influences, especially in the East and in Arabia, that they were therefore threatened with being Judaised, or with apostasy to Judaism, and that even at the present day certain Oriental Churches shew tokens of having once been subject to Jewish influences (see Serapion in Euseb. H. E. VI. 12. 1, Martyr. Pion., Epiph. de mens. et pond 15. 18; my Texte u. Unters. I. 3. p. 73 f., and Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, Part. 3. p. 197 ff.; actual disputations with Jews do not seem to have been common, though see Tertull., adv. Jud. and Orig. c. Cels. I. 45, 49, 55: II. 31. Clement also keeps in view Jewish objections). This Jewish Christianity, if we like to call it so, which in some regions of the East was developed through an immediate influence of Judaism on Catholicism, should not, however, be confounded with the Jewish Christianity which is the most original form in which Christianity realised itself. This was no longer able to influence the Christianity which had shaken itself free from the Jewish nation (as to futile attempts, see below), any more than the protecting covering stripped from the new shoot can ever again acquire significance for the latter.
[413] What is called the ever-increasing "legal" feature of Gentile Christianity and the Catholic Church is conditioned by its origin, in so far as its theory is rooted in that of Judaism spiritualised and influenced by Hellenism. As the Pauline conception of, the law never took effect, and a criticism of the Old Testament religion which is just law, neither understood nor ventured upon in the larger Christendom--the forms were not criticised, but the contents spiritualised--so the theory that Christianity is promise and spiritual law is to be regarded as the primitive one. Between the spiritual law and the national law there stand indeed ceremonial laws which, without being spiritually interpreted, could yet be freed from the national application. It cannot be denied that the Gentile Christian communities and the incipient Catholic Church were very careful and reserved in their adoption of such laws from the Old Testament, and that the later Church no longer observed this caution. But still it is only a question of degree, for there are many examples of that adoption in the earliest period of Christendom. The latter had no cause for hurry in utilizing the Old Testament so long as there was no external or internal policy, or so long as it was still in embryo. The decisive factor lies here again in enthusiasm and not in changing theories. The basis for these was supplied from the beginning. But a community of individuals under spiritual excitement builds on this foundation something different from an association which wishes to organise and assert itself as such on earth. (The history of Sunday is specially instructive here; see Zahn, Gesch. des Sonntags, 1878, as well as the history of the discipline of fasting, see Linsenmayr, Entwickelung der Kirchl. Fastendisciplin. 1877, and Die Abgabe des Zehnten. In general, cf. Ritschl., Entstehung der Altkath. Kirche, 2 edit. pp. 312 ff. 331 ff. 1 Cor. IX. 9, may be noted).
[414] Justin, Apol. I. 53, Dial. 47; Euseb., H. E. IV. 5; Sulpic. Sev., Hist. Sacr. II. 31; Cyrill, Catech. XIV. 15. Important testimonies in Origen, Eusebius, Epiphanius and Jerome.
[415] No Jewish Christian writings have been transmitted to us, even from the earliest period; for the Apocalypse of John which describes the Jews as a synagogue of Satan is not a Jewish Christian book (III. 9 especially, shews that the author knows of only one covenant of God, viz., that with the Christians). Jewish Christian sources lie at the basis of our synoptic Gospels, but none of them in their present form is a Jewish Christian writing. The Acts of the Apostles is so little Jewish Christian, its author seemingly so ignorant of Jewish Christianity, at least so unconcerned with regard to it that to him the spiritualised Jewish law, or Judaism as a religion which he connects as closely as possible with Christianity, is a factor already completely detached from the Jewish people (see Overbeck's Commentar z. Apostelgesch. and his discussion in the Ztschr. f. wiss. Theol. 1872. p. 305 ff.). Measured by the Pauline theology we may indeed, with Overbeck, say of the Gentile Christianity, as represented by the Author of the Acts of the Apostles, that it already has germs of Judaism and represents a falling off from Paulinism; but these expressions are not correct, because they have at least the appearance of making Paulinism the original form of Gentile Christianity. But as this can neither be proved nor believed, the religious attitude of the Author of the Acts of the Apostles must have been a very old one in Christendom. The Judaistic element was not first introduced into Gentile Christianity by the opponents of Paul, who indeed wrought in the national sense, and there is even nothing to lead to the hypothesis that the common Gentile Christian view of the Old Testament and of the law should be conceived as resulting from the efforts of Paul and his opponents, for the consequent effect here would either have been null, or a strengthening of the Jewish Christian thesis. The Jewish element, that is the total acceptance of the Jewish religion sub specie aternitatis et Christi, is simply the original Christianity of the Gentile Christians itself considered as theory. Contrary to his own intention, Paul was compelled to lead his converts to this Christianity, for only for such Christianity was "the time fulfilled" within the empire of the world. The Acts of the Apostles gives eloquent testimony to the pressing difficulties which under such circumstances stand in the way of a historical understanding of the Gentile Christians in view of the work and the theology of Paul. Even the Epistle to the Hebrews is not a Jewish Christian writing; but there is certainly a peculiar state of things connected with this document. For, on the one hand, the author and his readers are free from the law, a spiritual interpretation is given to the Old Testament religion which makes it appear to be glorified and fulfilled in the work of Christ, and there is no mention of any prerogative of the people of Israel. But, on the other hand, because the spiritual interpretation, as in Paul, is here teleological, the author allows a temporary significance to the cultus as literally understood, and therefore by his criticism he conserves the Old Testament religion for the past, while declaring that it was set aside as regards the present by the fulfilment of Christ. The teleology of the author, however, looks at everything only from the point of view of shadow and reality, an antithesis which is at the service of Paul also, but which in his case vanishes behind the antithesis of law and grace. This scheme of thought which is to be traced back to a way of looking at things which arose in Christian Judaism, seeing that it really distinguishes between old and new, stands midway between the conception of the Old Testament religion entertained by Paul, and that of the common Gentile Christian as it is represented by Barnabas. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews undoubtedly knows of a twofold convenant of God. But the two are represented as stages, so that the second is completely based on the first. This view was more likely to be understood by the Gentile Christians than the Pauline, that is, with some seemingly slight changes, to be recognised as their own. But even it at first fell to the ground, and it was only in the conflict with the Marcionites that some Church Fathers advanced to views which seem to be related to those of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Whether the author of this Epistle was a born Jew or a Gentile--in the former case he would far surpass the Apostle Paul in his freedom from the national claims--we cannot, at any rate, recognise in it a document containing a conception which still prizes the Jewish nationality in Christianity, nay, not even a document to prove that such a conception was still dangerous. Consequently, we have no Jewish Christian memorial in the New Testament at all, unless it be in the Pauline Epistles. But as concerns the early Christian literature outside the Canon, the fragments of the great work of Hegesippus are even yet by some investigators claimed for Jewish Christianity. Weizsäcker (Art. "Hegesippus" in Herzog's R. E. 2 edit.) has shewn how groundless this assumption is. That Hegesippus occupied the common Gentile Christian position is certain from unequivocal testimony of his own. If, as is very improbable, we were obliged to ascribe to him a rejection of Paul, we should have to refer to Euseb. H. E. IV. 29. 5. (Seuerianoi` blasphemountes Paulon to`n apo'stolon athetousin autou ta`s epistola`s mede` ta`s pra'xeis ton aposto'lon katadecho'menoi, but probably the Gospels; these Severians therefore, like Marcion, recognised the Gospel of Luke, but rejected the Acts of the Apostles), and Orig. c. Cels. V. 65: (eisi` ga`r tines aire'seis ta`s Pau'lou epistola`s tou aposto'lou me` prosie'menai o'sper Ebionaioi ampho'teroi kai` oi kalou'menoi ?Snkratetai'). Consequently, our only sources of knowledge of Jewish Christianity in the post-Pauline period are merely the accounts of the Church Fathers and some additional fragments (see the collection of fragments of the Ebionite Gospel and that to the Hebrews in Hilgenfeld, Nov. Test. extra can. rec. fasc. IV. Ed. 2, and in Zahn, l. c. II. p. 642 ff.). We know better, but still very imperfectly, certain forms of the syncretistic Jewish Christianity, from the Philosoph. of Hippolytus and the accounts of Epiphanius, who is certainly nowhere more incoherent than in the delineation of the Jewish Christians, because he could not copy original documents here, but was forced to piece together confused traditions with his own observations. See below on the extensive documents which are even yet, as they stand, treated as records of Jewish Christianity, viz., the Pseudo-Clementines. Of the pieces of writing whose Jewish Christian origin is controverted, in so far as they may be simply Jewish, I say nothing.
[416] As to the chief localities where Jewish Christians were found, see Zahn, Kanonsgesch. II. p. 648 ff.
[417] Dialogue 47.
[418] Yet it should be noted that the Christians who, according to Dial. 48, denied the pre-existence of Christ and held him to be a man are described as Jewish Christians. We should read in the passage in question, as my recent comparison of the Parisian codex shews, apo` tou umete'rou ge'nous. Yet Justin did not make this a controversial point of great moment.
[419] The so-called Barnabas is considerably older than Justin. In his Epistle (4. 6) he has in view Gentile Christians who have been converted by Jewish Christians, when he utters a warning against those who say o'ti a diathe'ke ekei'non (the Jews) kai` emon (estin). But how great the actual danger was cannot be gathered from the Epistle. Ignatius in two Epistles (ad Magn. 8-10: ad Philad. 6. 9) opposes Jewish Christian intrigues, and characterises them solely from the point of view that they mean to introduce the Jewish observance of the law. He opposes them with a Pauline idea (Magn. 8. 1: ei ga`r me'chri nun kata` no'mon, Ioudaismo`n zomen omologoumen cha'rin me` eilephe'nai), as well as with the common Gentile Christian assumption that the prophets themselves had already lived kata` Christo'n. These Judaists must be strictly distinguished from the Gnostics whom Ignatius elsewhere opposes (against Zahn, Ignat. v. Ant. p. 356 f.). The dangers from this Jewish Christianity cannot have been very serious, even if we take Magn. 11. 1, as a phrase. There was an active Jewish community in Philadelphia (Rev. III. 9), and so Jewish Christian plots may have continued longer there. At the first look it seems very promising that in the old dialogue of Aristo of Pella a Hebrew Christian, Jason, is put in opposition to the Alexandrian Jew, Papiscus. But as the history of the little book proves, this Jason must have essentially represented the common Christian and not the Ebionite conception of the Old Testament and its relation to the Gospel, etc.; see my Texte u. Unters.
I. 1. 2. p. 115 ff.; I. 3. pp. 115-130. Testimony as to an apostasy to Judaism is occasionally though rarely given; see Serapion in Euseb., H.
E. VI. 12, who addresses a book to one Domninus, ekpeptoko'ta para` to`n tou diogmou kairo`n apo` tes eis Christo`n pi'steos epi' te`n Ioudaike`n ethelothreskei'an; see also Acta Pionii, 13. 14. According to Epiphanius, de mens et pond. 14. 15, Acquila, the translator of the Bible, was first a Christian and then a Jew. This account is perhaps derived from Origen, and is probably reliable. Likewise according to Epiphanius (l. c. 17. 18), Theodotion was first a Marcionite and then a Jew. The transition from Marcionitism to Judaism (for extremes meet) is not in itself incredible.
[420] It follows from c. Cels. II. 1-3, that Celsus could hardly have known Jewish Christians.
[421] Iren. 26. 2: III. 11. 7: III. 15. 1, 21. 1: IV. 33. 4: V. 1. 3. We first find the name Ebionti, the poor, in Irenæus. We are probably entitled to assume that this name was given to the Christians in Jerusalem as early as the Apostolic age, that is, they applied it to themselves (poor in the sense of the prophets and of Christ, fit to be received into the Messianic kingdom). It is very questionable whether we should put any value on Epiph. h. 30. 17.
[422] When Irenæus adduces as the points of distinction between the Church and the Ebionites, that besides observing the law and repudiating the Apostle Paul, the latter deny the Divinity of Christ and his birth from the Virgin and reject the New Testament Canon (except the Gospel of Matthew), that only proves that the formation of dogma has made progress in the Church. The less was known of the Ebionites from personal observation, the more confidently they were made out to be heretics who denied the Divinity of Christ and rejected the Canon. The denial of the Divinity of Christ and the birth from the Virgin was, from the end of the second century, regarded as the Ebionite heresy par excellence, and the Ebionites themselves appeared to the Western Christians, who obtained their information solely from the East, to be a school like those of the Gnostics, founded by a scoundrel named Ebion for the purpose of dragging down the person of Jesus to the common level. It is also mentioned incidentally, that this Ebion had commanded the observance of circumcision and the Sabbath; but that is no longer the main thing (see Tertull, de carne 14, 18, 24: de virg. vel. 6: de præscr. 10. 33; Hippol., Syntagma, [Pseudo-Tertull, 11; Philastr. 37; Epiph. h. 30]; Hippol., Philos. VII. 34. The latter passage contains the instructive statement that Jesus by his perfect keeping of the law became the Christ). This attitude of the Western Christians proves that they no longer knew Jewish Christian communities Hence it is all the more strange that Hilgenfeld (Ketzergesch. p. 422 ff.) has in all earnestness endeavoured to revive the Ebion of the Western Church Fathers.
[423] See Orig. c. Cels. II. 1: V. 61, 65: de princip. IV. 22; hom. in Genes. III. 15 (Opp. II, p. 65): hom. in Jerem. XVII. 12 (III. p. 254): in Matth. T. XVI. 12 (III. p. 494), T. XVII. 12 (III. p. 733); cf. Opp. III. p. 895: hom. in Lc. XVII. (III. p. 952). That a portion of the Ebionites recognised the birth from the Virgin was according to Origen frequently attested. That was partly reckoned to them for righteousness and partly not, because they would not admit the pre-existence of Christ. The name "Ebionites" is interpreted as a nickname given them by the Church "beggarly" in the knowledge of scripture, and particularly of Christology.
[424] Eusebius knows no more than Origen (H. E. III. 27) unless we specially credit him with the information that the Ebionites keep along with the Sabbath also the Sunday. What he says of Symmachus, the translator of the Bible, and an Ebionite, is derived from Origen (H. E. VI. 17). The report is interesting, because it declares that Symmachus wrote against Catholic Christianity, especially against the Catholic Gospel of Matthew (about the year 200). But Symmachus is to be classed with the Gnostics, and not with the common type of Jewish Christianity (see below). We have also to thank Eusebius (H. E. III. 5. 3) for the information that the Christians of Jerusalem fled to Pella, in Peræa, before the destruction of that city. In the following period the most important settlements of the Ebionites must have been in the countries east of the Jordan, and in the heart of Syria (see Jul. Afric. in Euseb., H. E. I. 7. 14: Euseb., de loc. hebr. in Lagarde, Onomast. p. 301; Epiph., h. 29. 7: h. 30. 2). This fact explains how the bishops in Jerusalem and the coast towns of Palestine came to see very little of them. There was a Jewish Christian community in Beroea with which Jerome had relations (Jerom., de Vir. inl. 3).
[425] Jerome correctly declares (Ep. ad. August. 122. C. 13, Opp. I. p. 746), "(Ebionitæ) credentes in Christo propter hoc solum a patribus anathematizati sunt, quod legis cæremonias Christi evangelio miscuerunt, et sic nova confessa sunt, ut vetera non omitterent."
[426] Ep. ad August. l. c.; Quid dicam de Hebionitis, qui Christianos esse se simulant? usque hodie per totas orientis synagogas inter Judæos (!) hæresis est, que dicitur Minæorum et a Pharisæis nunc usque damnatur, quos vulgo Nazaræos nuncupant, qui credunt in Christum filium dei natum de Virgine Maria et eum dicunt esse, qui sub pontio Pilato passus est et resurrexit, in quem et nos credimus; sed dum volunt et Judæi esse et Christiani, nec Judæi sunt nec Christiani." The approximation of the Jewish Christian conception to that of the Catholics shews itself also in their exposition of Isaiah IX. 1. f. (see Jerome on the passage). Bert we must not forget that there were such Jewish Christians from the earliest times. It is worthy of note that the name Nazarenes, as applied to Jewish Christians, is found in the Acts of the Apostles XXIV. 5, in the Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus, and then first again in Jerome.
[427] Zahn, l. c. p. 648 ff. 668 ff. has not convinced me of the contrary, but I confess that Jerome's style of expression is not everywhere clear.
[428] Zahn, (1. c.) makes a sharp distinction between the Nazarenes, on the one side, who used the Gospel of the Hebrews, acknowledged the With from the Virgin, and in fact the higher Christology to some extent, did not repudiate Paul, etc., and the Ebionites on the other, whom he simply identifies with the Gnostic Jewish Christians, if I am not mistaken. In opposition to this, I think I must adhere to the distinction as given above in the text and in the following: (1) Non-Gnostic, Jewish Christians (Nazarenes, Ebionites), who appeared in various shades, according to their doctrine and attitude to the Gentile Church, and whom, with the Church Fathers, we may appropriately classify as strict or tolerant (exclusive or liberal). (2) Gnostic or syncretistic Judæo-Christians who are also termed Ebionites.
[429] This Gospel no doubt greatly interested the scholars of the Catholic Church from Clement of Alexandria onwards. But they have almost all contrived to evade the hard problem which it presented. It may be noted, incidentally, that the Gospel of the Hebrews, to judge from the remains preserved to us, can neither have been the model nor the translation of our Matthew, but a work independent of this, though drawing from the same sources, representing perhaps to some extent an earlier stage of the tradition. Jerome also knew very well that the Gospel of the Hebrews was not the original of the canonical Matthew, but he took care not to correct the old prejudice. Ebionitic conceptions, such as that of the female nature of the Holy Spirit, were of course least likely to convince the Church Fathers. Moreover, the common Jewish Christians hardly possessed a Church theology, because for them Christianity was something entirely different from the doctrine of a school. On the Gospel of the Hebrews, see Handmann (Texte u. Unters V. 3), Resch, Agrapha (1. c. V. 4), and Zahn, l. c. p. 642 ff.
[430] We have as yet no history of the sacrificial system and the views as to sacrifice in the Græco-Roman epoch of the Jewish Nation. It is urgently needed.
[431] We may remind readers of the assumptions, that the world was created by angels, that the law was given by angels, and similar ones which are found in the theology of the Pharisees. Celsus (in Orig. I. 26: V. 6) asserts generally that the Jews worshipped angels, so does the author of the Prædicatio Petri, as well as the apologist Aristides. Cf. Joël, Blicke in die Religionsgesch. I Abth., a book which is certainly to be used with caution (see Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1881. Coll. 184 ff.).
[432] No reliance can be placed on Jewish sources, or on Jewish scholars, as a rule. What we find in Joël, l. c. I. Abth. p. 101 ff. is instructive. We may mention Grätz, Gnosticismus und Judenthum (Krotoschin, 1846), who has called attention to the Gnostic elements in the Talmud, and dealt with several Jewish Gnostics and Antignostics, as well as with the book of Jezira. Grätz assumes that the four main dogmatic points in the book Jezira, viz., the strict unity of the deity, and, at the same time, the negation of the demiurgic dualism, the creation out of nothing with the negation of matter, the systematic unity of the world and the balancing of opposites, were directed against prevailing Gnostic ideas.
[433] We may pass over the false teachers of the Pastoral Epistles, as they cannot be with certainty determined, and the possibility is not excluded that we have here to do with an arbitrary construction; see Holtzman, Pastoralbriefe, p. 150 f.
[434] Orig. in Euseb. VI. 38; Hippol., Philos. IX. 13 ff., X. 29; Epiph., h. 30, also h. 19. 53; Method., Conviv. VIII. to. From the confused account of Epiphanius, who called the common Jewish Christians Nazarenes, the Gnostic type Ebionites and Sampsmi, and their Jewish forerunners Osseni, we may conclude, that in many regions where there were Jewish Christians they yielded to the propaganda of the Elkesaite doctrines, and that in the fourth century there was no other syncretistic Jewish Christianity besides the various shades of Elkesaites.
[435] I formerly reckoned Symmachus, the translator of the Bible, among the common Jewish Christians; but the statements of Victorinus Rhetor on Gal. I. 19. II. 26 (Migne T. VIII. Col. 1155. 1162) shew that he has a close affinity with the Pseudo-Clementines, and is also to be classed with the Elkesaite Alcibiades. "Nam Jacobum apostolum Symmachiani faciunt quasi duodecimum et hunc secuntur, qui ad dominum nostrum Jesum Christum adjungunt Judaismi observationem, quamquam etiam Jesum Christum fatentur; dicunt enim eum ipsum Adam esse et esse animam generalem, et aliæ hujusmodi blasphemiæ." The account given by Eusebius, H. E. VI. 17 (probably on the authority of Origen, see also Demonstr. VII. 1) is important: Ton ge me`n ermecheuton auton de` tou'ton iste'on, Ebionai'on to`n Su'mmachon gegone'nai . . . . kai` upomne'mata de` tou Summa'chou eise'ti nun pheretai, en ois dokei pro`s to` katu` Matthaion apoteino'menos euange'lion te`n dedelome'nen ai'resin kratu'nein. Symmachus therefore adopted an aggressive attitude towards the great Church, and hence we may probably class him with Alcibiades who lived a little later. Common Jewish Christianity was no longer aggressive in the second century.
[436] Wellhausen (l. c. Part III. p. 206) supposes that Elkesai is equivalent to Alexius. That the receiver of the "book" was a historical person is manifest from Epiphanius' account of his descendants (h. 19 2: 53. 1). From Hipp. Philosoph. IX. 16, p. 468, it is certainly probable, though not certain, that the book was produced by the unknown author as early as the time of Trajan. On the other hand, the existence of the sect itself can be proved only at the beginning of the third century, and therefore we have the possibility of an ante-dating of the "book". This seems to have been Origen's opinion.
[437] Epiph. (h. 53. 1) says of the Elkesaites: ou'te christianoi` upa'rchontei ou'te Ioudaioi ou'te E'llenes, alla` me'son aplos upa'rchontes. He pronounces a similar judgment as to the Samaritan sects (Simonians), and expressly (h. 30. 1) connects the Elkesaites with them.
[438] The worship paid to the descendants of this Elkesai, spoken of by Epiphanius, does not, if we allow for exaggerations, go beyond the measure of honour which was regularly paid to the descendants of prophets and men of God in the East. Cf. the respect enjoyed by the blood relations of Jesus and Mohammed.
[439] It the "book" really originated in the time of Trajan, then its production keeps within the frame-work of common Christianity, for at that time there were appearing everywhere in Christendom revealed books which contained new instructions and communications of grace. The reader may be reminded, for example, of the Shepherd of Hermas. When the sect declared that the "book" was delivered to Elkesai by a male and a female angel, each as large as a mountain, that these angels were the Son of God and the Holy Spirit, etc., we have, apart from the fantastic colouring, nothing extraordinary.
[440] It may be assumed from Philos. X. 29 that, in the opinion of Hyppolytus, the Elkesaites identified the Christ from above with the Son of God, and assumed that this Christ appeared on earth in changing and purely human forms, and will appear again (auto`n de` metangizo'menon en so'masi pollois polla'kis kai` nun de` en to Iesou, omoi'os pote` me`n ek tou theou gegenesthai, pote` de` pneuma gegone'nai, pote` de` ek parthe'nou, pote` de` ou' kai` touton de` mete'peita aei` en so'mati metangi'zesthai kai` en pollois kata` kairou`s dei'knusthai). As the Elkesaites (see the account by Epiphanius) traced back the incarnations of Christ to Adam, and not merely to Abraham, we may see in this view of history the attempt to transform Mosaism into the universal religion. But the Pharisaic theology had already begun with these Adam speculations, which are always a sign that the religion in Judaism is feeling its limits too narrow. The Jews in Alexandria were also acquainted with these speculations.
[441] In the Gospel of these Jewish Christians Jesus is made to say (Epiph. h. 30. 16) elthon katalusai ta`s thusias, kai` ea`n me` tau'sesthe tou thu'ei`n, ou pau'setai aph' umon e orge`. We see the essential progress of this Jewish Christianity within Judaism in the opposition in principle to the whole sacrificial service (vid. also Epiph., h. 19. 3).
[442] On this new Gospel see Zahn, Kanongesch. II. p. 724.
[443] It is incorrect to suppose that the lustrations were meant to take the place of baptism, or were conceived by these Jewish Christians as repeated baptisms. Their effect was certainly equal to that of baptism. But it is nowhere hinted in our authorities that they were on that account made equivalent to the regular baptism.
[444] The characteristic here, as in the Gentile Christian Gnosis, is the division of the person of Jesus into a more or less indifferent medium, and into the Christ. Here the factor constituting his personality could sometimes be placed in that medium, and sometimes in the Christ spirit, and thus contradictory formulæ could not but arise. It is therefore easy to conceive how Epiphanius reproaches these Jewish Christians with a denial, sometimes of the Divinity, and sometimes of the humanity of Christ (see h. 30 14).
[445] This syncretistic Judaism had indeed a significance for the history of the world, not, however, in the history of Christianity, but for the origin of Islam. Islam, as a religious system, is based partly on syncretistic Judaism (including the Zabians, so enigmatic in their origin), and, without questioning Mohammed's originality, can only be historically understood by taking this into account. I have endeavoured to establish this hypothesis in a lecture printed in MS. form, 1877. Cf. now the conclusive proofs in Wellhausen, 1. c. Part III. p. 197-212. On the Mandeans, see Brandt, Die Mandäische Religion, 1889; (also Wellhausen in d. deutschen Lit. Ztg., 1890 No. I. Lagarde i. d. Gött. Gel. Anz., 1890, No. 10).
[446] See Bestmann, Gesch. der Christ]. Sitte, Bd. II. 1 Part: Die judenchristliche Sitte, 1883; also, Theol. Lit. Ztg., 1883. Col. 269 ff. The same author, Der Ursprung der Katholischen Christenthums und des Islams, 1884; also Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1884, Col. 291 ff.
[447] See Schliemann, Die Clementinen, etc., 1844; Hilgenfeld, Die Clementinischen Recogn. u. Homil, 1848; Ritschl, in d. Allg. Monatschrift f. Wissensch. u. Litt., 1852. Uhlhorn, Die Homil. u. Recogn., 1854, Lehmann, Die Clement. Schriften, 1869; Lipsius, in d. Protest. K. Ztg., 1869, p. 477 ff.; Quellen der Romische Petrussage,
1872. Uhlhorn, in Herzog's R. Encykl. (Clementinen) 2 Edit. III. p. 286, admits: "There can be no doubt that the Clementine question still requires further discussion. It can hardly make any progress worth mentioning until we have collected better the material, and especially till we have got a corrected edition with an exhaustive commentary. The theory of the genesis, contents and aim of the pseudo-Clementine writings unfolded by Renan (Orig. T. VII. p. 74-l01) is essentially identical with that of German scholars. Langen (die Clemensromane,
1890) has set up very bold hypotheses, which are based on the assumption that Jewish Christianity was an important church factor in the second century, and that the pseudo-Clementines are comparatively old writings.
[448] There is no external evidence for placing the pseudo-Clementine writings in the second century. The oldest witness is Origen (IV. p. 401, Lommatzsch); but the quotation: "Quoniam opera bona, quæ fiunt ab infidelibus, in hoc sæculo its prosunt," etc., is not found in our Clementines, so that Origen appears to have used a still older version. The internal evidence all points to the third century (canon, composition, theological attitude, etc.). Moreover, Zahn, (Gött. Gel. Anz. 1876. No. 45) and Lagarde have declared themselves in favour of this date; while Lipsius (Apokr. Apostelgesch. II. 1) and Weingarten (Zeittafeln, 3 Edit. p. 23) have recently expressed the same opinion. The Homilies presuppose (1) Marcion's Antitheses, (2) Apelles' Syllogisms, (3) perhaps Callistus' edict about penance (see III. 70) and writings of Hippolytus (see also the expression epi`skopos episko'pon. Clem. ep. ad Jacob I., which is first found in Tertull., de pudic. I.). (4) The most highly developed form of polemic against heathen mythology. (5) The complete development of church apologetics, as well as the conviction that Christianity is identical with correct and absolute knowledge. They further presuppose a time when there was a lull in the persecution of Christians, for the Emperor, though pretty often referred to, is never spoken of as a persecutor, and when the cultured heathen world was entirely disposed in favour of a eclectic monotheism. Moreover, the remarkable Christological statement in Hom. XVI. 15. 16. points to the third century, in fact probably even presupposes the theology of Origen; Cf. the sentence: tou patro`s to` me' gegennesthai estin, uiou de` to` gegennesthai lenneto`n de` agenne'to e' kai` autugenne'to ou sunkri'netai. Finally, the decided repudiation of the awakening of Christian faith by visions and dreams, and the polemic against these is also no doubt of importance for determining the date; see XVII. 14-19. Peter says, § 18: to` adida'ktos a'neu optasi'as kai` onei'ron mathein apoka'lupsi's estin, he had already learned that at his confession (Matt. XVI). The question, e'i tis di optasi'an pro`s didaskali'an sophisthenai du'natai, is answered in the negative, § 19.
[449] This is also acknowledged in Koffmane, Die Gnosis, etc., p. 33.
[450] The Homilies, as we have them, are mainly composed of the speeches of Peter and others. These speeches oppose polytheism, mythology and the doctrine of demons, and advocate monotheism, ascetic morality and rationalism. The polemic against Simon Magus almost appears as a mere accessory.
[451] This distinction can also be shewn elsewhere in the Church of the third century. But I confess I do not know how Catholic circles got over the fact that, for example, in the third book of the Homilies many passages of the old Testament are simply characterised as untrue, immoral and lying. Here the Homilies remind one strongly of the Syllogisms of Apelles, the author of which, in other respects, opposed them in the interest of his doctrine of creating angels. In some passages the Christianity of the Homilies really looks like a syncretism composed of the common Christianity, the Jewish Christian Gnosticism, and the criticism of Apelles. Hom. VIII. 6-8 is also highly objectionable. __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX I.
On the Conception of Pre-existence.
On account of the importance of the question, we may be here permitted to amplify a few hints given in Chap. II., § 4, and elsewhere, and to draw a clearer distinction between the Jewish and Hellenic conceptions of pre-existence.
According to the theory held by the ancient Jews and by the whole of the Semitic nations, everything of real value that from time to time appears on earth has its existence in heaven. In other words, it exists with God, that is God possesses a knowledge of it; and for that reason it has a real being. But it exists beforehand with God in the same way as it appears on earth, that is with all the material attributes belonging to its essence. Its manifestation on earth is merely a transition from concealment to publicity (phanerousthai). In becoming visible to the senses, the object in question assumes no attribute that it did not already possess with God. Hence its material nature is by no means an inadequate expression of it, nor is it a second nature added to the first. The truth rather is that what was in heaven before is now revealing itself upon earth, without any sort of alteration taking place in the process. There is no assumptio naturæ novæ, and no change or mixture. The old Jewish theory of pre-existence is founded on the religious idea of the omniscience and omni-potence of God, that God to whom the events of history do not come as a surprise, but who guides their course. As the whole history of the world and the destiny of each individual are recorded on his tablets or books, so also each thing is ever present before him. The decisive contrast is between God and the creature. In designating the latter as "foreknown" by God, the primary idea is not to ennoble the creature, but rather to bring to light the wisdom and power of God. The ennobling of created things by attributing to them a pre-existence is a secondary result (see below).
According to the Hellenic conception, which has become associated with Platonism, the idea of pre-existence is independent of the idea of God; it is based on the conception of the contrast between spirit and matter, between the infinite and finite, found in the cosmos itself. In the case of all spiritual beings, life in the body or flesh is at bottom an inadequate and unsuitable condition, for the spirit is eternal, the flesh perishable. But the pre-temporal existence, which was only a doubtful assumption as regards ordinary spirits, was a matter of certainty in the case of the higher and purer ones. They lived in an upper world long before this earth was created, and they lived there as spirits without the "polluted garment of the flesh." Now if they resolved for some reason or other to appear in this finite world, they cannot simply become visible, for they have no "visible form." They must rather "assume flesh," whether they throw it about them as a covering, or really make it their own by a process of transformation or mixture. In all cases--and here the speculation gave rise to the most exciting problems--the body is to them something inadequate which they cannot appropriate without adopting certain measures of precaution, but this process may indeed pass through all stages, from a mere seeming appropriation to complete union. The characteristics of the Greek ideas of pre-existence may consequently be thus expressed. First, the objects in question to which pre-existence is ascribed are meant to be ennobled by this attribute. Secondly, these ideas have no relation to God. Thirdly, the material appearance is regarded as something inadequate. Fourthly, speculations about phantasma, assumptio naturæ humanæ, transmutatio, mixtura, duæ naturæ, etc., were necessarily associated with these notions.
We see that these two conceptions are as wide apart as the poles. The first has a religious origin, the second a cosmological and psychological; the first glorifies God, the second the created spirit.
However, not only does a certain relationship in point of form exist between these speculations, but the Jewish conception is also found in a shape which seems to approximate still more to the Greek one.
Earthly occurrences and objects are not only regarded as "foreknown" by God before being seen in this world, but the latter manifestation is frequently considered as the copy of the existence and nature which they possess in heaven, and which remains unalterably the same, whether they appear upon earth or not. That which is before God experiences no change. As the destinies of the world are recorded in the books, and God reads them there, it being at the same time a matter of indifference, as regards this knowledge of his, when and how they are accomplished upon earth, so the Tabernacle and its furniture, the Temple, Jerusalem, etc., are before God and continue to exist before him in heaven, even during their appearance on earth and after it.
This conception seems really to have been the oldest one. Moses is to fashion the Temple and its furniture according to the pattern he saw on the Mount (Exod. XXV. 9. 40: XXVI. 30: XXVII. 8: Num. VIII. 4). The Temple and Jerusalem exist in heaven, and they are to be distinguished from the earthly Temple and the earthly Jerusalem; yet the ideas of a phanerousthai of the thing which is in heaven and of its copy appearing on earth, shade into one another and are not always clearly separated.
The classing of things as original and copy was at first no more meant to glorify them than was the conception of a pre-existence they possessed within the knowledge of God. But since the view which in theory was true of everything earthly, was, as is naturally to be expected, applied in practice to nothing but valuable objects--for things common and ever recurring give no impulse to such speculations--the objects thus contemplated were ennobled, because they were raised above the multitude of the commonplace. At the same time the theory of original and copy could not fail to become a starting point for new speculations, as soon as the contrast between the spiritual and material began to assume importance among the Jewish people.
That took place under the influence of the Greek spirit; and was perhaps also the simultaneous result of an intellectual or moral development which arose independently of that spirit. Accordingly, a highly important advance in the old ideas of pre-existence appeared in the Jewish theological literature belonging to the time of the Maccabees and the following decades. To begin with, these conceptions are now applied to persons, which, so far as I know, was not the case before this (individualism). Secondly, the old distinction of original and copy is now interpreted to mean that the copy is the inferior and more imperfect, that in the present æon of the transient it cannot be equivalent to the original, and that we must therefore look forward to the time when the original itself will make its appearance, (contrast of the material and finite and the spiritual).
With regard to the first point, we have not only to consider passages in Apocalypses and other writings in which pre-existence is attributed to Moses, the patriarchs, etc., (see above, p. 102), but we must, above all, bear in mind utterances like Ps. CXXXIX. 15, 16. The individual saint soars upward to the thought that the days of his life are in the book of God, and that he himself was before God, whilst he was still unperfect. But, and this must not be overlooked, it was not merely his spiritual part that was before God, for there is not the remotest idea of such a distinction, but the whole man, although he is bsr.
As regards the second point, the distinction between a heavenly and an earthly Jerusalem, a heavenly and an earthly Temple, etc., is sufficiently known from the Apocalypses and the New Testament. But the important consideration is that the sacred things of earth were regarded as objects of less value, instalments, as it were, pending the fulfilment of the whole promise. The desecration and subsequent destruction of sacred things must have greatly strengthened this idea. The hope of the heavenly Jerusalem comforted men for the desecration or loss of the earthly one. But this gave at the same time the most powerful impulse to reflect whether it was not an essential feature of this temporal state, that everything high and holy in it could only appear in a meagre and inadequate form. Thus the transition to Greek ideas was brought about. The fulness of the time had come when the old Jewish ideas, with a slightly mythological colouring, could amalgamate with the ideal creations of Hellenic philosophers.
These, however, are also the general conditions which gave rise to the earliest Jewish speculations about a personal Messiah, except that, in the case of the Messianic ideas within Judaism itself, the adoption of specifically Greek thoughts, so far as I am able to see, cannot be made out.
Most Jews, as Trypho testifies in Justin's Dialogue 49, conceived the Messiah as a man. We may indeed go a step further and say that no Jew at bottom imagined him otherwise; for even those who attached ideas of pre-existence to him, and gave the Messiah a supernatural background, never advanced to speculations about assumption of the flesh, incarnation, two natures and the like. They only transferred in a specific manner to the Messiah the old idea of pre-terrestrial existence with God, universally current among the Jews. Before the creation of the world the Messiah was hidden with God, and, when the time is fulfilled, he makes his appearance. This is neither an incarnation nor a humiliation, but he appears on earth as he exists before God, viz., as a mighty and just king, equipped with all gifts. The writings in which this thought appears most clearly are the Apocalypse of Enoch (Book of Similitudes, Chap. 46-49) and the Apocalypse of Esra (Chap. 12-14). Support to this idea, if anything more of the kind had been required, was lent by passages like Daniel VII. 13 f. and Micah, V. 1. Nowhere do we find in Jewish writings a conception which advances beyond the notion that the Messiah is the man who is with God in heaven; and who will make his appearance at his own time. We are merely entitled to say that, as the same idea was not applied to all persons with the same certainty, it was almost unavoidable that men's minds should have been led to designate the Messiah as the man from heaven. This thought was adopted by Paul (see below), but I know of no Jewish writing which gave clear expression to it.
Jesus Christ designated himself as the Messiah, and the first of his disciples who recognised him as such were native Jews. The Jewish conceptions of the Messiah consequently passed over into the Christian community. But they received an impulse to important modifications from the living impression conveyed by the person and destiny of Jesus. Three facts were here of pre-eminent importance. First, Jesus appeared in lowliness, and even suffered death. Secondly, he was believed to be exalted through the resurrection to the right hand of God, and his return in glory was awaited with certainty. Thirdly, the strength of a new life and of an indissoluble union with God was felt issuing from him, and therefore his people were connected with him in the closest way.
In some old Christian writings found in the New Testament and emanating from the pen of native Jews, there are no speculations at all about the pre-temporal existence of Jesus as the Messiah, or they are found expressed in a manner which simply embodies the old Jewish theory and is merely distinguished from it by the emphasis laid on the exaltation of Jesus after death through the resurrection. 1. Pet. I. 18 ff. is a classic passage: elutro'thete timi'o ai'mati o`s amnou amo'mou kai` aspi'lou Christou, proegnosme'nou me`n pro` kataboles ko'smou, phanerothe'ntos de` ep' escha'tou ton chro'non di' umas tou`s di' autou pistou`s eis theo`n to`n egei'ranta auto`n ek nekron kai` do'xan auto do'nta, o'ste te`n pi'stin umon kai` elpi'da einai eis theo'n. Here we find a conception of the pre-existence of Christ which is not yet affected by cosmological or psychological speculation, which does not overstep the boundaries of a purely religious contemplation, and which arose from the Old Testament way of thinking, and the living impression derived from the person of Jesus. He is "fore-known (by God) before the creation of the world," not as a spiritual being without a body, but as a Lamb without blemish and without spot; in other words, his whole personality together with the work which it was to carry out, was within God's eternal knowledge. He "was manifested in these last days for our sake," that is, he is now visibly what he already was before God. What is meant here is not an incarnation, but a revelatio. Finally, he appeared in order that our faith and hope should now be firmly directed to the living God, that God who raised him from the dead and gave him honour. In the last clause expression is given to the specifically Christian thought, that the Messiah Jesus was exalted after crucifixion and death; from this, however, no further conclusions are drawn.
But it was impossible that men should everywhere rest satisfied with these utterances, for the age was a theological one. Hence the paradox of the suffering Messiah, the certainty of his glorification through the resurrection, the conviction of his specific relationship to God, and the belief in the real union of his Church with him did not seem adequately expressed by the simple formulæ proegnosme'nos, phanerothei's. In reference to all these points, we see even in the oldest Christian writings, the appearance of formulæ which fix more precisely the nature of his pre-existence, or in other words his heavenly existence. With regard to the first and second points there arose the view of humiliation and exaltation, such as we find in Paul and in numerous writings after him. In connection with the third point the concept "Son of God" was thrust into the fore-ground, and gave rise to the idea of the image of God (2 Cor. IV. 4; Col. I. 15; Heb. I. 2; Phil. II. 6). The fourth point gave occasion to the formation of theses, such as we find in Rom. VIII. 29: proto'tokon en pollois adelphois, Col. I. 18: proto'tokos ek ton nekron (Rev. I. 5), Eph. II. 6: sune'geiren kai` suneka'thisen en tois epourani'ois en Christo Iesou, I. 4: o theo`s exele'xato emas en Christo pro` kataboles ko'smou, I. 22: o theo`s e'doken to`n Christo`n kephale`n upe`r pa'nta te ekklesi'a e'tis esti`n to` soma autou, etc. This purely religious view of the Church, according to which all that is predicated of Christ is also applied to his followers, continued a considerable time. Hermas declares that the Church is older than the world, and that the world was created for its sake (see above, p. 103), and the author of the so-called 2nd Epistle of Clement declares (Chap. 14) . . . . . . . e'sometha ek tes ekklesi'as tes pro'tes tes pneumatikes, tes pro` eli'ou kai` sele'nes ektisme'nes . . . . , ouk oi'omai de` umas agnoein, o'ti ekklesi'a zosa soma' estin Christou. le'gei ga`r e graphe'. Epoi'esen o theo`s to`n a'nthropon a'rsen kai` thelu. to` a'rsen esti`n o Christo's to` thelu e ekklesi'a. Thus Christ and his Church are inseparably connected. The latter is to be conceived as pre-existent quite as much as the former; the Church was also created before the sun and the moon, for the world was created for its sake. This conception of the Church illustrates a final group of utterances about the pre-existent Christ, the origin of which might easily be misinterpreted unless we bear in mind their reference to the Church. In so far as he is proegnosme'nos pro` kataboles ko'smou, he is the arche` tes kti'seos tou theou (Rev. III. 14), the proto'tokos pa'ses kti'seos, etc. According to the current conception of the time, these expressions mean exactly the same as the simple proegnosme'nos pro` kataboles ko'smou, as is proved by the parallel formulæ referring to the Church. Nay, even the further advance to the idea that the world was created by him (Cor. Col. Eph. Heb.) need not yet necessarily be a meta'basis eis a'llo ge'nos; for the beginning of things (arche') and their purpose form the real force to which their origin is due (principle arche'). Hermas indeed calls the Church older than the world simply because "the world was created for its sake."
All these further theories which we have quoted up to this time need in no sense alter the original conception, so long as they appear in an isolated form and do not form the basis of fresh speculations. They may be regarded as the working out of the original conception attaching to Jesus Christ proegnosme'nos pro` kataboles ko'smou, phanerothei's k.t.l.; and do not really modify this religious view of the matter. Above all, we find in them as yet no certain transition to the Greek view which splits up his personality into a heavenly and an earthly portion; it still continues to be the complete Christ to whom all the utterances apply. But, beyond doubt, they already reveal the strong impulse to conceive the Christ that had appeared as a divine being. He had not been a transitory phenomenon, but has ascended into heaven and still continues to live. This post-existence of his gave to the ideas of his pre-existence a support and a concrete complexion which the earlier Jewish theories lacked.
We find the transition to a new conception in the writings of Paul. But it is important to begin by determining the relationship between his Christology and the views we have been hitherto considering. In the Apostle's clearest trains of thought everything that he has to say of Christ hinges on his death and resurrection. For this we need no proofs, but see, more
especially Rom. I. 3 f.: peri` tou uiou autou, tou genome'nou ek spe'rmatos Dauei`d kata` sa'rka, ?tou oristhe'ntos uiou theou en duna'mei kata` pneuma agiosu'nes ex anasta'seos nekron, Iesou Christou tou kuri'ou emon. What Christ became and his significance for us now are due to his death on the cross and his resurrection. He condemned sin in the flesh and was obedient unto death. Therefore he now shares in the do'xa of God. The exposition in 1 Cor. XV. 45, also (o e'schatos Ada`m eis pneuma zoopoioun, all' ou proton to` pneumatiko`n alla` to` psuchiko'n, e'peita to` pneumatiko'n. o protos a'nthropos ek ges choiko's o deu'teros a'nthropos ex ouranou) is still capable of being understood as to its fundamental features, in a sense which agrees with the conception of the Messiah, as kat' exoche'n, the man from heaven who was hidden with God. There can be no doubt, however, that this conception, as already shewn by the formulæ in the passage just quoted, formed to Paul the starting-point of a speculation, in which the original theory assumed a completely new shape. The decisive factors in this transformation were the Apostle's doctrine of "spirit and flesh," and the corresponding conviction that the Christ who is not be known "after the flesh," is a spirit, namely, the mighty spiritual being (pneuma zoopoioun), who has condemned sin in the flesh, and thereby enabled man to walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit.
According to one of the Apostle's ways of regarding the matter, Christ, after the accomplishment of his work, became the pneuma zoopoioun through the resurrection. But the belief that Jesus always stood before God as the heavenly man, suggested to Paul the other view, that Christ was always a "spirit," that he was sent down by God, that the flesh is consequently something inadequate and indeed hostile to him, that he nevertheless assumed it in order to extirpate the sin dwelling in the flesh, that he therefore humbled himself by appearing, and that this humiliation was the deed he performed.
This view is found in 2 Cor. VIII. 9: Iesous Christo`s di' umas epto'cheusen plou'sios o'n; in Rom. VIII. 3: o theo`s to`n eautou uio`n po'mpsas en omoio'mati sarko`s amarti'as kai` peri` amarti'as kate'krinen te`n amarti'an en te sarki'; and in Phil. II. 5 f.: Christos Iesous en morphe theou upa'rchon . . . . . eauto`n eke'nosen mo'rphen dou'lou labo'n, en omoio'mati anthro'pon geno'menos, kai` sche'mati eurethei`s os a'nthropos etapei'nosen eauto`n k.t.l. In both forms of thought Paul presupposes a real exaltation of Christ. Christ receives after the resurrection more than he ever possessed (to` o'noma to` upe`r pan o'noma). In this view Paul retains a historical interpretation of Christ, even in the conception of the pneuma Christo's. But whilst many passages seem to imply that the work of Christ began with suffering and death, Paul shews in the verses cited, that he already conceives the appearance of Christ on earth as his moral act, as a humiliation, purposely brought about by God and Christ himself, which reaches its culminating point in the death on the cross. Christ, the divine spiritual being, is sent by the Father from heaven to earth, and of his own free will he obediently takes this mission upon himself. He appears in the omoio'mati sarko`s amarti'as, dies the death of the cross, and then, raised by the Father, ascends again into heaven in order henceforth to act as the ku'rios zo'nton and nekron, and to become to his own people the principle of a new life in the spirit.
Whatever we may think about the admissibility and justification of this view, to whatever source we may trace its origin and however strongly we may emphasise its divergencies from the contemporaneous Hellenic ideas, it is certain that it approaches very closely to the latter; for the distinction of spirit and flesh is here introduced into the concept of pre-existence, and this combination is not found in the Jewish notions of the Messiah.
Paul was the first who limited the idea of pre-existence by referring it solely to the spiritual part of Jesus Christ, but at the same time gave life to it by making the pre-existing Christ (the spirit) a being who, even during his pre-existence, stands independently side by side with God.
He was also the first to designate Christ's sa'rx as "assumpta," and to recognise its assumption as in itself a humiliation. To him the appearance of Christ was no mere phanerousthai, but a kenousthai, tapeinousthai, ptocheu'ein.
These outstanding features of the Pauline Christology must have been intelligible to the Greeks, but, whilst embracing these, they put everything else in the system aside, Christo`s o ku'rios o so'sas emas, o`n me`n to` proton pneuma, ege'neto sa'rx kai` ou'tos emas eka'lesen, says 2 Clem. (9. 5), and that is also the Christology of 1 Clement, Barnabas and many other Greeks. From the sum total of Judæo-Christian speculations they only borrowed, in addition, the one which has been already mentioned: the Messiah as proegnosme'nos pro` kataboles ko'smou is for that very reason also e arche` tes kti'seos tou theou, that is the beginning, purpose and principle of the creation The Greeks, as the result of their cosmological interest, embraced this thought as a fundamental proposition. The complete Greek Christology then is expressed as follows: Christo`s, o so'sas emas, o`n me`n to` proton pneuma kai` pa'ses kti'seos arche`, ege'neto sa'rx kai` ou'tos emas eka'lesen. That is the fundamental, theological and philosophical creed on which the whole Trinitarian and Christological speculations of the Church of the succeeding centuries are built, and it is thus the root of the orthodox system of dogmatics; for the notion that Christ was the arche` pa'ses kti'seos necessarily led in some measure to the conception of Christ as the Logos. For the Logos had long been regarded by cultured men as the beginning and principle of the creation. [452]
With this transition the theories concerning Christ are removed from Jewish and Old Testament soil, and also that of religion (in the strict sense of the word), and transplanted to the Greek one. Even in his pre-existent state Christ is an independent power existing side by side with God. The pre?existence does not refer to his whole appearance, but only to a part of his essence; it does not primarily serve to glorify the wisdom and power of the God who guides history, but only glorifies Christ, and thereby threatens the monarchy of God. [453] The appearance of Christ is now an "assumption of flesh," and immediately the intricate questions about the connection of the heavenly and spiritual being with the flesh simultaneously arise and are at first settled by the theories of a naive docetism. But the flesh, that is the human nature created by God, appears depreciated, because it was reckoned as something unsuitable for Christ, and foreign to him as a spiritual being. Thus the Christian religion was mixed up with the refined asceticism of a perishing civilization, and a foreign substructure given to its system of morality, so earnest in its simplicity. [454] But the most questionable result was the following. Since the predicate "Logos," which at first, and for a long time, coincided with the idea of the reason ruling in the cosmos, was considered as the highest that could be given to Christ, the holy and divine element, namely, the power of a new life, a power to be viewed and laid hold of in Christ, was transformed into a cosmic force and thereby secularised.
In the present work I have endeavoured to explain fully how the doctrine of the Church developed from these premises into the doctrine of the Trinity and of the two natures. I have also shewn that the imperfect beginnings of Church doctrine, especially as they appear in the Logos theory derived from cosmology, were subjected to wholesome corrections--by the Monarchians, by Athanasius, and by the influence of biblical passages which pointed in another direction. Finally, the Logos doctrine received a form in which the idea was deprived of nearly all cosmical content. Nor could the Hellenic contrast of "spirit" and "flesh" become completely developed in Christianity, because the belief in the bodily resurrection of Christ, and in the admission of the flesh into heaven, opposed to the principle of dualism a barrier which Paul as yet neither knew nor felt to be necessary. The conviction as to the resurrection of the flesh proved the hard rock which shattered the energetic attempts to give a completely Hellenic complexion to the Christian religion.
The history of the development of the ideas of pre-existence is at the same time the criticism of them, so that we need not have recourse to our present theory of knowledge which no longer allows such speculations. The problem of determining the significance of Christ through a speculation concerning his natures, and of associating with these the concrete features of the historical Christ, was originated by Hellenism. But even the New Testament writers, who appear in this respect to be influenced in some way by Hellenism, did not really speculate concerning the different natures, but, taking Christ's spiritual nature for granted, determined his religious significance by his moral qualities--Paul by the moral act of humiliation and obedience unto death, John by the complete dependence of Christ upon God and hence also by his obedience, as well as the unity of the love of Father and Son. There is only one idea of pre-existence which no empiric contemplation of history and no reason can uproot. This is identical with the most ancient idea found in the Old Testament, as well as that prevalent among the early Christians, and consists in the religious thought that God the Lord directs history. In its application to Jesus Christ, it is contained in the words we read in 1 Pet. I. 20: proegnosme'nou me`n pro` kataboles ko'smou, phanerothei`s de` di' umas tou`s di' autou pistou`s eis theo`n to`n egei'ranta auto`n ek nekron kai` do'xan auto do'nta, o'ste te`n pi'stin umon kai` elpi'da einai eis theo'n. __________________________________________________________________
[452] These hints will have shewn that Paul's theory occupies a middle position between the Jewish and Greek ideas of pre-existence. In the canon, however, we have another group of writings which likewise gives evidence of a middle position with regard to the matter, I mean the Johannine writings. If we only possessed the prologue to the Gospel of John with its "en arche en o lo'gos" the "pa'nta di' autou ege'neto" and the "o lo'gos sa'rx ege'neto" we could indeed point to nothing but Hellenic ideas. But the Gospel itself, as is well known, contains very much that must have astonished a Greek, and is opposed to the philosophical idea of the Logos. This occurs even in the thought, "o lo'gos sa'rx ege'neto," which in itself is foreign to the Logos conception. Just fancy a proposition like the one in VI. 44, oudei`s du'natai elthein pro`s me, ea'n me` o pate`r o pe'mpsas me elku'se auto`n, or in V. 17. 21, engrafted on Philo's system, and consider the revolution it would have caused there. No doubt the prologue to some extent contains the themes set forth in the presentation that follows, but they are worded in such a way that one cannot help thinking the author wished to prepare Greek readers for the paradox he had to communicate to them, by adapting his prologue to their mode of thought. Under the altered conditions of thought which now prevail, the prologue appears to us the mysterious part, and the narrative that follows seems the portion that is relatively more intelligible. But to the original readers, if they were educated Greeks, the prologue must have been the part most easily understood. As nowadays a section on the nature of the Christian religion is usually prefixed to a treatise on dogmatics, in order to prepare and introduce the reader, so also the Johannine prologue seems to be intended as an introduction of this kind. It brings in conceptions which were familiar to the Greeks, in fact it enters into these more deeply than is justified by the presentation which follows; for the notion of the incarnate Logos is by no means the dominant one here. Though faint echoes of this idea may possibly be met with here and there in the Gospel--I confess I do not notice them--the predominating thought is essentially the conception of Christ as the Son of God, who obediently executes what the Father has shewn and appointed him. The works which he does are allotted to him, and he performs them in the strength of the Father. The whole of Christ's farewell discourses and the intercessory prayer evince no Hellenic influence and no cosmological speculation whatever, but shew the inner life of a man who knows himself to be one with God to a greater extent than any before him, and who feels the leading of men to God to be the task he had received and accomplished. In this consciousness he speaks of the glory he had with the Father before the world was (XVII. 4 f.: ego' se edo'xasa epi` tes ges to` e'rgon teleio'sas o de'dokas moi i'na poie'so· kai` nun do'xason me su', pa'ter, para` se'auto te do'xe e eichon pro` tou to`n ko'smon einai para` soi). With this we must compare verses like III. 13: oudei`s anabe'beken eis to`n ourano`n ei me` o ek tou ouranou kataba's, o uio`s tou anthro'pou, and III. 31: o a'nothen e`rcho'menos epa'no pa'nton estin. o o'n ek tes ges ek tes ges estin kai` ek tes ges lalei o ek tou ouranou ercho'menos epa'no pa'nton estin (see also I. 30: VI. 33, 38, 41 f. 50 f. 58, 62: VIII. 14, 58; XVII. 24). But though the pre-existence is strongly expressed in these passages, a separation of tneuma (lo'gos) and sa'rx in Christ is nowhere assumed in the Gospel except in the prologue. It is always Christ's whole personality to which every sublime attribute is ascribed. The same one who "can do nothing of himself" is also the one who was once glorious and will yet be glorified. This idea, however, can still be referred to the proegnosme'nos pro` kataboles ko'smou, although it gives a peculiar doxa with God to him who was foreknown of God, and the oldest conception is yet to be traced in many expressions, as, for example, I. 31: ka'go` ouk e'dein auto'n, all' i'na phanerothe' to Isra`el dia` touto elthon, V. 19: ou du'natai o uio`s poiein aph' eautou oude`n a'n me' ti ble'pe to`n pate'ra poiounta, V. 36: VIII. 38: a' ego` e'oraka para` to patri` lalo, VIII. 40: te`n ale'theian umin lela'leka e'n e'kousa para` tou theou, XII. 49: XV. 15: pa'nta a' e'kousa para` tou patro's mou e'gno'risa umin.
[453] This is indeed counterbalanced in the fourth Gospel by the thought of the complete community of love between the Father and the Son, and the pre-existence and descent of the latter here also tend to the glory of God. In the sentence "God so loved the world," etc., that which Paul describes in Phil. II. becomes at the same time an act of God, in fact the act of God. The sentence "God is love" sums up again all individual speculations, and raises them into a new and most exalted sphere.
[454] If it had been possible for speculation to maintain the level of the Fourth Gospel, nothing of that would have happened; but where were there theologians capable of this? __________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX II.
Liturgy and the Origin of Dogma.
The reader has perhaps wondered why I have made so little reference to Liturgy in my description of the origin of dogma. For according to the most modern ideas about the history of religion and the origin of theology, the development of both may be traced in the ritual. Without any desire to criticise these notions, I think I am justified in asserting that this is another instance of the exceptional nature of Christianity. For a considerable period it possessed no ritual at all, and the process of development in this direction had been going on, or been completed, a long time before ritual came to furnish material for dogmatic discussion.
The worship in Christian Churches grew out of that in the synagogues, whereas there is no trace of its being influenced by the Jewish Temple service (Duchesne, Origines du Culte Chrétien, p. 45 ff.). Its oldest constituents are accordingly prayer, reading of the scriptures, application of scripture texts, and sacred song. In addition to these we have, as specifically Christian elements, the celebration of the Lord's Supper, and the utterances of persons inspired by the Spirit. The latter manifestations, however, ceased in the course of the second century, and to some extent as early as its first half. The religious services in which a ritual became developed were prayer, the Lord's Supper and sacred song. The Didache had already prescribed stated formulæ for prayer. The ritual of the Lord's Supper was determined in its main features by the memory of its institution. The sphere of sacred song remained the most unfettered, though here also, even at an early period--no later in fact than the end of the first and beginning of the second century--a fixed and a variable element were distinguished; for responsory hymns, as is testified by the Epistle of Pliny and the still earlier Book of Revelation, require to follow a definite arrangement. But the whole, though perhaps already fixed during the course of the second century, still bore the stamp of spirituality and freedom. It was really worship in spirit and in truth, and this and no other was the light in which the Apologists, for instance, regarded it. Ritualism did not begin to be a power in the Church till the end of the second century; though it had been cultivated by the "Gnostics" long before, and traces of it are found at an earlier period in some of the older Fathers, such as Ignatius.
Among the liturgical fragments still preserved to us from the first three centuries two strata may de distinguished. Apart from the responsory hymns in the Book of Revelation, which can hardly represent fixed liturgical pieces, the only portions of the older stratum in our possession are the Lord's Prayer, originating with Jesus himself and used as a liturgy, together with the sacramental prayers of the Didache. These prayers exhibit a style unlike any of the liturgical formulæ of later times; the prayer is exclusively addressed to God, it returns thanks for knowledge and life; it speaks of Jesus the pais theou (Son of God) as the mediator; the intercession refers exclusively to the Church, and the supplication is for the gathering together of the Church, the hastening of the coming of the kingdom and the destruction of the world. No direct mention is made of the death and resurrection of Christ. These prayers are the peculiar property of the Christian Church. It cannot, however, be said that they exercised any important influence on the history of dogma. The thoughts contained in them perished in their specific shape; the measure of permanent importance they attained in a more general form, was not preserved to them through these prayers.
The second stratum of liturgical pieces dates back to the great prayer with which the first Epistle of Clement ends, for in many respects this prayer, though some expressions in it remind us of the older type dia' tou egapeme'nou paido's sou Iesoun Christou, "through thy beloved son Jesus Christ"), already exhibits the characteristics of the later liturgy, as is shewn, for example, by a comparison of the liturgical prayer in the Constitutions of the Apostles (see Lightfoot's edition and my own). But this piece shews at the same time that the liturgical prayers, and consequently the liturgy also, sprang from those in the synagogue, for the similarity is striking. Here we find a connection resembling that which exists between the Jewish "Two Ways" and the Christian instruction of catechumens. If this observation is correct, it clearly explains the cautious use of historical and dogmatic material in the oldest liturgies--a precaution not to their disadvantage. As in the prayers of the synagogue, so also in Christian Churches, all sorts of matters were not submitted to God or laid bare before Him, but the prayers serve as a religious ceremony, that is, as adoration, petition and intercession. Su` ei o theo`s mo'nos kai` Iesous Christo`s o pais sou kai` emeis lao's sou kai` pro'bata tes nomes sou, (thou art God alone and Jesus Christ is thy son, and we are thy people and the sheep of thy pasture). In this confession, and expressive Christian modification of that of the synagogue, the whole liturgical ceremony is epitomised. So far as we can assume and conjecture from the scanty remains of Ante-Nicene liturgy, the character of the ceremony was not essentially altered in this respect. Nothing containing a specific dogma or theological speculation was admitted. The number of sacred ceremonies, already considerable in the second century, (how did they arise?) was still further increased in the third; but the accompanying words, so far as we know, expressed nothing but adoration, gratitude, supplication and intercession. The relations expressed in the liturgy became more comprehensive, copious and detailed; but its fundamental character was not changed. The history of dogma in the first three centuries is not reflected in their liturgy. __________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX III.
NEOPLATONISM.
The Historical Significance and Position of Neoplatonism.
The political history of the ancient world ends with the Empire of Diocletian and Constantine, which has not only Roman and Greek, but also Oriental features. The history of ancient philosophy ends with the universal philosophy of Neoplatonism, which assimilated the elements of most of the previous systems, and embodied the result of the history of religion and civilisation in East and West. But as the Roman Byzantine Empire is at one and the same time a product of the final effort and the exhaustion of the ancient world, so also Neoplatonism is, on one side, the completion of ancient philosophy, and, on another, its abolition. Never before in the Greek and Roman theory of the world did the conviction of the dignity of man and his elevation above nature attain so certain an expression as in Neoplatonism; and never before in the history of civilisation did its highest exponents, notwithstanding all their progress in inner observation, so much undervalue the sovereign significance of real science and pure knowledge as the later Neoplatonists did. Judged from the stand-point of pure science, of empirical knowledge of the world, the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle marks a momentous turning-point, the post-Aristotelian a retrogression, the Neoplatonic a complete declension. But judging from the stand-point of religion and morality, it must be admitted that the ethical temper which Neoplatonism sought to beget and confirm was the highest and purest which the culture of the ancient world produced. This necessarily took place at the expense of science: for on the soil of polytheistic natural religions, the knowledge of nature must either fetter and finally abolish religion, or be fettered and abolished by religion. Religion and ethic, however, proved the stronger powers. Placed between these and the knowledge of nature, philosophy, after a period of fluctuation finally follows the stronger force. Since the ethical itself, in the sphere of natural religions, is unhesitatingly conceived as a higher kind of "nature," conflict with the empirical knowledge of the world is unavoidable. The higher "physics," for that is what religious ethics is here, must displace the lower or be itself displaced. Philosophy must renounce its scientific aspect, in order that man's claim to a supernatural value of his person and life may be legitimised.
It is an evidence of the vigour of man's moral endowments that the only epoch of culture which we are able to survey in its beginnings, its progress, and its close, ended not with materialism, but with the most decided idealism. It is true that in its way this idealism also denotes a bankruptcy; as the contempt for reason and science, and these are contemned when relegated to the second place, finally leads to barbarism, because it results in the crassest superstition, and is exposed to all manner of imposture. And, as a matter of fact, barbarism succeeded the flourishing period of Neoplatonism. Philosophers themselves no doubt found their mental food in the knowledge which they thought themselves able to surpass; but the masses grew up in superstition, and the Christian Church, which entered on the inheritance of Neoplatonism, was compelled to reckon with that and come to terms with it. Just when the bankruptcy of the ancient civilisation and its lapse into barbarism could not have failed to reveal themselves, a kindly destiny placed on the stage of history barbarian nations, for whom the work of a thousand years had as yet no existence. Thus the fact is concealed, which, however, does not escape the eye of one who looks below the surface, that the inner history of the ancient world must necessarily have degenerated into barbarism of its own accord, because it ended with the renunciation of this world. There is no desire either to enjoy it, to master it, or to know it as it really is. A new world is disclosed for which everything is given up, and men are ready to sacrifice insight and understanding, in order to possess this world with certainty; and, in the light which radiates from the world to come, that which in this world appears absurd becomes wisdom, and wisdom becomes folly.
Such is Neoplatonism. The pre-Socratic philosophers, declared by the followers of Socrates to be childish, had freed themselves from theology, that is the mythology of the poets, and constructed a philosophy from the observation of nature, without troubling themselves about ethics and religion. In the systems of Plato and Aristotle physics and ethics were to attain to their rights, though the latter no doubt already occupied the first place; theology, that is popular religion, continues to be thrust aside. The post-Aristotelian philosophers of all parties were already beginning to withdraw from the objective world. Stoicism, indeed, seems to fall back into the materialism that prevailed before Plato and Aristotle; but the ethical dualism which dominated the mood of the Stoic philosophers did not in the long run tolerate the materialistic physics; it sought and found help in the metaphysical dualism of the Platonists, and at the same time reconciled itself to the popular religion by means of allegorism, that is it formed a new theology. But it did not result in permanent philosophic creations. A one-sided development of Platonism produced the various forms of scepticism which sought to abolish confidence in empirical knowledge. Neoplatonism, which came last, learned from all schools. In the first place, it belongs to the series of post-Aristotelian systems and, as the philosophy of the subjective, it is the logical completion of them. In the second place, it rests on scepticism; for it also, though not at the very beginning, gave up both confidence and pure interest in empirical knowledge. Thirdly, it can boast of the name and authority of Plato; for in metaphysics it consciously went back to him and expressly opposed the metaphysics of the Stoics. Yet on this very point it also learned something from the Stoics; for the Neoplatonic conception of the action of God on the world, and of the nature and origin of matter, can only be explained by reference to the dynamic pantheism of the Stoics. In other respects, especially in psychology, it is diametrically opposed to the Stoa, though superior. Fourthly, the study of Aristotle also had an influence on Neoplatonism. That is shewn not only in the philosophic methods of the Neoplatonists, but also, though in a subordinate way, in their metaphysics. Fifthly, the ethic of the Stoics was adopted by Neoplatonism, but this ethic necessarily gave way to a still higher view of the conditions of the spirit. Sixthly and finally, Christianity also, which Neoplatonism opposed in every form (especially in that of the Gnostic philosophy of religion), seems not to have been entirely without influence. On this point we have as yet no details, and these can only be ascertained by a thorough examination of the polemic of Plotinus against the Gnostics.
Hence, with the exception of Epicureanism, which Neoplatonism dreaded as its mortal enemy, every important system of former times was drawn upon by the new philosophy. But we should not on that account call Neoplatonism an eclectic system in the usual sense of the word. For in the first place, it had one pervading and all-predominating interest, the religious; and in the second place, it introduced into philosophy a new supreme principle, the super-rational, or the super-essential. This principle should not be identified with the "Ideas" of Plato or the "Form" of Aristotle. For as Zeller rightly says: "In Plato and Aristotle the distinction of the sensuous and the intelligible is the strongest expression for belief in the truth of thought; it is only sensuous perception and sensuous existence whose relative falsehood they presuppose; but of a higher stage of spiritual life lying beyond idea and thought, there is no mention. In Neoplatonism, on the other hand, it is just this super-rational element which is regarded as the final goal of all effort, and the highest ground of all existence; the knowledge gained by thought is only an intermediate stage between sensuous perception and the super-rational intuition; the intelligible forms are not that which is highest and last, but only the media by which the influences of the formless original essence are communicated to the world. This view therefore presupposes not merely doubt of the reality of sensuous existence and sensuous notions, but absolute doubt, aspiration beyond all reality. The highest intelligible is not that which constitutes the real content of thought, but only that which is presupposed and earnestly desired by man as the unknowable ground of his thought." Neoplatonism recognised that a religious ethic can be built neither on sense-perception nor on knowledge gained by the understanding, and that it cannot be justified by these; it therefore broke both with intellectual ethics and with utilitarian morality. But for that very reason, having as it were parted with perception and understanding in relation to the ascertaining of the highest truth, it was compelled to seek for a new world and a new function in the human spirit, in order to ascertain the existence of what it desired, and to comprehend and describe that of which it had ascertained the existence. But man cannot transcend his psychological endowment. An iron ring incloses him. He who does not allow his thought to be determined by experience falls a prey to fancy, that is thought which cannot be suppressed assumes a mythological aspect: superstition takes the place of reason, dull gazing at something incomprehensible is regarded as the highest goal of the spirit's efforts, and every conscious activity of the spirit is subordinated to visionary conditions artificially brought about. But that every conceit may not be allowed to assert itself, the gradual exploration of every region of knowledge according to every method of acquiring it, is demanded as a preliminary--the Neoplatonists did not make matters easy for themselves,--and a new and mighty principle is set up which is to bridle fancy, viz., the authority of a sure tradition. This authority must be superhuman, otherwise it would not come under consideration; it must therefore be divine. On divine disclosures, that is revelations, must rest both the highest super-rational region of knowledge and the possibility of knowledge itself. In a word, the philosophy which Neoplatonism represents, whose final interest is the religious, and whose highest object is the super-rational, must be a philosophy of revelation.
In the case of Plotinus himself and his immediate disciples, this does not yet appear plainly. They still shew confidence in the objective presuppositions of their philosophy; and have, especially in psychology, done great work and created something new. But this confidence vanishes in the later Neoplatonists. Porphyry, be-fore he became a disciple of Plotinus, wrote a book peri` tes eklogi'on philosophi'as; as a philosopher he no longer required the "lo'gia". But the later representatives of the system sought for their philosophy revelations of the Godhead. They found them in the religious traditions and cults of all nations. Neoplatonism learned from the Stoics to rise above the political limits of nations and states, and to widen the Hellenic consciousness to a universally human one. The spirit of God has breathed throughout the whole history of the nations, and the traces of divine revelation are to be found everywhere. The older a religious tradition or cultus is, the more worthy of honour, the more rich in thoughts of God it is. Therefore the old Oriental religions are of special value to the Neoplatonists. The allegorical method of interpreting myths, which was practised by the Stoics in particular, was accepted by Neoplatonism also. But the myths, spiritually explained, have for this system an entirely different value from what they had for the Stoic philosophers. The latter adjusted themselves to the myths by the aid of allegorical explanation; the later Neoplatonists, on the other hand, (after a selection in which the immoral myths were sacrificed, see, e.g., Julian) regarded them as the proper material and sure foundation of philosophy. Neoplatonism claims to be not only the absolute philosophy, completing all systems, but at the same time the absolute religion, confirming and explaining all earlier religions. A rehabilitation of all ancient religions is aimed at (see the philosophic teachers of Julian and compare his great religious experiment); each was to continue in its traditional form, but at the same time each was to communicate the religious temper and the religious knowledge which Neoplatonism had attained, and each cultus is to lead to the high morality which it behoves man to maintain. In Neoplatonism the psychological fact of the longing of man for something higher, is exalted to the all-predominating principle which ex-plains the world. Therefore the religions, though they are to be purified and spiritualised, become the foundation of philosophy. The Neoplatonic philosophy therefore presupposes the religious syncretism of the third century, and cannot be understood without it. The great forces which were half unconsciously at work in this syncretism, were reflectively grasped by Neoplatonism. It is the final fruit of the developments resulting from the political, national and religious syncretism which arose from the undertakings of Alexander the Greek and the Romans.
Neoplatonism is consequently a stage in the history of religion; nay, its significance in the history of the world lies in the fact that it is so. In the history of science and enlightenment it has a position of significance only in so far as it was the necessary transition stage through which humanity had to pass, in order to free itself from the religion of nature and the depreciation of the spiritual life, which oppose an insurmountable barrier to the highest advance of human knowledge. But as Neoplatonism in its philosophical aspect means the abolition of ancient philosophy, which, however, it desired to complete, so also in its religious aspect it means the abolition of the ancient religions which it aimed at restoring. For in requiring these religions to mediate a definite religious knowledge, and to lead to the highest moral disposition, it burdened them with tasks to which they were not equal, and under which they could not but break down. And in requiring them to loosen, if not completely destroy, the bond which was their only stay, namely, the political bond, it took from them the foundation on which they were built. But could it not place them on a greater and firmer foundation? Was not the Roman Empire in existence, and could the new religion not become dependent on this in the same way as the earlier religions had been dependent on the lesser states and nations? It might be thought so, but it was no longer possible. No doubt the political history of the nations round the Mediterranean, in their development into the universal Roman monarchy, was parallel to the spiritual history of these nations in their development into monotheism and a universal system of morals; but the spiritual development in the end far outstripped the political: even the Stoics attained to a height which the political development could only partially reach. Neoplatonism did indeed attempt to gain a connection with the Byzantine Roman Empire: one noble monarch, Julian, actually perished as a result of this endeavour: but even before this the profounder Neoplatonists discerned that their lofty religious philosophy would not bear contact with the despotic Empire, because it would not bear any contact with the "world" (plan of the founding of Platonopolis). Political affairs are at bottom as much a matter of indifference to Neoplatonism as material things in general. The idealism of the new philosophy was too high to admit of its being naturalised in the despiritualised, tyrannical and barren creation of the Byzantine Empire, and this Empire itself needed unscrupulous and despotic police officials, not noble philosophers. Important and instructive, therefore, as the experiments are, which were made from time to time by the state and by individual philosophers, to unite the monarchy of the world with Neoplatonism, they could not but be ineffectual.
But, and this is the last question which one is justified in raising here, why did not Neoplatonism create an independent religious community? Since it had already changed the ancient religions so fundamentally, in its purpose to restore them; since it had attempted to fill the old naive cults with profound philosophic ideas, and to make them exponents of a high morality; why did it not take the further step and create a religious fellowship of its own? Why did it not complete and confirm the union of gods by the founding of a church which was destined to embrace the whole of humanity, and in which, beside the one ineffable Godhead, the gods of all nations could have been worshipped? Why not? The answer to this question is at the same time the reply to another, viz., Why did the christian church supplant Neoplatonism? Neoplatonism lacked three elements to give it the significance of a new and permanent religious system. Augustine in his confessions (Bk. VII. 18-21) has excellently described these three elements. First and above all, it lacked a religious founder; secondly, it was unable to give any answer to the question, how one could permanently maintain the mood of blessedness and peace; thirdly, it lacked the means of winning those who could not speculate. The "people" could not learn the philosophic exercises which it recommended as the condition of attaining the enjoyment of the highest good; and the way by which even the "people" can attain to the highest good was hidden from it. Hence these "wise and prudent" remained a school. When Julian attempted to interest the common uncultured man in the doctrines and worship of this school, his reward was mockery and scorn.
Not as philosophy and not as a new religion did Neoplatonism become a decisive factor in history, but, if I may say so, as a frame of mind.
[455] The feeling that there is an eternal highest good which lies beyond all outer experience and is not even the intelligible, this feeling, with which was united the conviction of the entire worthlessness of everything earthly, was produced and fostered by Neoplatonism. But it was unable to describe the contents of that highest being and highest good, and therefore it was here compelled to give itself entirely up to fancy and aesthetic feeling. Therefore it was forced to trace out "mysterious ways to that which is within," which, however, led no-where. It transformed thought into a dream of feeling; it immersed itself in the sea of emotions; it viewed the old fabled world of the nations as the reflection of a higher reality, and transformed reality into poetry; but in spite of all these efforts it was only able, to use the words of Augustine, to see from afar the land which it desired. It broke this world into fragments; but nothing remained to it, save a ray from a world beyond, which was only an indescribable "something."
And yet the significance of Neoplatonism in the history of our moral culture has been, and still is, immeasurable. Not only because it refined and strengthened man's life of feeling and sensation, not only because it, more than anything else, wove the delicate veil which even to-day, whether we be religious or irreligious, we ever and again cast over the offensive impression of the brutal reality, but, above all, because it begat the consciousness that the blessedness which alone can satisfy man is to be found somewhere else than in the sphere of knowledge. That man does not live by bread alone is a truth that was known before Neoplatonism; but it proclaimed the profounder truth, which the earlier philosophy had failed to recognise, that man does not live by knowledge alone. Neoplatonism not only had a propadeutic significance in the past, but continues to be, even now, the source of all the moods which deny the world and strive after an ideal, but have not power to raise themselves above esthetic feeling, and see no means of getting a clear notion of the impulse of their own heart and the land of their desire.
Historical Origin of Neoplatonism.
The forerunners of Neoplatonism were, on the one hand, those Stoics who recognise the Platonic distinction of the sensible and supersensible world, and on the other, the so-called Neopythagoreans and religious philosophers, such as Posidonius, Plutarch of Chæronea, and especially Numenius of Apamea. [456] Nevertheless, these cannot be regarded as the actual Fathers of Neoplatonism; for the philosophic method was still very imperfect in comparison with the Neoplatonic, their principles were uncertain, and the authority of Plato was not yet regarded as placed on an unapproachable height. The Jewish and Christian philosophers of the first and second centuries stand very much nearer the later Neoplatonism than Numenius. We would probably see this more clearly if we knew the development of Christianity in Alexandria in the second century, But, unfortunately, we have only very meagre fragments to tell us of this. First and above all, we must mention Philo. This philosopher who interpreted the Old Testament religion in terms of Hellenism had, in accordance with his idea of revelation, already maintained that the Divine Original Essence is supra-rational, that only ecstasy leads to Him, and that the materials for religious and moral knowledge are contained in the oracles of the Deity. The religious ethic of Philo, a combination of Stoic, Platonic, Neopythagorean and Old Testament gnomic wisdom, already bears the marks which we recognise in Neoplatonism. The acknowledgment that God was exalted above all thought was a sort of tribute which Greek philosophy was compelled to pay to the national religion of Israel, in return for the supremacy which was here granted to the former. The claim of positive religion to be something more than an intellectual conception of the universal reason was thereby justified. Even religious syncretism is already found in Philo; but it is something essentially different from the later Neoplatonic, since Philo regarded the Jewish cult as the only valuable one, and traced back all elements of truth in the Greeks and Romans to borrowings from the books of Moses.
The earliest Christian philosophers, especially Justin and Athenagoras, likewise prepared the way for the speculations of the later Neoplatonists by their attempts, on the one hand, to connect Christianity with Stoicism and Platonism, and on the other, to exhibit it as supra-Platonic. The method by which Justin, in the introduction to the Dialogue with Trypho, attempts to establish the Christian knowledge of God, that is the knowledge of the truth, on Platonism, Scepticism and "Revelation," strikingly reminds us of the later methods of the Neoplatonists. Still more is one reminded of Neoplatonism by the speculations of the Alexandrian Christian Gnostics, especially of Valentinus and the followers of Basilides. The doctrines of the Basilidians(?) communicated by Hippolytus (Philosoph. VII. c. 20 sq.), read like fragments from the didactic writings of the Neoplatonists: Epei` oude`n en ouk u'le'm ouk ousi'a, ouk aou'sion, ouk aploun, ouk su'ntheton, ouk ano'eton, ouk anai'stheton, ouk a'nthropos . . . . . . ouk o`n theo`s anoe'tos, anaisthe'tos abou'los aproaire'tos, apathos, anepithume'tios ko'smon ethe'lese poiesai . . . . . . Ou'tos ouk o`n theo`s apoi`ese ko'smon ouk o'nta ex ouk o'nton, katabalo'menos kai` uposte'sas sperma ti e`n e'chon pasan en eauto tes tou ko'smou panstermi'an. Like the Neoplatonists, these Basilidians did not teach an emanation from the Godhead, but a dynamic mode of action of the Supreme Being. The same can be asserted of Valentinus who also places an unnamable being above all, and views matter not as a second principle, but as a derived product. The dependence of Basilides and Valentinus on Zeno and Plato is, besides, un-doubted. But the method of these Gnostics in constructing their mental picture of the world and its history was still an uncertain one. Crude primitive myths are here received, and naively realistic elements alternate with bold attempts at spiritualising. While therefore, philosophically considered, the Gnostic systems are very unlike the finished Neoplatonic ones, it is certain that they contained almost all the elements of the religious view of the world which we find in Neoplatonism.
But were the earliest Neoplatonists really acquainted with the speculations of men like Philo, Justin, Valentinus and Basilides? Were they familiar with the Oriental religions, especially with the Jewish and the Christian? And, if we must answer these questions in the affirmative, did they really learn from these sources?
Unfortunately, we cannot at present give certain, and still less detailed, answers to these questions. But, as Neoplatonism originated in Alexandria, as Oriental cults confronted every one there, as the Jewish philosophy was prominent in the literary market of Alexandria, and that was the very place where scientific Christianity had its headquarters, there can, generally speaking, be no doubt that the earliest Neoplatonists had some acquaintance with Judaism and Christianity. In addition to that, we have the certain fact that the earliest Neoplatonists had discussions with (Roman) Gnostics (see Carl Schmidt, Gnostische Schriften in koptischer Sprache, pp. 603-665, and that Porphyry entered into elaborate controversy with Christianity. In comparison with the Neoplatonic philosophy, the system of Philo and the Gnostics appears in many respects an anticipation which had a certain influence on the former, the precise nature of which has still to be ascertained. But the anticipation is not wonderful, for the religious and philosophic temper which was only gradually produced on Greek soil, existed from the first in such philosophers as took their stand on the ground of a revealed religion of redemption. Iamblichus and his followers first answer completely to the Christian Gnostic schools of the second century; that is to say, Greek philosophy, in its immanent development, did not attain till the fourth century the position which some Greek philosophers who had accepted Christianity, had already reached in the second. The influence of Christianity--both Gnostic and Catholic--on Neoplatonism was perhaps very little at any time, though individual Neoplatonists since the time of Amelius employed Christian sayings as oracles, and testified their high esteem for Christ.
Sketch of the History and Doctrines of Neoplatonism.
Ammonius Saccas (died about 245), who is said to have been born a Christian, but to have lapsed into heathenism, is regarded as the founder of the Neoplatonic school in Alexandria. As he has left no writings, no judgment can be formed as to his teaching. His disciples inherited from him the prominence which they gave to Plato and the attempts to prove the harmony between the latter and Aristotle. His most important disciples were Origen the Christian, a second heathen Origen, Longinus, Herennius, and, above all, Plotinus. The latter was born in the year 205, at Lycopolis in Egypt, laboured from 224 in Rome, and found numerous adherents and admirers, among others the Emperor Galienus and his consort, and died in lower Italy about 270. His writings were arranged by his disciple Porphyry, and edited in six Enneads.
The Enneads of Plotinus are the fundamental documents of Neoplatonism. The teaching of this philosopher is mystical, and, like all mysticism, it falls into two main portions. The first and theoretic part shews the high origin of the soul, and how it has departed from this its origin. The second and practical part points out the way by which the soul can again be raised to the Eternal and the Highest. As the soul with its longings aspires beyond all sensible things and even beyond the world of ideas, the Highest must be something above reason. The system therefore has three parts. I. The Original Essence. II. The world of ideas and the soul. III. The world of phenomena. We may also, in conformity with the thought of Plotinus, divide the system thus: A. The supersensible world (1. The Original Essence; 2. the world of ideas; 3. the soul). B. The world of phenomena. The Original Essence is the One in contrast to the many; it. is the Infinite and Unlimited in contrast to the finite; it is the source of all being, therefore the absolute causality and the only truly existing; but it is also the Good, in so far as everything finite is to find its aim in it and to flow back to it. Yet moral attributes cannot be ascribed to this Original Essence, for these would limit it. It has no attributes at all: it is a being without magnitude, without life, without thought; nay, one should not, properly speaking, even call it an existence; it is something above existence, above goodness, and at the same time the operative force without any substratum. As operative force the Original Essence is continually begetting something else, without itself being changed or moved or diminished. This creation is not a physical process, but an emanation of force; and because that which is produced has any existence only in so far as the originally Existent works in it, it may be said that Neoplatonism is dynamical Pantheism. Everything that has being is directly or indirectly a production of the "One." In this "One" everything so far as it has being, is Divine, and God is all in all. But that which is derived is not like the Original Essence itself. On the contrary, the law of decreasing perfection prevails in the derived. The latter is indeed an image and reflection of the Original Essence, but the wider the circle of creations extends the less their share in the Original Essence. Hence the totality of being forms a gradation of concentric circles which finally lose themselves almost completely in non-being, in so far as in the last circle the force of the Original Essence is a vanishing one. Each lower stage of being is connected with the Original Essence only by means of the higher stages; that which is inferior receives a share in the Original Essence only through the medium of these. But everything derived has one feature, viz., a longing for the higher; it turns itself to this so far as its nature allows it.
The first emanation of the Original Essence is the Nous it is a complete image of the Original Essence and archetype of all existing things; it is being and thought at the same time, World of ideas and Idea. As image the Nov; is equal to the Original Essence, as derived it is completely different from it. What Plotinus understands by Nous is the highest sphere which the human spirit can reach (ko'smos noeto's) and at the same time pure thought itself.
The soul which, according to Plotinus, is an immaterial substance like the Nous, [457] is an image and product of the immovable Nous. It is related to the Nous as the latter is to the Original Essence. It stands between the Nous and the world of phenomena. The Nous penetrates and enlightens it, but it itself already touches the world of phenomena. The Nous is undivided, the soul can also preserve its unity and abide in the Nous; but it has at the same time the power to unite itself with the material world and thereby to be divided. Hence it occupies a middle position. In virtue of its nature and destiny it belongs, as the single soul (soul of the world), to the supersensible world; but it embraces at the same time the many individual souls; these may allow themselves to be ruled by the Nous, or they may turn to the sensible and be lost in the finite.
The soul, an active essence, begets the corporeal or the world of phenomena. This should allow itself to be so ruled by the soul that the manifold of which it consists may abide in fullest harmony. Plotinus is not a dualist like the majority of Christian Gnostics. He praises the beauty and glory of the world. When in it the idea really has dominion over matter, the soul over the body, the world is beautiful and good. It is the image of the upper world, though a shadowy one, and the gradations of better or worse in it are necessary to the harmony of the whole. But, in point of fact, the unity and harmony in the world of phenomena disappear in strife and opposition. The result is a conflict, a growth and decay, a seeming existence. The original cause of this lies in the fact that a substratum, viz., matter, lies at the basis of bodies. Matter is the foundation of each (to` ba'thos eka'stou e u'le); it is the obscure, the indefinite, that which is without qualities, the me` o'n. As devoid of form and idea it is the evil, as capable of form the intermediate.
The human souls that are sunk in the material have been ensnared by the sensuous, and have allowed themselves to be ruled by desire. They now seek to detach themselves entirely from true being, and striving after independence fall into an unreal existence. Conversion therefore is needed, and this is possible, for freedom is not lost.
Now here begins the practical philosophy. The soul must rise again to the highest on the same path by which it descended: it must first of all return to itself. This takes place through virtue, which aspires to assimilation with God and leads to Him. In the ethics of Plotinus all earlier philosophic systems of virtue are united and arranged in graduated order. Civic virtues stand lowest, then follow the purifying, and finally the deifying virtues. Civic virtues only adorn the life, but do not elevate the soul as the purifying virtues do; they free the soul from the sensuous and lead it back to itself and thereby to the Nous. Man becomes again a spiritual and permanent being, and frees himself from every sin, through asceticism. But he is to reach still higher; he is not only to be without sin, but he is to be "God." That takes place through the contemplation of the Original Essence, the One, that is through ecstatic elevation to Him. This is not mediated by thought, for thought reaches only to the Nous, and is itself only a movement. Thought is only a preliminary stage towards union with God. The soul can only see and touch the Original Essence in a condition of complete passivity and rest. Hence, in order to attain to this highest, the soul must subject itself to a spiritual "Exercise." It must begin with the contemplation of material things, their diversity and harmony, then retire into itself and sink itself in its own essence, and thence mount up to the Nous, to the world of ideas; but, as it still does not find the One and Highest Essence there, as the call always comes to it from there: "We have not made ourselves" (Augustine in the sublime description of Christian, that is Neoplatonic, exercises), it must, at it were, lose sight of itself in a state of intense concentration, in mute contemplation and complete forgetfulness of all things. It can then see God, the source of life, the principle of being, the first cause of all good, the root of the soul. In that moment it enjoys the highest and indescribable blessedness; it is itself, as it were, swallowed up by the deity and bathed in the light of eternity.
Plotinus, as Porphyry relates, attained to this ecstatic union with God four times during the six years he was with him. To Plotinus this religious philosophy was sufficient; he did not require the popular religion and worship. But yet he sought their support. The Deity is indeed in the last resort only the Original Essence, but it manifests itself in a fulness of emanations and phenomena. The Nous is, as it were, the second God; the lo'goi which are included in it are gods; the stars are gods etc. A strict monotheism appeared to Plotinus a poor thing. The myths of the popular religion were interpreted by him in a particular sense, and he could justify even magic, soothsaying and prayer. He brought forward reasons for the worship of images, which the Christian worshippers of images subsequently adopted. Yet, in comparison with the later Neoplatonists, he was free from gross superstition and wild fanaticism. He cannot, in the remotest sense, be reckoned among the "deceivers who were themselves deceived," and the restoration of the ancient worship of the Gods was not his chief aim.
Among his disciples the most important were Amelius and Porphyry. Amelius changed the doctrine of Plotinus in some points, and even made use of the prologue of the Gospel of John. Porphyry has the merit of having systematized and spread the teaching of his master, Plotinus. He was born at Tyre, in the year 233; whether he was for some time a Christian is uncertain; from 263-268 he was a pupil of Plotinus at Rome; before that he wrote the work peri` tes ek logi'on philosophi'as, which shews that he wished to base philosophy on revelation; he lived a few years in Sicily, (about 270) where he wrote his "fifteen books against the Christians"; he then returned to Rome, where he laboured as a teacher, edited the works of Plotinus, wrote himself a series of treatises, married in his old age, the Roman Lady Marcella, and died about the year 303. Porphyry was not an original, productive thinker, but a diligent and thorough investigator, characterized by great learning, by the gift of an acute faculty for philological and historical criticism, and by an earnest desire to spread the true philosophy of life, to refute false doctrines, especially those of the Christians, to ennoble man and draw him to that which is good. That a mind so free and noble surrendered itself entirely to the philosophy of Plotinus and to polytheistic mysticism, is a proof that the spirit of the age works almost irresistibly, and that religious mysticism was the highest possession of the time. The teaching of Porphyry is distinguished from that of Plotinus by the fact that it is still more practical and religious. The aim of philosophy, according to Porphyry, is the salvation of the soul. The origin and the guilt of evil lie not in the body, but in the desires of the soul. The strictest asceticism (abstinence from cohabitation, flesh and wine) is therefore required in addition to the knowledge of God. During the course of his life Porphyry warned men more and more decidedly against crude popular beliefs and immoral cults. "The ordinary notions of the Deity are of such a kind that it is more godless to share them than to neglect the images of the gods." But freely as he criticised the popular religions, he did not wish to give them up. He contended for a pure worship of the many gods, and recognised the right of every old national religion, and the religious duties of their professors. His work against the Christians is not directed against Christ, or what he regarded as the teaching of Christ, but against the Christians of his day, and against the sacred books which, according to Porphyry, were written by impostors and ignorant people. In his acute criticism of the genesis or what was regarded as Christianity in his day, he spoke bitter and earnest truths, and therefore acquired the name of the fiercest and most formidable of all the enemies of Christians. His work was destroyed (condemned by an edict of Theodosius II. and Valentinian, of the year 448), and even the writings in reply (by Methodius, Eusebius, Apollinaris, Philostorgius, etc.,) have not been preserved. Yet we possess fragments in Lactantius, Augustine, Macarius Magnes and others, which attest how thoroughly Porphyry studied the Christian writings and how great his faculty was for true historical criticism.
Porphyry marks the transition to the Neoplatonism which subordinated itself entirely to the polytheistic cults, and which strove, above all, to defend the old Greek and Oriental religions against the formidable assaults of Christianity. Iamblichus, the disciple of Porphyry (died 330), transformed Neoplatonism "from a philosophic theorem into a theological doctrine." The doctrines peculiar to Iamblichus can no longer be deduced from scientific, but only from practical motives. In order to justify superstition and the ancient cults, philosophy in Iamblichus becomes a theurgic mysteriosophy, spiritualism. Now appears that series of "Philosophers" in whose case one is frequently unable to decide whether they are deceivers or deceived, "decepti deceptores," as Augustine says. A mysterious mysticism of numbers plays a great role. That which is absurd and mechanical is surrounded with the halo of the sacramental; myths are proved by pious fancies and pietistic considerations with a spiritual sound; miracles, even the most foolish, are believed in and are performed. The philosopher becomes the priest of magic, and philosophy an instrument of magic. At the same time the number of Divine Beings is infinitely increased by the further action of unlimited speculation. But this fantastic addition which Iamblichus makes to the inhabitants of Olympus is the very fact which proves that Greek philosophy has here returned to mythology, and that the religion of nature was still a power. And yet no one can deny that, in the fourth century, even the noblest and choicest minds were found among the Neoplatonists. So great was the declension that this Neoplatonic philosophy was still the protecting roof for many influential and earnest thinkers, although swindlers and hypocrites also concealed themselves under this roof. In relation to some points of doctrine, at any rate, the dogmatic of Iamblichus marks an advance. Thus, the emphasis he lays on the idea that evil has its seat in the will, is an important fact; and in general the significance he assigns to the will is perhaps the most important advance in psychology, and one which could not fail to have great influence on dogmatic also (Augustine). It likewise deserves to be noted that Iamblichus disputed Plotinus' doctrine of the divinity of the human soul.
The numerous disciples of Iamblichus (Aedesius, Chrysantius, Eusebius, Priscus, Sopater, Sallust and especially Maximus, the most celebrated) did little to further speculation; they occupied themselves partly with commenting on the writings of the earlier philosophers (particularly Themistius), partly as missionaries of their mysticism. The interests and aims of these philosophers are best shewn in the treatise "De mysteriis Ægyptiorum." Their hopes were strengthened when their disciple Julian, a man enthusiastic and noble, but lacking in intellectual originality, ascended the imperial throne, 361 to 363. This emperor's romantic policy of restoration, as he himself must have seen, had, however, no result, and his early death destroyed every hope of supplanting Christianity.
But the victory of the Church in the age of Valentinian and Theodosius, unquestionably purified Neoplatonism. The struggle for dominion had led philosophers to grasp at and unite themselves with everything that was hostile to Christianity. But now Neoplatonism was driven out of the great arena of history. The Church and its dogmatic, which inherited its estate, received along with the latter superstition, polytheism, magic, myths and the apparatus of religious magic. The more firmly all this established itself in the Church and succeeded there, though not without finding resistance, the freer Neoplatonism becomes. It does not by any means give up its religious attitude or its theory of knowledge, but it applies itself with fresh zeal to scientific investigations and especially to the study of the earlier philosophers. Though Plato remains the divine philosopher, yet it may be noticed how, from about 400, the writings of Aristotle were increasingly read and prized. Neoplatonic schools continue to flourish in the chief cities of the empire up to the beginning of the fifth century, and in this period they are at the same time the places where the theologians of the Church are formed. The noble Hypatia, to whom Synesius, her enthusiastic disciple, who was afterwards a bishop, raised a splendid monument, taught in Alexandria. But from the beginning of the fifth century ecclesiastical fanaticism ceased to tolerate heathenism. The murder of Hypatia put an end to philosophy in Alexandria, though the Alexandrian school maintained itself in a feeble form till the middle of the sixth century. But in one city of the East, removed from the great highways of the world, which had become a provincial city and possessed memories which the Church of the fifth century felt itself too weak to destroy, viz., in Athens, a Neoplatonic school continued to flourish. There, among the monuments of a past time, Hellenism found its last asylum. The school of Athens returned to a more strict philosophic method and to learned studies. But as it clung to religious philosophy and undertook to reduce the whole Greek tradition, viewed in the light of Plotinus' theory, to a comprehensive and strictly articulated system, a philosophy arose here which may be called scholastic. For every philosophy is scholastic which considers fantastic and mythological material as a noli me tangere, and treats it in logical categories and distinctions by means of a complete set of formulæ. But to these Neoplatonists the writings of Plato, certain divine oracles, the Orphic poems, and much else which were dated back to the dim and distant past, were documents of standard authority and inspired divine writings. They took from them the material of philosophy, which they then treated with all the instruments of dialectic.
The most prominent teachers at Athens were Plutarch (died 433), his disciple Syrian (who, as an exegete of Plato and Aristotle, is said to have done important work, and who deserves notice also because he very vigorously emphasised the freedom of the will), but, above all, Proclus (411-485). Proclus is the great scholastic of Neoplatonism. It was he "who fashioned the whole traditional material into a powerful system with religious warmth and formal clearness, filling up the gaps and reconciling the contradictions by distinctions and speculations." "Proclus," says Zeller, "was the first who, by the strict logic of his system, formally completed the Neoplatonic philosophy and gave it, with due regard to all the changes it had undergone since the second century, that form in which it passed over to the Christian and Mohammedan middle ages. Forty-four years after the death of Proclus the school of Athens was closed by Justinian (in the year 529); but in the labours of Proclus it had completed its work, and could now really retire from the scene. It had nothing new to say; it was ripe for death, and an honourable end was prepared for it. The words of Proclus, the legacy of Hellenism to the Church and to the middle ages, attained an immeasurable importance in the thousand years which followed. They were not only one of the bridges by which the philosophy of the middle ages returned to Plato and Aristotle, but they determined the scientific method of the next thirty generations, and they partly produced, partly strengthened and brought to maturity the medieval Christian mysticism in East and West.
The disciples of Proclus--Marinus, Asclepiodotus, Ammonius, Zenodotus, Isidorus, Hegias, Damascius--are not regarded as prominent. Damascius was the last head of the school at Athens. He, Simplicius, the masterly commentator on Aristotle, and five other Neoplatonists migrated to Persia after Justinian had issued the edict closing the school. They lived in the illusion that Persia, the land of the East, was the seat of wisdom, righteousness and piety. After a few years they returned with blasted hopes to the Byzantine kingdom.
At the beginning of the sixth century Neoplatonism died out as an independent philosophy in the East; but almost at the same time, and this is no accident, it conquered new regions in the dogmatic of the Church through the spread of the writings of the pseudo-Dionysius; it began to fertilize Christian mysticism, and filled the worship with a new charm.
In the West, where, from the second century, we meet with few attempts at philosophic speculation, and where the necessary conditions for mystical contemplation were wanting, Neoplatonism only gained a few adherents here and there. We know that the rhetorician, Marius Victorinus, (about 350) translated the writings of Plotinus. This translation exercised decisive influence on the mental history of Augustine, who borrowed from Neoplatonism the best it had, its psychology, introduced it into the dogmatic of the Church, and developed it still further. It may be said that Neoplatonism influenced the West at first only through the medium or under the cloak of ecclesiastical theology. Even Boethius--we can now regard this as certain--was a Catholic Christian. But in his mode of thought he was certainly a Neoplatonist. His violent death in the year 525, marks the end of independent philosophic effort in the West. This last Roman philosopher stood indeed almost completely alone in his century, and the philosophy for which he lived was neither original nor firmly grounded and methodically carried out.
Neoplatonism and Ecclesiastical Dogmatic.
The question as to the influence which Neoplatonism had on the history of the development of Christianity is not easy to answer; it is hardly possible to get a clear view of the relation between them. Above all, the answers will diverge according as we take a wider or a narrower view of so-called "Neoplatonism." If we view Neoplatonism as the highest and only appropriate expression for the religious hopes and moods which moved the nations of Græco-Roman Empire from the second to the fifth centuries, the ecclesiastical dogmatic which was developed in the same period may appear as a younger sister of Neoplatonism which was fostered by the elder one, but which fought and finally conquered her. The Neoplatonists themselves described the ecclesiastical theologians as intruders who appropriated Greek philosophy, but mixed it with foreign fables. Hence Porphyry said of Origen (in Euseb., H. E. VI. 19): "The outer life of Origen was that of a Christian and opposed to the law; but, in regard to his views of things and of the Deity, he thought like the Greeks, inasmuch as he introduced their ideas into the myths of other peoples." This judgment of Porphyry is at any rate more just and appropriate than that of the Church theologians about Greek philosophy, that it had stolen all its really valuable doctrines from the ancient sacred writings of the Christians. It is, above all, important that the affinity of the two sides was noted. So far, then, as both ecclesiastical dogmatic and Neoplatonism start from the feeling of the need of redemption, so far as both desire to free the soul from the sensuous, so far as they recognise the inability of man to attain to blessedness and a certain knowledge of the truth without divine help and without a revelation, they are fundamentally related. It must no doubt be admitted that Christianity itself was already profoundly affected by the influence of Hellenism when it began to outline a theology; but this influence must be traced back less to philosophy than to the collective culture and to all the conditions under which the spiritual life was enacted. When Neoplatonism arose ecclesiastical Christianity already possessed the fundamental features of its theology, that is, it had developed these, not by accident, contemporaneously and independent of Neoplatonism. Only by identifying itself with the whole history of Greek philosophy, or claiming to be the restoration of pure Platonism, was Neoplatonism able to maintain that it had been robbed by the church theology of Alexandria. But that was an illusion. Ecclesiastical theology appears, though our sources here are unfortunately very meagre, to have learned but little from Neoplatonism even in the third century, partly because the latter itself had not yet developed into the form in which the dogmatic of the church could assume its doctrines, partly because ecclesiastical theology had first to succeed in its own region, to fight for its own position and to conquer older notions intolerable to it. Origen was quite as independent a thinker as Plotinus; but both drew from the same tradition. On the other hand, the influence of Neoplatonism on the Oriental theologians was very great from the fourth century. The more the Church expressed its peculiar ideas in doctrines which, though worked out by means of philosophy, were yet unacceptable to Neoplatonism (the christological doctrines), the more readily did theologians in all other questions resign themselves to the influence of the latter system. The doctrines of the incarnation, of the resurrection of the body, and of the creation of the word, in time formed the boundary lines between the dogmatic of the Church and Neoplatonism; in all else ecclesiastical theologians and Neoplatonists approximated so closely that many among them were completely at one. Nay, there were Christian men, such as Synesius, for example, who in certain circumstances were not found fault with for giving a speculative interpretation of the specifically Christian doctrines. If in any writing the doctrines just named are not referred to, it is often doubtful whether it was composed by a Christian or a Neoplatonist. Above all, the ethical rules, the precepts of the right life, that is asceticism, were always similar. Here Neoplatonism in the end celebrated its greatest triumph. It introduced into the Church its entire mysticism, its mystic exercises, and even the magical ceremonies as expounded by Iamblichus. The writings of the pseudo-Dionysius contain a Gnosis in which, by means of the doctrines of lamblichus and doctrines like those of Proclus, the dogmatic of the Church is changed into a scholastic mysticism with directions for practical life and worship. As the writings of this pseudo-Dionysius were regarded as those of Dionysius the disciple of the Apostle, the scholastic mysticism which they taught was regarded as apostolic, almost as a divine science. The importance which these writings obtained first in the East, then from the ninth or the twelfth century also in the West, cannot be too highly estimated. It is impossible to explain them here. This much only may be said, that the mystical and pietistic devotion of to-day, even in the Protestant Church, draws its nourishment from writings whose connection with those of the pseudo-Areopagitic can still be traced through its various intermediate stages.
In antiquity itself Neoplatonism influenced with special directness one Western theologian, and that the most important, viz., Augustine. By the aid of this system Augustine was freed from Manichaeism, though not completely, as well as from scepticism. In the seventh Book of his confessions he has acknowledged his indebtedness to the reading of Neoplatonic writings. In the most essential doctrines, viz., those about God, matter, the relation of God to the world, freedom and evil, Augustine always remained dependent on Neoplatonism; but, at the same time, of all theologians in antiquity he is the one who saw most clearly and shewed most plainly wherein Christianity and Neoplatonism are distinguished. The best that has been written by a Father of the Church on this subject, is contained in Chapters 9-21 of the seventh Book of his confessions.
The question why Neoplatonism was defeated in the conflict with Christianity, has not as yet been satisfactorily answered by historians. Usually the question is wrongly stated. The point here is not about a Christianity arbitrarily fashioned, but only about Catholic Christianity and Catholic theology. This conquered Neoplatonism after it had assimilated nearly everything it possessed. Further, we must note the place where the victory was gained. The battle-field was the empire of Constantine, Theodosius and Justinian. Only when we have considered these and all other conditions are we entitled to enquire in what degree the specific doctrines of Christianity contributed to the victory, and what share the organisation of the Church had in it. Undoubtedly, however, we must always give the chief prominence to the fact that the Catholic dogmatic excluded polytheism in principle, and at the same time found a means by which it could represent the faith of the cultured mediated by science as identical with the faith of the multitude resting on authority.
In the theology and philosophy of the middle ages mysticism was the strong opponent of rationalistic dogmatism; and, in fact, Platonism and Neoplatonism were the sources from which, in the age of the Renaissance and in the following two centuries, empiric science developed itself in opposition to the rationalistic dogmatism which disregarded experience. Magic, astrology, alchemy, all of which were closely connected with Neoplatonism, gave an effective impulse to the observation of nature and consequently to natural science, and finally prevailed over formal and barren rationalism. Consequently, in the history of science, Neoplatonism has attained a significance and performed services of which men like Iamblichus and Proclus never ventured to dream. In point of fact, actual history is often more wonderful and capricious than legends and fables.
Literature.--The best and fullest account of Neoplatonism, to which I have been much indebted in preparing this sketch, is Zeller's Die Philosophie der Griechen, III. Theil, 2 Abtheilung (3 Auflage, 1881) pp. 419-865. Cf. also Hegel, Gesch. d. Philos. III. 3 ff. Ritter, IV. pp. 571-728: Ritter et Preller, Hist. phil. græc. et rom. § 531 ff. The Histories of Philosophy by Schwegler, Brandis, Brucker, Thilo, Strümpell, Ueberweg (the most complete survey of the literature is found here), Erdmann, Cousin, Prantl. Lewes. Further: Vacherot, Hist. de l'école d'Alexandria, 1846, 1851. Simon, Hist. de l'école d'Alexandria, 1845. Steinhart, articles "Neuplatonismus," "Plotin," "Porphyrius," "Proklus " in Pauly, Realencyclop. des klass. Alterthums. Wagenmann, article "Neuplatonismus" in Herzog, Realencyklopädie f. protest. Theol. T. X. (2 Aufl.) pp. 519-529. Heinze, Lehre vom Logos, 1872, p. 298 f. Richter, Neuplatonische Studien, 4 Hefte.
Heigl, Der Bericht des Porphyrios über Origenes, 1835. Redepenning, Origenes I. p. 421 f. Dehaut, Essai historique sur la vie et la doctrine d'Ammonius Saccas, 1836. Kirchner, Die Philosophie des Plotin,
1854. (For the biography of Plotinus, cf. Porphyry, Eunapius, Suidas; the latter also in particular for the later Neoplatonists.) Steinhart, De dialectica Plotini ratione, 1829, and Meletemata Plotiniana, 1840. Neander, Ueber die welthistorische Bedeutung des 9^ten Buchs in der 2^ten Enneade des Plotinos, in the Adhandl. der Berliner Akademie,
1843. p. 299 f. Valentiner, Plotin u. s. Enneaden, in the Theol. Stud. u. Kritiken, 1864, H. 1. On Porphyrius, see Fabricius, Bibl. gr. V. p. 725 f. Wolff, Porph. de philosophia ex oraculis haurienda librorum reliquiæ, 1856. Müller, Fragmenta hist. gr. III. 688 f. Mai, Ep. ad Marcellam, 1816. Bernays, Theophrast. 1866. Wagenmann, Jahrbücher für Deutsche Theol. Th. XXIII. (1878) p. 269 f. Richter, Zeitschr. f. Philos. Th. LII. (1867) p. 30 f. Hebenstreit, de Iamblichi doctrina,
1764. Harless, Das Buch von den ägyptischen Mysterien, 1858. Meiners, Comment. Societ. Götting. IV. p. 50 f. On Julian, see the catalogue of the rich literature in the Realencyklop. f. prot. Theol. Th. VII. (2 Aufl.) p. 287; and Neumann, Juliani libr. c. Christ. quæ supersunt,
1880. Hoche, Hypatia, in "Philologus," Th. XV. (1860) p. 435 f. Bach, De Syriano philosopho, 1862. On Proclus, see the Biography of Marinus and Freudenthal in "Hermes" Th. XVI. p. 214 f. On Boethius, cf. Nitzsch, Das System des Boëthius, 1860. Usener, Anecdoton Holderi, 1877.
On the relation of Neoplatonism to Christianity and its significance in the history of the world, cf. the Church Histories of Mosheim, Gieseler, Neander, Baur; also the Histories of Dogma by Baur and Nitzsch. Also Löffler, Der Platonismus, der Kirchenväter, 1782. Huber, Die Philosophie der Kirchenväter, 1859. Tzschirner, Fall des Heidenthums, 1829. Burckhardt, Die Zeit Constantin's des Grossen, p. 155 f. Chastel, Hist. de la destruction du Paganisme dans l'empire d'Orient, 1850. Beugnot, Hist. de la destruction du Paganisme en Occident. 1835. E. v. Lasaulx, Der Untergang des Hellenismus, 1854. Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria, 1886. Réville, La réligion à Rome sous les Sévères, 1886. Vogt, Neuplatonismus und Christenthum, 1836. Ullmann, Einfluss des Christenthums auf Porphyrius, in Stud. und Krit., 1832.
On the relation of Neoplatonism to Monasticism, cf. Keim, Aus dem Urchristenthum, 1178, p. 204 f. Carl Schmidt, Gnostische Schriften in Koptischer Sprache, 1892 (Texte u. Unters., VIII. 1. 2). See, further, the Monographs on Origen, the later Alexandrians, the three Cappadocians, Theodoret, Synesius, Marius Victorinus, Augustine, Pseudo-Dionysius, Maximus, Scotus Erigena and the Mediæval Mystics. Special prominence is due to Jahn, Basilius Plotinizans, 1838. Dorner, Augustinus, 1875. Bestmann, Qua ratione Augustinus notiones philos. Græcæ adhibuerit, 1877. Loesche, Augustinus Plotinizans, 1881. Volkmann, Synesios, 1869.
On the after effects of Neoplatonism on Christian Dogmatic, see Ritschl, Theologie und Metaphysik. 2 Aufl. 1887. __________________________________________________________________
[455] Excellent remarks on the nature of Neoplatonism may be found in Eucken, Gött. Gel. Anz., 1 März, 1884. p. 176 ff.: this sketch was already written before I saw them. "We find the characteristic of the Neoplatonic epoch in the effort to make the inward, which till then had had alongside of it an independent outer world as a contrast, the exclusive and all-determining element. The movement which makes itself felt here, outlasts antiquity and prepares the way for the modern period; it brings about the dissolution of that which marked the culminating point of ancient life, that which we are wont to call specifically classic. The life of the spirit, till then conceived as a member of an ordered world and subject to its laws, now freely passes beyond these bounds, and attempts to mould, and even to create, the universe from itself. No doubt the different attempts to realise this desire reveal, for the most part, a deep gulf between will and deed; usually ethical and religious requirements of the naive human consciousness must replace universally creative spiritual power, but all the insufficient and unsatisfactory elements of this period should not obscure the fact that, in one instance, it reached the height of a great philosophic achievement, in the case of Plotinus."
[456] Plotinus, even in his lifetime, was reproached with having borrowed most of his system from Numenius. Porphyry, in his "Vita Plotini," defended him against this reproach.
[457] On this sort of Trinity, see Bigg, "The Christian Platonists of Alexandria," p. 248 f. __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________
Indexes __________________________________________________________________
Index of Scripture References
Genesis
[1]1 [2]1:1
Exodus
[3]24:3 [4]25:9 [5]25:40 [6]26:30 [7]27:8
Numbers
[8]8:4
1 Samuel
[9]27:1-12
Job
[10]1880
Psalms
[11]2:2 [12]45:8 [13]51:19 [14]96:1-13 [15]110:1 [16]110:4 [17]139:15-16
Isaiah
[18]7:1-25 [19]7:14 [20]7:14 [21]9:1 [22]29:13 [23]53:1-12
Daniel
[24]7:1-28 [25]7:13
Micah
[26]5:1
Malachi
[27]1:11
Matthew
[28]1:1-2:23 [29]5:1-48 [30]9:13 [31]16:1-28 [32]16:18 [33]18:17 [34]19:17 [35]22:31 [36]24:36 [37]28:19 [38]28:19
Mark
[39]1:15 [40]5:18-19 [41]8:29 [42]10:45 [43]12:32-34 [44]13:32
Luke
[45]1:4 [46]1:34-35 [47]8:45 [48]10:27-28 [49]12:41-46 [50]24:26 [51]24:34 [52]24:34 [53]24:51
John
[54]1:1-51 [55]1:18 [56]1:30 [57]1:31 [58]3:13 [59]3:13
[60]3:31 [61]4:2 [62]4:22 [63]4:24 [64]4:62 [65]5:17
[66]5:21 [67]5:36 [68]6:1-71 [69]6:27-58 [70]6:33 [71]6:38
[72]6:41 [73]6:44 [74]6:50 [75]6:58 [76]6:62 [77]8:14
[78]8:38 [79]8:40 [80]8:58 [81]12:49 [82]15:15 [83]17:1-26
[84]17:4 [85]17:24 [86]20:17 [87]20:28 [88]20:29 [89]32:9
[90]88
Acts
[91]2:14 [92]2:32 [93]3:13 [94]10:42 [95]14:11 [96]15:22 [97]19:5 [98]20:28 [99]24:5 [100]28:6 [101]28:31
Romans
[102]1:3 [103]1:3 [104]2:4 [105]3:1-8:39 [106]4 [107]4
[108]5:1-21 [109]6 [110]6:1-2 [111]6:3 [112]6:3 [113]7
[114]7:1-25 [115]8:1-39 [116]8:1-39 [117]8:3 [118]8:29
[119]9:5 [120]10:6 [121]10:9 [122]13:1
1 Corinthians
[123]1:2 [124]1:12 [125]1:13 [126]3:2 [127]4:15 [128]9:5
[129]9:9 [130]9:9 [131]10:4 [132]11:1 [133]11:10 [134]11:23
[135]12:3 [136]12:3 [137]13:1-13 [138]15:1-11 [139]15:1-58
[140]15:3 [141]15:5 [142]15:5 [143]15:5 [144]15:45
2 Corinthians
[145]4:4 [146]5:17 [147]8:9 [148]13:13
Galatians
[149]1:15 [150]1:15-16 [151]1:18 [152]1:22 [153]2:1-21
[154]2:1-21 [155]2:8 [156]2:11 [157]3:16 [158]3:19
[159]4:22-31 [160]4:26 [161]5:22
Ephesians
[162]1:1 [163]1:1 [164]1:4 [165]1:20 [166]1:22 [167]2:6
[168]3 [169]3:5 [170]4:9 [171]7 [172]7 [173]7 [174]7
[175]7:2 [176]9 [177]9 [178]10 [179]14 [180]14:2 [181]17
[182]18 [183]19 [184]20 [185]20:1 [186]20:2
Philippians
[187]1:18 [188]2:5 [189]2:6 [190]2:9
Colossians
[191]1:15 [192]1:18 [193]269 [194]291 [195]409 [196]415 [197]1155
1 Timothy
[198]2:5 [199]3:16 [200]3:16 [201]3:16 [202]6:20
2 Timothy
[203]4:1
Titus
[204]2:13 [205]2:13
Hebrews
[206]1:2 [207]10:25 [208]12:22 [209]13:16
James
[210]1:25 [211]1:27
1 Peter
[212]1:18 [213]1:20 [214]3:19
2 Peter
[215]1:1 [216]1:1 [217]3:2
2 John
[218]10:11
Revelation
[219]1:5 [220]2:3 [221]2:9 [222]2:9 [223]3:9 [224]3:9 [225]3:14 [226]21:2
4 Maccabees
[227]5:24 __________________________________________________________________
Index of Greek Words and Phrases
* auto`s eauto to`n lao`n to`n kaino`n etoima'zon: [228]1 * i'na epignos perii` hon kateche'thes lo'gon te`n aspha'leian:
[229]1 * ku'rios: [230]1 * o theo's: [231]1 * ta` bibli'a: [232]1 * chre` de` kai` pisteu'ein, o'ti ku'rios Iesous Christo`s kai` pase te teri` autou kata` te`n theoteta kai` te`n anthropo'teta; alethei'a dei` de` kai` eis to` a'gion pisteu'ein pneuma, kai` o'ti autexou'sioi o'ntes kolazo'metha me`n eph' hois amarta'nomen, timo'metha de` eph' hois eu prattomen.: [233]1 * . . . . ou, katha'per a'n tis eika'seien a`nthropos, upere'ten tina` pe'mpsas e` a'ngelon e` a'rchonta e` tina ton diepo'nton ta` epi'geia e` tina ton pepisteume'non ta`s en ouranois dioike'seis, all' auto`n to`n techni'ten kai` demiourgo`n ton o'lon, k.t.l.:
[234]1 * . . . . ton lo'gon tou ku'riou Iesou, ou`s ela'kesen dida'skon:
[235]1 * . . . te`n ekklesi'an tou theou e`n periepoie'sato dia` tou ai'matos tou idi'ou: [236]1 * Upe`r Kai'saros Autokra'ttoros theou : [237]1 * Adelphoi', ou'tos dei emas phronein peri` Iesou, os peri` theou, os peri` kritou zo'nton kai` nekron: [238]1 * Alethe`s Lo'gos: [239]1 * Ap' arches atha'natoi' este kai` te'kna zoes este aioni'as, kai` to`n tha'naton ethe'lete meri'sasthai eis eautou's, i'na dapane'site auto`n kai` analo'sete, kai` apotha'ne' o tha'natos en umin kai` di' umon, o'tan ga`r to`n me`n ko'smon lu'ete, autoi de` me` katlu'esthe, kurieu'ete tes kri'seos kai` tes phthoras apa'ses.: [240]1 * Basilei'a tou theou: [241]1 * Diati' oun presbute'ra : [242]1 * Did: [243]1 * Didache`: [244]1 [245]2 [246]3 * Didache` ku'rion dia` ton ib' aposto'lon: [247]1 * Didache` ton aposto'lon: [248]1 * Didache': [249]1 * Du'o de` tinas sunistosin ek theou tetagme'nous, e'na me`n to`n Christo`n, e'na de` to`n dia'bolon. kai` to`n me`n Christo`n le'gousi tou me'llontos aionos eilephe'nai to`n kleron, to`n de` dia'bolon touton pepisteusthai on aiona, ek prostages dethen tou pantokra'toros kata` ai'tesin ekate'ron auton: [250]1 * Du'o suneste ta` a'phesin amartema'ton parecho'mena, pa'thos dia` Christo'n kai` ba'ptisma.: [251]1 * Ea'n muri'ous paidagogou`s e'chete en christo all' ou pollous pate'ras: [252]1 * Enkra'teia: [253]1 * Exelexa'men umas dodeka mathepa`s, k.t.l.: [254]1 * Exegetika': [255]1 * Epei` oude`n en ouk u'le'm ouk ousi'a, ouk aou'sion, ouk aploun, ouk su'ntheton, ouk ano'eton, ouk anai'stheton, ouk a'nthropos . . . . . . ouk o`n theo`s anoe'tos, anaisthe'tos abou'los aproaire'tos, apathos, anepithume'tios : [256]1 * Epipha'nes, uio`s Karpokra'tous, e'zese ta` pa'nta e'te eptakai'deka kai' theo`s en Same tes Kephalleni'as teti'metai, e'ntha auto iero`n rhuton li'thon, bomoi', teme'ne, mouseion, okodo'metai' te kai' kathie'rotai, kai` sunio'ntes eis to` iero`n oi Kaphallenes kata` noumeni'an gene'thlion apothe'osin thu'ousin Epipha'nei, ppe'ndousi te kai` euochountai kai' u'mnoi le'gontai.:
[257]1 * Elle'non topho's tis: [258]1 * Eis, iatro's estin sarkiko's te kai` pneumatiko's, genneto`s kai` age'nnetos, en sarki` geno'menos theo`s, en thana'to zoe` alethine', kai` ek Mari'as kai` ek theou, proton pathetos kai` to'te apathe's Iesous Christo`s o ku'rios emon.: [259]1 * Emeis anapti'xantes ta`s bi'blous a`s ei'chomen ton propheton, a` me`n dia` parabolon a` de` dia` ainigma'ton e de` authentiko; kai` autolexei' to`n Christo`n Iesoun onomazo'nton, eu`rmen kai` te`n parousi'an autou kai` to`n thanaton kai` to`n stauro`n kai` ta`s loipa's kola'seis pa'sas, o`sas epoi'esan auto oi Ioudaioi, kai` te`n e'gersin kai` te`n eis ouranou`s ana'lepsin pro` tou Hierso'luma krithenai, katho`s ege'grapto tauta pa'nta a` e'dei auto`n pathein kai` met' auto`n a` e'stai; tauta oun epigno'ntes episteu'samen to theo dia` ton gegramme'non eis auto`n.: [260]1 * Theo's: [261]1 * I. Chr. o theo's o ou'tos umas pophi'sas: [262]1 * Iesous: [263]1 * Iesous Christo`s di' umas epto'cheusen plou'sios o'n: [264]1 * Iesous eis touto etoimasthe, i'na . . . . emas lutrosa'menos ek tou sko'tous dia'thetai en emin diathe'ken lo'go.: [265]1 * Ioudaioi kai` oi oli'go diaphe'rontes auton Ebionaioi: [266]1 * Kai` schedo`n pa'ntes me`n Samareis, oli'goi de` kai` en a'llois e'thnesin, os to`n proton theo`n Si'mona omologountes, ekeinon kai` proskunousin: [267]1 * Ke'rdon eis te`n ekklesi'an elthon kai` exomologou'menos, ou'tos diete'lese, pote` me`n lathrodidaskalon pote` de` pa'lin exomologou'menos, pote` de` elengo'menos eph' hois edi'daske kakos, kai` aphista'menos tes ton adelphon sunodi'as: [268]1 * Mathe'se exes kai` te`n tou'tou arche'n te kai` ge'nnesin, axioume'ne tes apostolikes parado'seos, e` ek diadoches kai` emeis pareile'phamen, meta` kairou [sic] kanoni'sai pa'ntas tou`s lo'gous te tou soteros didaskali'a: [269]1 * Marki'on sou to` o'noma epike'klentai oi upo sou epateme'noi os seauto`n keru'xantos kai` ouchi' Christo'n: [270]1 * Me`ga'le Apo'phasis: [271]1 * Monogene's: [272]1 * Nous: [273]1 [274]2 [275]3 [276]4 [277]5 [278]6 [279]7 [280]8
[281]9 [282]10 [283]11 [284]12 [285]13 [286]14 * O Pe'tros apekri'the; o ku'rios emon ou'te theou`s einai ephthe'nxato para` to`n kti'santa ta` pa'nta ou'te eauto`n theo`n einai anego'reusen, uio`n de` theou tou ta` pa'nta diakosme'santos to`n eipo'nta auto`n eulo'gos emaka'risen kai` o Si'mon apekri'nato; ou dokei soi oun to`n apo` theo`n einai; kai` o Pe'tros e'phe; pos touto einai du'natai, phra'son emin, touto ga`r emeis eipein soi ou duna'metha o`ti me` ekou'samen par' autou.:
[287]1 * O'ti me`n oun kai` euchai kai` eucharisti'ai, upo' ton axi'on gino'menai, te'leiai mo'nai kai` eua'restoi eisi to theo thusi'ai, kai` auto's phemi: [288]1 * O'ti, phesi'n, pa'nton pro'te ektisthe dia` touto presbute'ra, kai` dia` tau'ten o ko'smos katerti'sthe. : [289]1 * Ouch os koino`n a'rton oude` koino`n po'ma tauta lamba'nomen, all' o'n tro'pon dia` lo'gou theou sarkopoietheis Iesous Christo`s o sote`r emon kai` sa'rka kai` aima uper soteri'as emon e'schen, ou'tos kai` te`n di' euches lo'gou tou par' autou eucharistetheisan trophe'n, ex hei aima kai` sa'rkes kata` metabole`n tre'phontai emon, ekei'nou tou sarkopoiethe'ntos Iesou kai` sa'rka kai` haima thdida'chthemen einai: [290]1 * Pa'nta upomei'nas e`nkrate`s te`n theo'teta Iesous eirga'zeto. e`sthien ga`r kai` e'pien idi'os ouk apodidou`s ta` bro'mata, posau'te en auto tes enkratei'as du'namis, o'ste kai` me` phtharenai te`n trophe`n en auto epei` to` phthei'resthai auto`s ouk eichen.: [291]1 * Pais: [292]1 * Peri` archon: [293]1 * Peri'odoi Pe'trou dia` Kle'mentos Anabathmoi` Iako'bou: [294]1 * Pi'stis Sophi'a: [295]1 * Pisteu'o eis theo`n pate'ra pantokra'tora kai` eis Chrito`n Iesoun (to`n) uio`n autou to`n monogene: [296]1 * Proseuche` Iose'ph: [297]1 * Seuerianoi` blasphemountes Paulon to`n apo'stolon athetousin autou ta`s epistola`s mede` ta`s pra'xeis ton aposto'lon katadecho'menoi:
[298]1 * Su` ei o theo`s mo'nos kai` Iesous Christo`s o pais sou kai` emeis lao's sou kai` pro'bata tes nomes sou: [299]1 * Tati'anos Ioustinou akroate`s gegono's . . . . meta` de` te`n ekei'nou marturi'an aposta`s tes ekklesi'as, oie'mati didaska'lou eparthei`s . . . . i'dion charaktera didaskalei'ou suneste'sato.:
[300]1 * To` do'gmatos o'noma tes anthropi'nes e'chetai boules te kai` gno'mes. O'ti de` touth' ou'tos e'chei, marturei me`n, ikanos e dogmatike` ton iatron te'chne marturei de` kai` ta` ton philoso'phon kalou'mena do'gmata. O'ti de` kai` ta` sunkle'to do'xanta e'ti kai` nun do'gmata sunkle'tou le'getai, oude'na agnoein oimai.: [301]1 * Ton ge me`n ermecheuton auton de` tou'ton iste'on, Ebionai'on to`n Su'mmachon gegone'nai . . . . kai` upomne'mata de` tou Summa'chou eise'ti nun pheretai, en ois dokei pro`s to` katu` Matthaion apoteino'menos euange'lion te`n dedelome'nen ai'resin kratu'nein:
[302]1 * To agaponi' emas kai` lu'santi emas ek tou amartion en to ai'mati auto, auto e do'xa: [303]1 * Christo`s me`n kata` to` kechristhai kai` kosmesai ta pa'nta di' autou to`n theo`n le'getai: [304]1 * Christo`s o ku'rios o so'sas emas o`n me`n to` proton pnethma ege'neto sa`rx kai` oo'tos emas eka'lesen: [305]1 * Christo`s o ku'rios o so'sas emas, o`n me`n to` proton pneuma, ege'neto sa'rx kai` ou'tos emas eka'lesen: [306]1 * Christo`s o'n theou lo'gos pro' aio'non: [307]1 * Christo`s, o so'sas emas, o`n me`n to` proton pneuma kai` pa'ses kti'seos arche`, ege'neto sa'rx kai` ou'tos emas eka'lesen.: [308]1 * Christos Iesous en morphe theou upa'rchon . . . . . eauto`n eke'nosen mo'rphen dou'lou labo'n, en omoio'mati anthro'pon geno'menos, kai` sche'mati eurethei`s os a'nthropos etapei'nosen eauto`n k.t.l.: [309]1 * a'theoi: [310]1 * a'nthropos: [311]1 [312]2 * a'nthropos Christo`s Iesous: [313]1 * a'nothen o'n: [314]1 * a'rtos tes eucharisti'as: [315]1 * a'phesis amartion, sarko`s: [316]1 * a'phosis amartion: [317]1 * aga'pe: [318]1 * aga'pe a'phthartos.: [319]1 * age'nnetos: [320]1 * adelpho'tes: [321]1 * athanasi'a: [322]1 * athanasi'a (zoe` aio'nios): [323]1 * alethei'a tes sarko's: [324]1 * alla` to` me`n pneumatiko`n me` dedunesthai aute`n morphosai, epeide` omoou'sion uperche'n aute: [325]1 * all' ereis; kai` me`n perite'tmetai o lao`s eis sphragida.: [326]1 * ana'stasis: [327]1 * ana'stasis sarko`s: [328]1 * ana'stasis, zoe` aio'nios: [329]1 * anazopure'santes en ai'mati theou: [330]1 * anakephalai'osis: [331]1 * anaplassein: [332]1 * anasta'sis: [333]1 [334]2 * anaste'seis te`n sa'rka mou tau'ten.: [335]1 * ane'pte eis ourano`n o'then kai` heke, instead of o'then e'rchetai krinai zontas kai` nekrou's.: [336]1 * anele'mphthe en do'xe: [337]1 * ansitheseis: [338]1 * apagoreu'o me'te sune'rchesthai tou`s artoko'kous kat' etairi'an me'te paresteko'tas thrasu'nesthai. peitha'rchein de pa'ntos tois upe`r tou koine sumphe'rontos epitattome'nois k.t.l. or the exhortation: kollasthe tois agi'ois, o'ti oi kollo'menoi autois agiasthe'sontai: [339]1 * ape'thanen kata` ta`s grapha's: [340]1 * apo` kataboles ko`smou: [341]1 * apo` tou umete'rou ge'nous: [342]1 * apo`stoloi, prophetai: [343]1 * apo'deixin medemi'an peri` hon le'gousin e'chousin, alla` alo'gos os upo` lu'kou a'rnes suneprasme'noi ktl.: [344]1 * apolu'trosis: [345]1 [346]2 * aposto'lon ge'nomenos mathete`s gi`nomai dida'skalos ethnon, ta` paradothe'nta axi'os upereton ginome'nois alethei'as mathetais.:
[347]1 * ap' arches auto'ptais kai` upere'tais tou lo'gou: [348]1 * arche` pa'ses kti'seos: [349]1 * arche': [350]1 [351]2 * aphtharsi'a: [352]1 [353]2 * aph' eno`s patro's proelthon: [354]1 * a' ego` e'oraka para` to patri` lalo: [355]1 * a'gios: [356]1 * a'ma to anabenai auto`n apo` tou potamou tou Iorda'nou, tes phones autou lechthei'ses uio's mou ei su', ego` se'meron gege'nneka' se:
[357]1 * ai kuriakai` graphai': [358]1 * ai'resis, ekklesi'a: [359]1 * auto`n de` metangizo'menon en so'masi pollois polla'kis kai` nun de` en to Iesou, omoi'os pote` me`n ek tou theou gegenesthai, pote` de` pneuma gegone'nai, pote` de` ek parthe'nou, pote` de` ou' kai` touton de` mete'peita aei` en so'mati metangi'zesthai kai` en pollois kata` kairou`s dei'knusthai: [360]1 * auto`s de` ethe'lesen ou'to pathein; e'dei ga`r i'na epi` xu'lou pa'the: [361]1 * auto`s de` i'na katarge'se to`n tha'naton kai` te`n ek nekron ana'stasin dei'xe, oti en sarki` e'dei auto`n phanerothenai, upe'meinen, i'na kai` tois patra'sin te`n epangeli'an apodo kai` auto`s eauto to`n lao`n to`n kaino`n etoima'zon, epidei'xe, tes ges o'n, o'tr te'n ona'stasig auto`s poie'sas krinei: [362]1 * auto`s o dida'skalos emon kai` ku'rios: [363]1 * autou: [364]1 * autou me endunamountos tou telei'ou anthropou genome'nou, apart from the genome'nou: [365]1 * haima I Chr. e'tis esti`n chara` aio'nios kai` para'monos.: [366]1 * aima theou: [367]1 * basilei'a tou theou: [368]1 * basilei'a tou theou (christou): [369]1 * basta'zein o'lon to`n zugo`n tou ku'riou: [370]1 * ble'pe me'pote anabe epi` te`n kardi'an sou te`n sa'rka sou tau'ten phtharte`n einai.: [371]1 * gennethe'nta dia` Mari'as: [372]1 * gi'gnesthai sa'rx: [373]1 * ginoskete o'ti heis theo`s estin o's arche`n pa'nton epoi'esen, kai` te'lous exousi'an e'chon: [374]1 * gno'sis: [375]1 [376]2 [377]3 * gno'sis kai` zoe': [378]1 * gno'sis kai` zoe: [379]1 * gno'sis tes zoes: [380]1 * gnosis: [381]1 * gnosis (ale'theia) kai` zoe` aio'nos: [382]1 * gnosis soteri'as: [383]1 * graphe`: [384]1 * despo'tes: [385]1 [386]2 * demiourgo`s kai` pater ton aio'non: [387]1 * di`a: [388]1 * dia`: [389]1 * dia` te`n ekklesi'an o ko'smos katerti'sthe: [390]1 * dia' tou egapeme'nou paido's sou Iesoun Christou: [391]1 * dia'konoi: [392]1 * dia'konos tou pepontho'tos theou: [393]1 * diaaskaleion: [394]1 * diakoni'a tou lo`gou: [395]1 * diata'xeis ton aposto'lon: [396]1 * dida'gmata Christou: [397]1 * dida'gmata tou christou: [398]1 * dida'skaloi: [399]1 * dida'skalos: [400]1 * dida'skein o'ti outo`s estin o christo`s tou theou: [401]1 * dida'skein terein pa'nta o`sa enetei'lato o Iesous: [402]1 * didache`, (lo'gos) ku'riou, didache` (ke'rugma) ton aposto'lon:
[403]1 * dikaiosu'ne ex e'rgon. : [404]1 * dio` gnori'zo umin o'ti oudeis en pneu'mati theou lalon le'gei, ANAThEMA IESOUS, kai` oudeis du'natai eipein, KURIOS IESOUS ei me` en pneu'mati agi'o: [405]1 * do'kesis: [406]1 * do'xa: [407]1 * du'o ousi'ai Christou: [408]1 * dora, prosphorai': [409]1 * e'doxen to pneu'mati to agi'o kai` emin: [410]1 * e'thne: [411]1 * e'i tis di optasi'an pro`s didaskali'an sophisthenai du'natai:
[412]1 * e'ktisas ta` pa'nta e'neken tou ono'matos sou: [413]1 * e'nnomos politei'a: [414]1 [415]2 * e'rchesthai (phanerousthai) en sarki': [416]1 * e'sometha ek tes ekklesi'as tes pro'tes tes pneumatikes, tes pro` eli'ou kai` sele'nes ektisme'nes . . . . , ouk oi'omai de` umas agnoein, o'ti ekklesi'a zosa soma' estin Christou. le'gei ga`r e graphe'. Epoi'esen o theo`s to`n a'nthropon a'rsen kai` thelu. to` a'rsen esti`n o Christo's to`: [417]1 * e'stin de` houtos o aio`n kai` o me'llon du'o echthroi'; houtos le'gei moichei'an kai` phthora`n kai` philargouri'an kai` apa'ten, ekeinos de` tou'tois aposta'ssetai: [418]1 * ea`n o allo'phulos to`n no'mon pra'xe, Ioudaio's estin, me` pra'xas de' E'llen: [419]1 * enkra'teia: [420]1 * ego` ga`r pare'labon apo` tou kuri'ou, o` kai` pare'doka umin k.t.l.: [421]1 * ego' se edo'xasa epi` tes ges to` e'rgon teleio'sas o de'dokas moi i'na poie'so· kai` nun do'xason me su', pa'ter, para` se'auto te do'xe e eichon pro` tou to`n ko'smon einai para` soi: [422]1 * ek: [423]1 * ek tes trophes tau'tes haima kai` sa'rkes kata` metabole`n tre'phontai emon (kata` metabole'n: [424]1 * ekeinon zeto, to`n uper emon apothano'nta, ekeinon the'lo, to`n di' emas anasta'nta;: [425]1 * eke'ruxas tois koimome'nois; nai': [426]1 * ekklesi'a: [427]1 [428]2 [429]3 [430]4 * ekklesi'a tou theou: [431]1 [432]2 [433]3 * ekklesiastiko`s kano`n: [434]1 * eklexa'menos doulo'n tina pisto` kai` eua'reston: [435]1 * ekpeptoko'ta para` to`n tou diogmou kairo`n apo` tes eis Christo`n pi'steos epi' te`n Ioudaike`n ethelothreskei'an: [436]1 * elutro'thete timi'o ai'mati o`s amnou amo'mou kai` aspi'lou Christou, proegnosme'nou me`n pro` kataboles ko'smou, phanerothe'ntos de` ep' escha'tou ton chro'non di' umas tou`s di' autou pistou`s eis theo`n to`n egei'ranta auto`n ek nekron kai` do'xan auto do'nta, o'ste te`n pi'stin umon kai` elpi'da einai eis theo'n.: [437]1 * en anthro'pois theoi': [438]1 * en arche en o lo'gos" the "pa'nta di' autou ege'neto" and the "o lo'gos sa'rx ege'neto: [439]1 * en dikaiosune tou theou emon kai` soteros. I. Chr.: [440]1 * en ko'mpo alazonei'as: [441]1 * en morphe theou: [442]1 * en hois theologeitai o christo's: [443]1 * en uio (christo): [444]1 * enarche: [445]1 * eno'esa umas katertisme'nous en akine'to pi'stei, o'sper kathelome'nous en to stauro tou kuriou Iesou Christou sarki' te kai` pneu'mari kai` edrasme'nous en aga'pe en to ai'mari Christou, peplerophoreme'nous eis to`n kuri'ou emon, alethos o'nta ek ge'nous Dabi`d kata` sa'rka, uio`n theou kata` the'lema kai` du'namin theou, gegeneme'non alethos ek parthe'nou, bebaptisme'non upo` Ioa'nnou, i'na plerothe pasa dikaiosu'ne up' autou, alethos epi` Ponti'ou Pila'tou kai` Ero'dou tetra'rchou kathelome'non upe'r emon en sarki'--aph' hou karpou emeis, apo` tou theomakari'tou autou pa'thous--i'na a're su'ssemon eis tou's aionas dia' tes anasta'seos eis tou's agi'ous kai` pistou`s autou ei'te en Ioudai'ois ei'te en i'thnesin en eni` so'mate tes ekklesi'as autou.: [446]1 * entlai (enta'lmata): [447]1 * epangeli'a (zoe` aionios) gnosis (alethei'a) no'mos (enkra`te'ia):
[448]1 * epangeli'a, gnosis, no'mos: [449]1 * epi` to` auto` sunercho'menoi sunzeteite peri` tou koine sumphe'rontos: [450]1 * epi` to pa'thei tou upsi'stou: [451]1 * epi`skopos episko'pon: [452]1 * epi'skopoi: [453]1 [454]2 * epi'skopoi dai'mones: [455]1 * epi'skopos: [456]1 * episkopoi: [457]1 * epitre'psate' moi mimete`n einai tou pathous tou theou mou: [458]1 * epipha'neia: [459]1 * e'na a'rton klontes o's estin pha'rmakon athanasi'as, anti'dotos tou me` atothanein alla` zen en Iesou Christou dia` panto's.:
[460]1 * ete'ra meta'noia ouk e'stin ei me` ekei'ne, o'te eis u'dor kate'bemen kai` ela'bomen a'phesin amartion emon ton prote'ron:
[461]1 * ei ga`r me'chri nun kata` no'mon, Ioudaismo`n zomen omologoumen cha'rin me` eilephe'nai: [462]1 * ei ga`r me' elthen en sarki', oud' a'n pos oi a'nthropoi eso'thesan ble'pontes auto'n; o'te to`n me'llonta me` einai e'lion emble'pontes ouk ischu'sousin eis ta`s aktinas autou antophthalmesai: [463]1 * ei en te zoe tau'te` en christo elpiko'tes esme`n mo'non, eleeino'teroi pa'nton anthro'pon esme'n: [464]1 * eiko'tos Ioudai'oi's me`n no'mos, E'llesi de` philosophi'a me'chris tes parousi'as enteuthen de` e klesis e katholike': [465]1 * eis a'phesin amartion: [466]1 * eis exousi'an mega'len kai` kuriu'teta: [467]1 * eis to` a'phesin amartion: [468]1 * eis to` o'noma: [469]1 * eis to` o'noma : [470]1 * eis to` o'noma tou patro`s, kai` tou uiou, kai` tou agi'ou rneu'matos: [471]1 * eisi` ga`r tines aire'seis ta`s Pau'lou epistola`s tou aposto'lou me` prosie'menai o'sper Ebionaioi ampho'teroi kai` oi kalou'menoi ?Snkratetai': [472]1 * ei?s estin o agatho's: [473]1 * euange'lion (kuri'on): [474]1 * euange'lion kuri'ou: [475]1 * eucharisti'a: [476]1 [477]2 * eucharisti'an poiein: [478]1 * eucharisti'as kai` proseuches ape'chontai dia` to` me` omologein, te`n eucharisti'an sa'rka einei tou soteros emon Iesou Christou, te`n upe`r ton amartion emon pathousan.: [479]1 * eucharistoume'n soi upe`r tes gnoseos kai` pi'steos kai` athanasi'as.: [480]1 * eucharistoume'n soi, pa'ter a'gie, uper tou agi'ou ono'mato's sou, ou kaeske'nosas en tais kardi'as emon kai` upe'r tes gno'seos kai` pi'steos ai' athanasi'as, hes egno'risas emin dia` Iesou tou taidos sou: [481]1 * eucharistoume'n soi, pa'ter emon uper tes zoes kai` gno'seos hes egno'risas emin dia` Iesou tou paido's sou: [482]1 * eidr se pro` posou'tou aionos, Ermo'dore, e Si'bulla ekei'ne, kai` to'te estha: [483]1 * heis de` estin agatho's, hou pa'rousi'a e dia` tou uiou phane'rosis: [484]1 * heis theo`s, heis no'mos, mi'a elpi's: [485]1 * zetei to` koinophele`s pasin kai` me` to` eautou: [486]1 * zoe` aio'nios: [487]1 * zoe`n aio'nion: [488]1 * e arche` tes kti'seos tou theou: [489]1 * e gno'me tou patro's: [490]1 * e gnosis tou theou: [491]1 * e graphe`, ta` bibli'a: [492]1 * e de` paradexame'ne to` tou theou spe'rma telespho'rois odisi to`n mo'non kai` agapeto`n aistheto`n uio`n apeku'ese to`nde to`n ko`smon: [493]1 * e didaskalia tou soteros: [494]1 * e ek logi'on philosophi'a: [495]1 * e ekklesi'a: [496]1 * e ekklesi'a tou theou: [497]1 * e para'dosis-- o paradothei`s lo'gos-- o kano`n tes alethei'as or te`s parado'seos--e pi'stis-- o kano'n tes pi'steos--: [498]1 * e trophe` au'te kalheitai par' emin eucharisti'a: [499]1 * e'tis esti`n me'ter emon, gennosa eis e`n epengeila'metha agi'an ekklesi'an.: [500]1 * egapeme'nos: [501]1 * egou'menoi: [502]1 * emeis di' euches timomen to`n theo`n, kai` tau'ten te`n thusi'an ari'sten, kai` agiota'ten meta` dikaiosu'nes anape'mpomen to dikai'o lo'go: [503]1 * emeis kai` Pe'tron kai` tou`s a'llous aposto'lous apodecho'metha os Christo'n: [504]1 * emeis oi Christo`n to`n basile'a e'chomen, o'ti alethino`s theo's estin kai` poiete`s ouranou kai` ges kai` thala'sses. : [505]1 * emeis proskunoumen o` oi'damen: [506]1 * emeis tou's aposto'lous apodecho'metha os Christo`n: [507]1 * emin de` echari'so, de'spota, pneumatike`n trophe'n kai` poto`n kai` zoe`n aio'nion dia` tou paido's sou: [508]1 * emas basilei'an, iereis to theo kai` patri` autou: [509]1 * emin echari'so pneumatike`n trophe`n kai` poto`n kai` zoe`n aio'nion: [510]1 * emon: [511]1 * thee` Iesou Christe': [512]1 * theo`n pa'tera pantokra'tora: [513]1 * theo`n pantokra'tora: [514]1 * theo`n prosagoreu'ontes; ei kai' me'chri nun os a'nthropon ephobe'themen, alla` tou'nteuthen krei'ttona se thnetes tes phu'seos omologoumen: [515]1 * theo`s: [516]1 [517]2 [518]3 * theo`s Adriano's: [519]1 * theo`s gi'netai ton lambano'nton: [520]1 * theo`s en en arche te`n de` arche`n lo'gou du'namin pareile'phamen:
[521]1 * theo`s kai` theo`s uio`s: [522]1 * theo`s monogene's: [523]1 * theo`s sote'r: [524]1 [525]2 * theo`s t. alethei'as: [526]1 * theo`s o`n omou te kai` a'nthropos: [527]1 * theo`s o'n en arche pro's to`n theo'n, : [528]1 * theo's: [529]1 [530]2 [531]3 [532]4 [533]5 [534]6 [535]7 [536]8
[537]9 [538]10 * theo's Seoueros Eusebes: [539]1 * theo's ek theou: [540]1 * theo's,": [541]1 * theo's--christos--oi do'deka aposto'loi--ekklesi'ai: [542]1 * theoi': [543]1 * theopiie'sis: [544]1 * theopoi'esis: [545]1 [546]2 * theopoie'sis: [547]1 * theos: [548]1 * theo exomologou'metha dia` I. Chr.--theo do'xa dia' I. Chr: [549]1 * thi'asos: [550]1 * threskei'a kathara` kai` ami'antos para` to the'o kai` patri` au'te esti'n, episke'ptesthai orpha'nous kai` che'ras en te thli'psei auton: [551]1 * thu'ein: [552]1 * thusi'a: [553]1 [554]2 [555]3 * thusiaste'rion: [556]1 * thelu e ekklesi'a: [557]1 * i'de pa'lin Iesous, ouchi` uio`s anthro'pou alla` uio`s tou theou, tu'po de` en sarki` phanerothei's: [558]1 * i'dios, proto'pokos: [559]1 * i'na kai` e sa'rx au'te, douleu'sasa to pneu'mari ame'mptos, sche to'pon tina` kataske'no'seos, kai` me` doxe to`n mistho`n tes doulei'as autes apololeke'nai.: [560]1 * ka'go` ouk e'dein auto'n, all' i'na phanerothe' to Isra`el dia` touto elthon, V. 19: ou du'natai o uio`s poiein aph' eautou oude`n a'n me' ti ble'pe to`n pate'ra poiounta: [561]1 * katholikoi': [562]1 * katho`s auto`s enetei'lato kai` oi euangelisa'menoi emas apo'stoloi kai` oi prophetai oi prokeru'xantes te`n e'leusin tou kuri'ou emon.: [563]1 * kai` auto`s ta`s amarti'as auton ekatha'rise) polla` kopia'sas kai` pollou`s ko'pou`s entleko's: [564]1 * kai` ga`r pa'ntes apeklei'sthesan eis touto a'kontes eipein, o'ti to` pan eis e'na anatre'chei. ei oun ta` pa'nta eis e'na anatre'chei kai` kata` thu'alentinon kai` kata` Marki'ona. Ke'ri'ntho'n te` kai` pasan te`n ekei'non phluari'an, kai` a'kontes eis touto perie'pesan, i'na to`n e'na o'mologe'sosin ai'tion ton pa'nton ou'tos oun suntre'chousin kai` autoi` me` the'lontes te alethei'a e'na theo`n le'gein poie'santa os ethe'lsen: [565]1 * kai` ekklesiastikoi': [566]1 * kai` emon (estin): [567]1 * kai` me' lege'to tis umon o'ti au'te e sa`rx ou kri'netai oude` ani'statai.: [568]1 * kai` o a'rtos kai` to` e'laion agia'zetai te du'namei tou ono'matos ou ta` auta` o'nta kata` to` phaino'menon hoia ele'phthe, alla` duna'mei eis du'namin pneumatike'n metabe'bletai: [569]1 * kai` oi apo'stoloi; to` euange'lion: [570]1 * kai` ou dei emas mikra` phronein peri` tes soteri'as emon; en tho ga`r phronein emas mikra` peri` autou, mikra` kai' elrizomen labein: [571]1 * kai` to`n Christo`n de` ouk apo` ton en to plero'mati aio'non probeblesthai, alla` upo` tes metro`s, e'xo de` genome'nes, kata` te`n gno'men ton kreitto'non apokekuesthai meta` skias tino's. Kai` touton me'n, a'te a'rrena upa'rchonta, apoko`psanta uph' eautou te`n skia`n, anadramein eis to` ple'roma.: [572]1 * kai` touton einai to`n kat' eiko'na kai` omoi'osin gegono'ta; kat' eiko'na me`n to`n uliko`n upa'rchein, paraple'sion me`n, all' ouch omoou'sion to theo kath' omoi'osin de` to`n psuchiko'n.: [573]1 * kai' ga`r eisi tines, he says, apo` tou imete'rou ge'nous omologountes auto`n Christo`n einai, a'nthropon de` ex anthro'pon geno'menon apophaino'menoi, hois ou sunti'themai: [574]1 * kainos to`n theo`n dia` tou Psristou sebo'metha.: [575]1 * kano`n de` ekklesiastiko's e sunodi'a kai` sumphoni'a no'mou te kai` propheton te kata` te`n tou kuri'ou parousi'an paradidome'ne diathe'ke: [576]1 * kano`n ekklesiastiko's: [577]1 * kano`n tes parado'seos: [578]1 * kano'n ekklesiastiko`s e` pros tou`s Ioudai'zontas: [579]1 * kata` Christo'n: [580]1 * kata` gno'men or kata` phu'sin: [581]1 * kata` ke'leusi'n tou kuri'ou umon, k.o`.l.: [582]1 * kata` pneuma: [583]1 * kata` pneuma and kata` sa'rka: [584]1 * kata` pan ge'nos anthro'pon: [585]1 * kata` sa'kra, kata` pneuma: [586]1 * kata` sa'rka: [587]1 * kata` sa'rka--kata` pneuma: [588]1 * kata` tneuma: [589]1 * kata'skopos: [590]1 * kataba's-anaba's: [591]1 * kat' a'llon de' tro'pon le'gesthai theo`n zoon atha'naton logiko`n spoudaion, o'ste pasan astei'an psuche'n theo`n upa'rchein, ka`n perio'chetai, a'llos de` lenesthai theo`n to` kath' auto` o'n zonn atha'naton os ta` en anthropois sophois periechome'nas psucha`s me` upa'rchein theou's). : [592]1 * kat' alethei'an: [593]1 * kat' exoche'n: [594]1 [595]2 * kekteme'noi adia'kriton pneuma, o's estin Iesous Christo`s.: [596]1 * kekteme'noi adia'kriton pneuma, os estin Iesous Christo`s: [597]1 * kenousthai, tapeinousthai, ptocheu'ein.: [598]1 * keru'ssein te`n Basilei'an tou theou, kai` dida'skein ta` peri` tou kuri'ou Iesou Christou.: [599]1 * klesis: [600]1 * klesis tes epangeli'as, and the entolai` tes didaches: [601]1 * klesis tes epangeli'as.: [602]1 * ko`smos: [603]1 * ko'smon: [604]1 * ko'smon ethe'lese poiesai . . . . . . Ou'tos ouk o`n theo`s apoi`ese ko'smon ouk o'nta ex ouk o'nton, katabalo'menos kai` uposte'sas sperma ti e`n e'chon pasan en eauto tes tou ko'smou panstermi'an.: [605]1 * ko'smos: [606]1 * ko'smos noeto's: [607]1 * koino`s a'rtos: [608]1 * kollasthe tois agi'ois, o'ti oi kollo'menoi autois agiasthe'sontai:
[609]1 * kotmokra'tor: [610]1 * krio`s epi'semos ek mega'lou poimni'ou eis prosphora'n, olokau'toma dekto`n to theo atoimasme'non.: [611]1 * krite`s zo'nton kai` nekron: [612]1 * ku'rio's, a'ngelos theou, theo`s en anthro'pois: [613]1 * ku'rios: [614]1 [615]2 * ku'rios = despotes: [616]1 * ku'rios zo'nton: [617]1 * ku'rios, a'ngelos, kata'skopos, epi'skopos, theo`s : [618]1 * ku'rios, sote'r: [619]1 * lalountes to`n lo'gon: [620]1 * lao`s o tou egapeme'nou o philou'menos kai` philon autno'n: [621]1 * le'gei o theo's: [622]1 * lo`gos: [623]1 * lo`gos theou dia` Iesou Christou dia` ton aposto'lon.: [624]1 * lo'gia: [625]1 * lo'goi: [626]1 [627]2 * lo'gos: [628]1 [629]2 [630]3 * lo'gos alethe's: [631]1 [632]2 * lo'gos apoura'nios: [633]1 * lo'gos theou': [634]1 * lo'gos theou and lo'gos christou: [635]1 * lo'gos theou, didache' ku'riou, ke'rugma ton do'deka aposto'lon :
[636]1 * lo'gos megalosu'nes tou theou: [637]1 * lo'gos tou theou: [638]1 * lo'gos tes pi'steos: [639]1 * lu'trn: [640]1 * ma'thesis: [641]1 * mathe'tas: amen: [642]1 * mathetai': [643]1 * mega'le exousia kai` kurio'tes: [644]1 * mesi'tes: [645]1 * meta'basis eis a'llo ge'nos: [646]1 * meta'noia: [647]1 * me` arneisthai o'ti outo's estin o Christo`s, ea`n phai'netai os a'nthropos ex anthro'pon gennethei`s kai` ekloge geno'menos eis to` Christo`n einai apodeiknu'etai: [648]1 * me` dein o'los exeta'zein to`n lo'gon, all' ekaston, os pepi'steuke, diame'nein. Sothe'sesthai ga`r tou`s eti' to`n estarome'non elpiko'tas apephai'neto, mo'non ea`n en e'rgois agathois euri'skontai . . . . to` de` pos e'sti mi'a arche', me` gino'skein e'legen, ou'to de` kineisthai mo'non . . . . me` epi'stasthai pos heis esti`n age'nnetos theo's, touto de` pisteu'ein.: [649]1 * me` euri'okontes te`n diai'resin ton pragma'ton, os oude` ekeinos, duo` archa`s apephe'nanto psilos kai` anapodei'ktos: [650]1 * me` o'n: [651]1 * mede` kata` Ioudai'ous se'besthe; kai` ga`r ekeinoi mo'noi oio'menoi to`n theo`n gigno'skein ouk epi'stantai, latreu'ontes ange'lois kai` archange'lois, meni` kai` sele'ne, kai` ea`n me` sele'ne phane, sa'bbaton ouk agousi to` leko'menon proton, oude` geomeni'an a'gousin, oude` a'zuma, oude` eorte'n, oude` mega'len eme'ran.: [652]1 * mi'a arche`: [653]1 * mi'a e pa'nton ge'gone ton aposto'lon o'sper didaskali'a ou'tos de` kai` e para'dosis;: [654]1 * mnemoneu'ontes hon eipen o kuri'os dida'skon: [655]1 * mo`nos alethino`s: [656]1 * mon: [657]1 * monogene`s the'os: [658]1 * mustagogi'a: [659]1 * muste'rion: [660]1 * nekron: [661]1 * neo'teroi: [662]1 * neo'teros uio's: [663]1 * no`mos: [664]1 * no'mos a'neu zugou ana'nkes: [665]1 * no'mos t. eleutheri'as: [666]1 * no'mos tneumatiko's: [667]1 * no'mou politei'a: [668]1 * nomi'zontes apo` Mari'as kai` deuro Christo`n auto`n kaleisthai kai' uio`n theou, kai` einai me`n pro'teron psilo`n a'nthropon, kata` prokope`n de` eilephe'nai te`n tou uiou tou theou prosegori'an: [669]1 * nouthetein kai` ele'nchein: [670]1 * nous: [671]1 * o Iesous upe'meinen pathein, k.t.l.: [672]1 * o Pe'tros e'kkritos en ton aposto'lon kai` pto'ma ton matheton kai` koruphe' tou so'rou.: [673]1 * o a'nothen e`rcho'menos epa'no pa'nton estin. o o'n ek tes ges ek tes ges estin kai` ek tes ges lalei o ek tou ouranou ercho'menos epa'no pa'nton estin: [674]1 * o agatho`s emon theo`s o eu'splanchnos, o elee'mon, o a'gios, o katharo's, o ami'antos, o mo'nos, o heis, o ameta'bletos, o eilikrine's, o a'dolos, o me` orgizo'menos, o pases emin legome'nes e` nooume'nes prosegori'as ano'teros kai` upselo'teros emon theo`s Iesous: [675]1 * o agapeto`s pais: [676]1 * o bi'os emon o'los a'llo oude`n en ei me` tha'natos: [677]1 * o ga`r auto`s houtos paidagogo`s to'te me`n "phobethe'se ku'rion to`n theo`n e'legen, emin de` "a`gape'seis ku'rion to`n theo`n sou" tarenesen. dia` touto kai` ente'lletai emin "pau'sasthe apo` ton e'rgon umon" ton talaion amartion, "ma'thete kalo`n poiein, e'kklinon apo` kakou kai` poi'eson agatho'n, ega'pesas dikaiosu'nen, emi'sesas anomi'an" au'te mou e ne'a diathe'ke palai`o kecharagme'ne gra'mmati.: [678]1 * o ga`r lalon pro`s umas, ego Iako`b kai` Israe'l, a'ngelos theou eimi` ego` kai` pneuma archiko`n kai` Abraa`m kai` Isaa`k proekti'sthesan pro pantos e'rgou, ego` de` Iako`b . . . . ego` protogonos panto` zo'os zooume'nou upo` theou." : [679]1 * o dotheisa pi'stis--to` ke'rugma--ta` dida`gmata tou christou--e didache`--ta` mathe'mata, or to` ma'thema: [680]1 * o e'schatos Ada`m eis pneuma zoopoioun, all' ou proton to` pneumatiko`n alla` to` psuchiko'n, e'peita to` pneumatiko'n. o protos a'nthropos ek ges choiko's o deu'teros a'nthropos ex ouranou: [681]1 * o eklexa'menos emas eis apostole`n ethnon, o ekpe'mpsas emas eis te`n oikoume'nen theo's, o deixas eauto`n dia` ton apostolon:
[682]1 * o emo`s e'ros estau'rotai kai` ouk e'stin en emoi` pur philoulon.:
[683]1 * o eu'splanchnos theo's kai` kurio's emon Iesous Christo`s ouk ebou'leto apole'sthai ma'rtura ton idi'on pathema'ton: [684]1 * o theo`s (ku'rios) le'gei.: [685]1 * o theo`s e'doken to`n Christo`n kephale`n upe`r pa'nta te ekklesi'a e'tis esti`n to` soma autou: [686]1 * o theo`s exele'xato emas en Christo pro` kataboles ko'smou: [687]1 * o theo`s emon: [688]1 * o theo`s pe'ponthen upo` dexia's Israeliti'dos: [689]1 * o theo`s to`n eautou uio`n po'mpsas en omoio'mati sarko`s amarti'as kai` peri` amarti'as kate'krinen te`n amarti'an en te sarki':
[690]1 * o theo`s umin ego` e'de katastre'phein epita'ttomai to`n bi'on . . . . o kletheis atha'natos uph' emon e'de thanein apa'gomai:
[691]1 * o theo`s, o eklexa'menos to`n ku'rion Iesoun Christo`n kai` emas di' autou eis lao`n periou'sion don. k.t.l.: [692]1 * o theo's: [693]1 * o theo's Da'bid: [694]1 * o theo's emon: [695]1 * o theo's mou: [696]1 * o ku'rios: [697]1 [698]2 [699]3 [700]4 * o ku'rios (emon): [701]1 * o ku'rios kai` dida'skalos emon heipen: [702]1 * o lao`s o'n etoi'masen en to egapemo'no autou.: [703]1 * o lo'gos sa'rx ege'neto: [704]1 * o monogene`s pais: [705]1 * o pate`r kai` kti'stes tou su'mpantos ko'smou: [706]1 * o sote`r emon: [707]1 * o`per esti'n o Christo's: [708]1 * o`s a`n oun eltho'n dida'xe umas tauta pa'nta ta` proeireme'na, de'xasthe auto'n.: [709]1 * o'pos to`n arithmo`n to`n katerithmeme'non ton eklekton autou en o'lo ko'smo diaphula'xe a'thrauston o demiourgo`s ton apa'nton dia` tou egapeme'nou paido`s autou Iesou Christou.: [710]1 * o'son du'nasai agneu'seis: [711]1 * o'te eudo'kesen o theo`s apokalu'psai to`n uio`n autou en emoi':
[712]1 * o'te eudo'kesen o theo`s apokalu'pssai to`n uio`n autou en emoi`:
[713]1 * o'te etosen o dida'skalos to`n a`rton kai` to` pote'rion kai` eulo'gesen auta` le'gon; touto esti to` soma' mou kai` to` haima, ouk epe`trepse tau'tais the women) sustenai emin . . . . Ma'rtha eipen dia` Maria'm, o'ti eiden aute`n meidiotan. Mari'a eipen ouke'ti ege'lasa.: [714]1 * o'te etesen o didaska'los to`n a'rton: [715]1 * o'ti a diathe'ke ekei'non: [716]1 * o'ti eo'rakas me pepi'steukas, makarioi oi me` idontes kai` piste'usantes: [717]1 * omoio'mati sarko`s amarti'as: [718]1 * omologi'an einai te`n me`n en te pi'stei kai` politei'a, te`n de` en phone; e me`n oun en phone omologia kai` epi` ton exousion gi'netai, e'n mo'nen omologi'an egountai einai oi polloi', ouch ugios du'nantai de` tau'ten te`n omologi'an kai` oi upokrisai` omologein.: [719]1 * omoou'sios: [720]1 * oikonomi'a eis to`n kaino`n a'nthropon Iesoun Christo'n: [721]1 * oi apo'stoloi emin euengeli'sthesan apo` tou kuri'ou Iesou Christou, Iesous o christo`s apr tou theou exepo'mphthe. o christo`s oun apo` tou theou, kai` oi apo'stoloi apo` tou Christou; ege'nonto oun ampho'tera euta'ktos ek thele'matos theou k.t.l.:
[722]1 * oi aute`n tes apolutro'seos emin pi'stin kai` elpida e'chontes:
[723]1 * oi dokountes e'chein theo`n: [724]1 * oi ku'rioi: [725]1 * oi orthegno'menes kata` pa'nta christanoi' eisin: [726]1 * oi peri` to`n Petro`n: [727]1 * oi prophetai, apo` tou ku'riou echontes te`n cha'rin, eis auto`n eprophe'teusan.: [728]1 * oi prophetai kata` Christo`n Iesoun e'zesan: [729]1 * ou pa'ntote' se os thea'n egesa'men: [730]1 * ou'te christianoi` upa'rchontei ou'te Ioudaioi ou'te E'llenes, alla` me'son aplos upa'rchontes: [731]1 * oude` ga'r xoe` a'neu gno'seos oude` gnosis asphale`s a'neu zoes alethous; dio` plesion eka'teron pephu'teutai: [732]1 * oudei`s anabe'beken eis to`n ourano`n ei me` o ek tou ouranou kataba's, o uio`s tou anthro'pou: [733]1 * oudei`s du'natai elthein pro`s me, ea'n me` o pate`r o pe'mpsas me elku'se auto`n: [734]1 * oudei`s pi'stin epangello'menos amarta'nei: [735]1 * ouchi` tauta e'dei pathein to`n Christo`n kai' euselthein eis te`n do'xan autou?: [736]1 * ouchi` uio`s anthro'pou all: uio`s tou theou, topo de` en sarki` phanerothei's: [737]1 * ou'tos du'namin labousa kuriake`n e psuche` meleta einai theo's, kako`n me`n oude`n a'llo ple`n agnoi'as einai nomi'zousa: [738]1 * ou'tos kai` to` u'dor kai` to` exorkizo'menon kai` to` bapti'sma gino'menon ou mo'non chorei to` cheiron, alla` kai` agiasmo`n pposlamba'nei.: [739]1 * oun: [740]1 * houto`s, katha' phesin Ippo'botos, eis posos ton teratei'as e'lasen, o'ste Erinu'os analabo`n schema perieei, le'gon episkopos aphichthai ex A'idou ton amarto'me'non, o'pos pa'lin katio`n tasta apange'lloi tois ekei, dai'mosin: [741]1 * houtos o aio'n: [742]1 * pa'thos: [743]1 * pa'thos (haima, stauro's): [744]1 * pa'nta a' e'kousa para` tou patro's mou e'gno'risa umin: [745]1 * pa'roikos: [746]1 * pathe'mata tou theou: [747]1 * panto`s tou kosmou ku'rios: [748]1 * pantokra'tor: [749]1 * paradothei`s lo'gos: [750]1 * pare'doka umin en pro'tois, o kai` pare'labon, o'ti Christo`s ape'thanen upe`r ton amartion emon: [751]1 * paroikousa te`n po'lin: [752]1 * pais theou: [753]1 [754]2 * peple'rotai o kairo`s kai` e'ngiken e' basilei'a tou theou· metanoeite kai` pisteu'ete en to euangeli'o: [755]1 * peri` dikaiosu'nes--teri` prosphuous psuches--ethika`--peri` enkratei'as e peri` eunouchi'as: [756]1 * peri` tou kata` to`n sotera katartismou: [757]1 * peri` tou uiou autou, tou genome'nou ek spe'rmatos Dauei`d kata` sa'rka, ?tou oristhe'ntos uiou theou en duna'mei kata` pneuma agiosu'nes ex anasta'seos nekron, Iesou Christou tou kuri'ou emon:
[758]1 * peri` tes ek logi'on philosophi'as: [759]1 * peri` tes eklogi'on philosophi'as: [760]1 * peri` ton prote'ron agnoema'ton to theo mono dunato`n i'asin dounai; autou ga`r esti pasa exousi'a. Præd. Petri ap. Clem. Strom. VI. 6. 48: o'sa en agnoi'a tis umon epoi'esen me` eedo`s saphos to`n theo`n, ea`n epignou`s metanoe'se, ta'nta auto aphethe'setai ta` amarte'mata.: [761]1 * perisso'teron auton pa'nton ekopi'asa: [762]1 * pete`r tes alethei'as: [763]1 * pi'stis: [764]1 [765]2 [766]3 [767]4 * pisteu'o eis e'na theo`n pantokra'tora: [768]1 * pisteu'o eis theo`n pete'ra pantokra'tora.: [769]1 * pneuma: [770]1 [771]2 [772]3 * pneuma Christo's: [773]1 * pneuma zoopoioun: [774]1 [775]2 * pneuma theou: [776]1 * pneuma o theo`s, kai` tou`s proskunountas auto`n en pneu'mati kai' alethei'a dei proskunein: [777]1 * pneuma, nous: [778]1 * pneuma, omoou'sion to patri': [779]1 * poeountes to` the'lema tou patro`s emon eso'metha ek tes ekklesi'as tes pro'tes tes pneumatikes, tes pro` eli'ou kai` sele'nes ektisme'nes . . . . ekklesi'a zosa soma' esti Christou; le'gei ga'r e graphe'; epoi'esen o theo`s to`n a'nthropon a'rsen kai' thelu. To` a'rsen esti`n o Christo's, to` thelu e ekklesi'a.: [780]1 * poiein: [781]1 [782]2 * poiein to` the'lema tou Christo`u: [783]1 * politei'a en to kosmo: [784]1 * polla'kis gennethe'nta kai` genno'menon pephene'nai kai` phu'esthai, alla'ssonta gene'seis kai` metensomatou'menon: [785]1 * polloi` osperei` a'kontes proselelu'thasi christianismo, pneu'mato's tino's tre'psantos . . . kai` phantasio'santos autou`s u'par e' o'nar: [786]1 * pote'ria oi'no kakrame'na prospoiou'menos eucharistein. Kai` epi' ple'on ektei'non to`n lo'gon tes epikleseos, porphu'rea kai` eruthra` anaphai'nesthai poiei, os dokein te`n apo` ton upo`r ta` o'la cha'rin to` haima to` eautes sta'zein en ekei'no to poteri'o dia` tes epikle'seos autou, kai` uperimei'resthai tou`s paro'ntas ex ekei'n9;u geu'sasthai tou po'matos, i'na kai` eis autou`s epombre'se e dia` tou ma'gou tou'tou kleizome'ne cha'ris.: [787]1 * presbu'teroi: [788]1 [789]2 * probole': [790]1 * proe'legen, o'te edi'daskn: [791]1 * proegnosme'nos pro` kataboles ko'smou: [792]1 [793]2 [794]3 * proegnosme'nos pro` kataboles ko'smou, he is the arche` tes kti'seos tou theou: [795]1 * proegnosme'nos pro` kataboles ko'smou, phanerothei's k.t.l.: [796]1 * proegnosme'nos, phanerothei's: [797]1 * proegnosme'nou me`n pro` kataboles ko'smou, phanerothei`s de` di' umas tou`s di' autou pistou`s eis theo`n to`n egei'ranta auto`n ek nekron kai` do'xan auto do'nta, o'ste te`n pi'stin umon kai` elpi'da einai eis theo'n.: [798]1 * prokope`: [799]1 * proorontas tou`s lo'gous tou didaska'lou emon: [800]1 * prosdecho'menoi te`n makari'an elpi'da kai` epipha'neian tes do'xes tou mega'lou theou kai` soteros emon Christou Iesou: [801]1 * prosta'tes kai` boetho`s tes asthenei'as, and as archiereu`s ton prosphoron emon: [802]1 * prosphe'rein ta` dora: [803]1 * prosphora`, dora: [804]1 * prosphora`s prosphe'rein prose'taxen emin o sote'r, alla` ouchi' ta`s di' alo'gon zo'on e` tou'ton ton thomiama'ton alla` dia` pneumatikon ai'non kai` doxon kai` eucharisti'as kai` dia` tes eis toi`s plesi'on koinoni'as kai` e?poii'as.: [805]1 * prosphora': [806]1 * prosphorai': [807]1 * proista'menoi tes ekklesi'as: [808]1 * proto'tokon en pollois adelphois: [809]1 * proto'tokos ek ton nekron: [810]1 * proto'tokos pa'ses kti'seos: [811]1 * proton pa'nton pi'steuson, o'ti heis esti`n o theo`s, o ta` pa'nta kti'sas kai` katarti'sas, k.t.l: [812]1 * puknos metanoousi: [813]1 * pos oun gegra'phate o'ti theo's o dia` sa'rkos patho`n kai` a`nasta's, . . . . oudamou de` haima theou di'cha sarko`s paradedo'kasin ai graphai` e` theo`n dia` sarko`s patho'nta kai` anasta'nta: [814]1 * sa'kra labo'n: [815]1 * sa'rx: [816]1 [817]2 [818]3 [819]4 [820]5 [821]6 [822]7 [823]8 * sa'rx Iesou Christou, e upe'r ton amartion emon pathousa: [824]1 * sa'rx ege'neto: [825]1 * sa'rx pathousa: [826]1 * sarko`s ana'stasin: [827]1 * sarkos ana'stasin: [828]1 * sophi'a, su'nesis, episte'me, gnosis (ton dikaioma'ton), from the lo'gos theou tes pi'steos: [829]1 * sunagoge` Markioniston: [830]1 * sunagoge', su'stema, diatribe', ai athro'pinai sunelu'seis, :
[831]1 * sune'geiren kai` suneka'thisen en tois epourani'ois en Christo Iesou: [832]1 * suntalai'poroi kai` summisou'menoi: [833]1 * suno'numa tauta einai le'getai.: [834]1 * sphragi's: [835]1 * so'ter: [836]1 * sothe'sesthai tou`s epi' to`n estaurome'non elpiko'tas, mo'non ea`n en e'rgois agathois euri'skontai.: [837]1 * soteri'a: [838]1 * sote`r: [839]1 * sote'r: [840]1 [841]2 [842]3 * soteri'a, apolu'trosis: [843]1 * ta` apomnemoneu'mata t. aposto'lon: [844]1 * ta` pathe'mata autou: [845]1 * ta' lo'gia (kuriaka'): [846]1 * talai'poroi kai` misou'menoi: [847]1 * tais ekklesi'ais tes Ioudai'as: [848]1 * tais en Christo: [849]1 * tauta tois epideome'nois choregon : [850]1 * te`n ale'theian umin lela'leka e'n e'kousa para` tou theou: [851]1 * tere'sate te`n sa'rka agne`n kai` te`n sphragida a'spilon: [852]1 * tneuma (lo'gos): [853]1 * to` adida'ktos a'neu optasi'as kai` onei'ron mathein apoka'lupsi's estin: [854]1 * to` haima autou e'doken upe`r emon Iesous Christo`s . . . kai` te`n sa'rka upe`r tes sarko`s emon kai` te`n psuche`n upo`r ton psuchon e'mon.: [855]1 * to` ba'thos eka'stou e u'le: [856]1 * to` ba'ptisma umon mene'to os o'pla: [857]1 * to` de` ku'ema tes metro`s tes "Achamo'th," omoou'sion upa'rchon te metri's: [858]1 * to` didaska'lion tes thei'as aretes: [859]1 * to` o'noma to` upe`r pan o'noma: [860]1 * to` pa'thos tou theou mou; Eph. 7: [861]1 * to` skeptron tes melagosu'nes tou theou: [862]1 * to` tou do'gmatos o'noma tes anthropi'nes e'chetai boules te kai` gno'mes k.t.l.: [863]1 * to` tes eusebei'as muste'rion: [864]1 * to`n auto`n einai pate'ra, to`n auto`n einai uio`n, to`n auto`n einai a'gion pneuma: [865]1 * to`n ku'rion emon to`n gennethe'nta ek pneu'matos agi'ou kai` Mari'as tes parthe'nou, to`n epi` Pontion Pila'tou staurothe'nta kai` taphe'nta; te tri'te eme'ra anasta'nta ek nekron, anaba'nta eis tou`s ouranou's, kathe'menon en dexia tou patro's, o'then e'rchetai krinai zontas kai` nekrou's; kai` eis pneuma a'gion, agi'an ekklisi'an, a'phesin amartion sarko`s ana'stasin, ame'n.:
[866]1 * to`n sotera le'gousin, oude` ga`r ku'rion onoma'zein auto`n the`lousin--ku'rios and despo'tes: [867]1 * to`n tou christou lo'gon, with lo'gos theou peri` enkatei'as, kai` anasta'seos: [868]1 * tou patro`s to` me' gegennesthai estin, uiou de` to` gegennesthai lenneto`n de` agenne'to e' kai` autugenne'to ou sunkri'netai:
[869]1 * touto poieite: [870]1 * tri'as: [871]1 * trophe` eucharistetheisa: [872]1 * trophe` pneumatike': [873]1 * tes diathe'kes autou: [874]1 * tes pi'steos emon eisi`n boethoi` pho'bos kai` upomone', ta` de` summachounta emin makrothumi'a kai` enkra'teia; tou'ton meno'nton ta` pro`s ko'rion agnos, suneuphrai'nontai' autois sophi'a, su'nesis, episte'me, gnosis: [875]1 * to mo'no theo aora'to, patri` tes alethei'as, to exapostei'lanti emin to`n sotera kai` archego`n tes aphtharsi'as, di' hou kai` ephane'rosen emin te`n ale'theian kai` te`n epoura'nion zoe'n, auto e do'xa.: [876]1 * to uio anthro'pou kai` uio theou: [877]1 * upe`r tes gno'seos kai` pi'steos kai` athanasi'as hes egno'risen emin o theo`s dia` Iesou, or upe`r tes zoes kai` gno'seos, and 1 Clem. 36. 2: dia` tou'to ethe'lesen o despo'tes tes athana'tou gno'seos emas geu'sasthai: [878]1 * upo` diabo'lou tau'ten paradi'dothsai dogmati'zousi, mimeisthai d' autou`s oi mega'lauchoi' phasi to`n ku'rion me'te ge'manta, me'te ti en to ko'smo ktesa'menon mallon para` tou`s a'llous nenoeke'nai to` euange'lion kaucho'menoi: [879]1 * uph' hon kla'don skepasthe'ntes oi pa'ntes os o'rnea upo` kalia`n suneltho'nta mete'labon tes ex auton proerchome'nes edodi'mou kai` epourani'ou trophes: [880]1 * phanerousthai: [881]1 [882]2 [883]3 * phanerousthai en sarki': [884]1 * phasi` tou`s me`n prote'rous a'pantas kai' autou`s tou`s aposto'lous pareilephe'nai te kai` dedidache'nai tauta, a' nun houtoi le'gousi, kai` teteresthai te`n ale'theia tou keru'gmatos me'chri ton chro'non tou Bi'ktoros . . . apo` de` tou diado'chou autou Zephuri'nou parakechara'chthai te`n ale'theian.: [885]1 * pheu'gete ou ta`s phu'seis alla` ta`s gno'mas ton kakhon: [886]1 * philanthropi'a: [887]1 * philoxeni'a: [888]1 * phronein peri` autou os peri` theou: [889]1 * photismo's: [890]1 [891]2 [892]3 * cha'ris metanoi'as: [893]1 [894]2 [895]3 * chari'smata: [896]1 * christo's": [897]1 * psi'lo`s a'nthropos: [898]1 * o'phthe ange'lois. ekeru'chthe en e'thnesin, episteu'the en ko'smo.: [899]1 * os o nomos keru'ssei kai` oi prophetai kai` o ku'rios: [900]1 * o'sper upo` ton zodi'on e ge'nesis dioikeitai, ou'tos upo` ton aposto'lon e anage'nnesis: [901]1 * os auto's phesin o Basilei'des, e`n me'ros ek tou legome'nou thele'matos tou theou upeile'phamen, to` egapeke'nai a'panta. o'ti lo'gon aposo'zousi pro`s to` pan a'panta; e'teron de` to` medeno`s epithumein, kai` to` tri'ton misei'n mede` e'n?: [902]1 * os peri` theou: [903]1 [904]2 * elthon katalusai ta`s thusias, kai` ea`n me` tau'sesthe tou thu'ei`n, ou pau'setai aph' umon e orge`: [905]1 * ina o kaino`s no'mos tou kuri'ou emon Iesou Christou me` anthropopoieton e'che te`n prosphora'n.: [906]1 * "theo's": [907]1 * "o uio`s tou theou": [908]1 __________________________________________________________________
Index of Latin Words and Phrases
* (Ebionitæ) credentes in Christo propter hoc solum a patribus anathematizati sunt, quod legis cæremonias Christi evangelio miscuerunt, et sic nova confessa sunt, ut vetera non omitterent.:
[909]1 * Ab igne, inquiunt, creatoris deprehendetur: [910]1 * Aiunt, Marcionem non tam innovasse regulam separatione legis et evangelii quam retro adulteratam recurasse: [911]1 * Apostoli et discentes ipsorum: [912]1 * Apostoli non diversa inter se docuerent: [913]1 * Apostoli quæ sunt Judæorum sentientes scripserunt: [914]1 * Apostolorum principem: [915]1 * Apostolos admiscuisse ea quæ sunt legalia salvatoris verbis: [916]1 * Apostolos vultis Judaismi magis adfines subintelligi.: [917]1 * Atque adeo præ se ferunt Marcionitæ: quod deum suum omnino non timeant. Malus autem, inquiunt, timebitur; bonus autem diligitur.:
[918]1 * Carmen dicere Christo quasi deo: [919]1 * Cessatio delicti radix est veniæ, ut venia sit pænitentiæ fructus:
[920]1 * Christiani rudes: [921]1 * Consensus repetitus: [922]1 * Corpus sumus: [923]1 * De verbi autem administratione quid dicam, cum hoc sit negotium illis, non ethnicos convertendi, sed nostros evertendi? Hanc magis gloriam captant, si stantibus ruinam, non si jacentibus elevationem operentur. Quoniam et ipsum opus eorum non de suo proprio ædificio venit, sed de veritatis destructione; nostra suffodiunt, ut sua ædificent. Adime illis legem Moysis et prophetas et creatorem deum, accusationem eloqui non habent.: [924]1 * Denique in tantam quidam dilectionis audaciam proruperunt, ut nova quædam et inaudita super Paulo monstra confingerent. Alli enim aiunt, hoc quod scriptum est, sedere a dextris salvatoris et sinistris, de Paulo et de Marcione dici, quod Paulus sedet a dextris, Marcion sedet a sinistris. Porro alii legentes: Mittam vobis advocatum Spiritum veritatis, nolunt intelligere tertiam personam a patre et filio, sed Apostolum Paulum.: [925]1 * Deus incognitus: [926]1 * Diabolus ipsas quoque res sacramentorum divinorum idolorum mysteriis æmulatur. Tingit et ipse quosdam, utique credentes et fideles suos; expositionem delictorum de lavacro repromittit, et si adhuc memini, Mithras signat illic in frontibus milites suos, celebrat et panis oblationem et imaginem resurrectionis inducit . . . . summum pontificem in unius nuptiis statuit, habet et virgines, habet et continentes.: [927]1 * Dispares deos, alterum, judicem, ferum, bellipotentem; alterum mitem, placidum et tantummodo bonum atque optimum.: [928]1 * Dixit Jesus ad suos mathe'tas: amen: [929]1 * Dominus: [930]1 * Dominus invenit me, qui ab initio orbis terrarum præparatus sum, ut sim arbiter (mesi'tes: [931]1 * Es quo fit, ut nullo modo in theologicis, quæ omnia e libris antiquis hebraicis, græcis, latinis ducuntur, possit aliquis bene in definiendo versari et a peccatis multis et magnis sibi cavere, nisi litteras et historiam assumat.: [932]1 * Et hoc est, quod schismata apud hæreticos fere non sunt, quia cum Sint, non parent. Schisma est enim unitas ipsa.: [933]1 * Et in primis illud retorquendum in istos, qui duorum nobis deorum controversiam facere præsumunt. Scriptum est, quod negare non possunt: "Quoniam unus est dominus." De Christo ergo quid sentiunt? Dominum esse, aut ilium omnino non esse? Sed dominum illum omnino non dubitant. Ergo si vera est illorum ratiocinatio, jam duo sunt domini.: [934]1 * Felix aqua quæ semel abluit, qum ludibrio pecatoribus non est.:
[935]1 * Fertur ergo in traditionibus, quoniam Johannes ipsum corpus, quod erat extrinsecus, tangens manum suam in profunda misisse et duritiam carnis nullo modo reluctatam esse, sed locum manui præbuisse discipuli.: [936]1 * Gentiles quamvis idola colant, tamen summum deum patrem creatorem cognoscunt et confitentur [!]; in hunc Marcion, blasphemat, etc.:
[937]1 * Gnosticos autem se vocant, etiam imagines, quasdam quidem depictas, quasdam autem et de reliqua materia fabricatas habent et eas coronant, et proponent eas cum imaginibus mundi philosophorum, videlicet cum imagine Pythagoræ et Platonis et Aristotelis et reliquorum, et reliquam observationem circa eas similiter ut gentes faciunt.: [938]1 * Hoc sentire et facere omnem servum dei oportet, etiam minor's loci, ut maioris fieri possit, si quern gradum in persecutionis tolerantia ascenderit: [939]1 * Hominum plerique orationem demonstrativam continuam mente assequi nequeunt, quare indigent, ut instituantur parabolis. Veluti nostro tempore videmus, homines illos, qui Christiani vocantur, fidem suam e parabolis petiisse. Hi tamen interdum talia faciunt, qualia qui vere philosophantur. Nam quod mortem contemnunt, id quidem omnes ante oculos habemus; item quod verecundia quadam ducti ab usu rerum venerearam abhorrent. Sunt enim inter eos feminas et viri, qui per totam vitam a concubitu abstinuerint; sunt etiam qui in animis regendis coërcendisque et in accerrimo honestatis studio eo progressi sint, ut nihil cedant vere philosophantibus.: [940]1 * Immo inquiunt Marcionitæ, deus poster, etsi non ab initio, etsi non per conditionem, sed per semetipsum revelatus est in Christi Jesu.:
[941]1 * Inflatus est iste [scil. the Valentinian proud of knowledge] neque in coelo, neque in terra putat se esse, sed intra Pleroma introisse et complexum jam angelum suum, cum institorio et supercilio incedit gallinacei elationem habens . . . . Plurimi, quasi jam perfecti, semetipsos spiritales vocant, et se nosse jam dicunt eum qui sit intra Pleroma ipsorum refrigerii locum: [942]1 * Major pars imperitorum apud gloriosissimam multitudinem psychicorum.: [943]1 * Major pæne vis hominum e visionibus deum discunt.: [944]1 * Marcion non negat creatorem deum esse.: [945]1 * Marcionitæ interrogati quid fiet peccatori cuique die illo? respondent abici ilium quasi ab oculis: [946]1 * Mariccus . . . . iamque adsertor Galliarum et deus, nomen id sibi indiderat: [947]1 * Mundus ille superior: [948]1 * Nam Jacobum apostolum Symmachiani faciunt quasi duodecimum et hunc secuntur, qui ad dominum nostrum Jesum Christum adjungunt Judaismi observationem, quamquam etiam Jesum Christum fatentur; dicunt enim eum ipsum Adam esse et esse animam generalem, et aliæ hujusmodi blasphemiæ.: [949]1 * Narem contrahentes impudentissimi Marcionitæ convertuntur ad destructionem operum creatoris. Nimirum, inquiunt, grande opus et dignum deo mundus?: [950]1 * Naturam si expellas furca, tamen usque recurret.: [951]1 * Nihil veritas erubescit nisi solummodo abscondi.: [952]1 * Nullus potest hæresim struere, nisi qui ardens ingenii est et habet dona naturæ quæ a deo artifice sunt creata: talis fait Valentinus, talis Marcion, quos doctissimos legimus, talis Bardesanes, cujus etiam philosophi admirantur ingenium.: [953]1 * Oportet me magis deo vivo et vero, regi sæculorum omnium Christo, sacrificium offerre.: [954]1 * Prius est prædicare posterius tinguere: [955]1 * Ptolemæus nomina et numeros Æonum distinxit in personales substantias, sed extra deum determinatas, quas Valentinus in ipsa summa divinitatis ut sensus et affectus motus incluserat.: [956]1 * Quem deum colis? Respondit: Christum. Polemon (judex): Quid ergo? iste alter est? [the co-defendant Christians had immediately before confessed God the Creator]. Respondit: Non; sed ipse quem et ipsi paullo ante confessi sunt: [957]1 * Quid dicam de Hebionitis, qui Christianos esse se simulant? usque hodie per totas orientis synagogas inter Judæos (!) hæresis est, que dicitur Minæorum et a Pharisæis nunc usque damnatur, quos vulgo Nazaræos nuncupant, qui credunt in Christum filium dei natum de Virgine Maria et eum dicunt esse, qui sub pontio Pilato passus est et resurrexit, in quem et nos credimus; sed dum volunt et Judæi esse et Christiani, nec Judæi sunt nec Christiani.: [958]1 * Quid novi attulit dominus veniens?: [959]1 * Quoniam opera bona, quæ fiunt ab infidelibus, in hoc sæculo its prosunt: [960]1 * Sacrorum pleraque initia in Græcia participavi. Eorum quædam signa et monumenta tradita mihi a sacerdotibus sedulo conservo.: [961]1 * Scio dicturos, atqui hanc esse principalem et perfectam bonitatem, cum sine ullo debito familiaritatis in extraneos voluntaria et libera effunditur, secundum quam inimicos quoque nostros et hoc nomine jam extraneos deligere jubeamur.: [962]1 * Scio scripturam Enoch, quæ hunc ordinem angelis dedit, non recipi a quibusdam, quia nec in armorium Judaicum admittitur . . . sed cum Enoch eadem scriptura etiam de domino prædicarit, a nobis quidem nihil omnino reiciendum est quod pertinet ad nos. Et legimus omnem scripturam ædificationi habilem divinitus inspirari. A Judæis potest jam videri propterea reiecta, sicut et cetera fera quæ Christum sonant. . . . . Eo accedit quod Enoch apud Judam apostolum testimonium possidet.: [963]1 * Sed enim nationes extraneæ, ab omni intellectu spiritalium potestatum eadem efficacia idolis suis subministrant. Sed viduis aquis sibi mentiuntur. Nam et sacris quibusdam per lavacrum initiantur, Isidis alicujus aut Mithræ; ipsos etiam deos suos lavationibus efferunt. Ceterum villas, domos, templa totasque urbes aspergine circumlatæ aqua expiant passim. Certe ludis Apollinaribus et Eleusiniis tinguuntur, idque se in regenerationem et impunitatem periuriorum suorum agere præsumunt. Item penes veteres, quisquis se homicidio infecerat, purgatrices aquas explorabat.: [964]1 * Sensus, motus, affectus dei: [965]1 * Separatio legis et Evangelii proprium et principale opus est Marcionis, nec poterunt negare discipuli ejus, quod in summo (suo) instrumento habent, quo denique initiantur et indurantur in hanc hæresim.: [966]1 * Separatio legis et evangelii proprium et principale opus est Marcionis . . . ex diversitate sententiarum utriusque instrumenti diversitatem quoque argumentatur deorum.: [967]1 * Si bona fide quæras, concreto vultu, suspenso supercilio, Altum est, aiunt. Si subtiliter temptes per ambiguitates bilingues communem fidem adfirmant. Si scire to subostendas negant quidquid agnoscunt. Si cominus certes, tuam simplicitatem sua cæde dispergunt. Ne discipulis quidem propriis ante committunt quam suos fecerint. Habent artificium quo prius persuadeant quam edoceant.:
[968]1 * Si hominem non perfectum fecit deus, unusquisque autem per industriam propriam perfectionem sibi virtutis adsciscit: non ne videtur plus sibi homo adquirere, quam ei deus contulit?: [969]1 * Si homo tantummodo Christus, cur homo in orationibus mediator invocatur, cum invocatio hominis ad præstandam salutem inefficax judicetur.: [970]1 * Sicut ex lege ac prophetis et a domino nostro Jesu Christo didicimus.: [971]1 * Simplices quique, ne dixerim imprudentes et idiotæ, quæ major semper credentium pars est: [972]1 * Solius bonitatis: [973]1 * Speraverat Episcopatum Valentinus, quia et ingenio poterat et eloquio. Sed alium ex martyrii prærogativa loci potitum indignatus de ecclesia authenticæ regulæ abrupit: [974]1 * Spiritus salutaris: [975]1 * Subito Christus, subito et Johannes. Sic sunt omnia apud Marcionem, quæ suum et plenum habent ordinem apud creatorem.: [976]1 * Sæculum: [977]1 * Tranquilitas est et mansuetudinis segregare solummodo et partem ejus cum infidelibus ponere: [978]1 * Valentini robustissima secta: [979]1 * Valentiniani frequentissimum plane collegium inter hæreticos.:
[980]1 * Valentiniani nihil magis curant quam occultare, quod prædicant; si tamen prædicant qui occultant. Custodiæ officium conscientiæ officium est: [981]1 * a ligno: [982]1 * a priori: [983]1 * analogia fidei: [984]1 * articuli fide: [985]1 * articulus constitutivus ecclesia: [986]1 * ascensus in coelum: [987]1 [988]2 * assumpta: [989]1 * assumptio: [990]1 * assumptio naturæ novæ: [991]1 * carmen dicere Christo quasi deo: [992]1 * collegia tenuiorum: [993]1 * communem fidem adfirmant: [994]1 * consensus patrum et doctorum: [995]1 * corpus permixtum: [996]1 * coelum tertium: [997]1 * de conscientia religionis et disciplinæ unitate et spei foedere.:
[998]1 * de coelo: [999]1 * decepti deceptores: [1000]1 * dei filius: [1001]1 * delicta pristinæ cæcitatis: [1002]1 * demonstratio veræ carnis post resurrectionem: [1003]1 * descensus ad inferna: [1004]1 * descensus de coelo, ascensus in coelum; ascensus in coelum, descensus ad inferna: [1005]1 * deus: [1006]1 * deus Jesus Christus: [1007]1 * deus melior: [1008]1 * disciplina Evangelii: [1009]1 * distincte agere: [1010]1 * dominus ac deus: [1011]1 [1012]2 [1013]3 * dominus ac deus noster: [1014]1 [1015]2 * dominus regnavit: [1016]1 * ex errare per veritatem ad errorem: [1017]1 * ex necessitate salutis: [1018]1 * ex professo: [1019]1 [1020]2 * factiuncula, congregatio, conciliabulum, conventiculum: [1021]1 * fides implicita: [1022]1 * finis religionis: [1023]1 * frequentissimum collegium: [1024]1 * hic igitur a multis quasi deus glorificatus est, et docuit semetipsunr esse qui inter Judæos quidem quasi filius apparuerit, in Samaria autem quasi pater descenderit in reliquis vero gentibus quasi Spiritus Sanctus adventaverit.: [1025]1 * hæc fere summa est doctrina apud suos, in qua cerni potest nihil inesse, quod discrepet a scripturis vel ab ecclesia Catholica vel ab ecclesia Romana . . . . sed dissensio est de quibusdam abusibus:
[1026]1 * in abstracto: [1027]1 * invisibilia: [1028]1 * justitia civilis: [1029]1 * lex: [1030]1 * malignus: [1031]1 * malus: [1032]1 * materia subjacens: [1033]1 * minori ad majus: [1034]1 * mutatis mutandis: [1035]1 * ne quid nimis: [1036]1 * numen supremum: [1037]1 * passiones dei: [1038]1 * per semetipsum: [1039]1 * personalis substantia: [1040]1 * phantasma: [1041]1 * phantasma, assumptio naturæ humanæ, transmutatio, mixtura, duæ naturæ: [1042]1 * plerique nec Ecclesias habent: [1043]1 * primo per mantis impositionem in exorcismo, secundo per baptismi regenerationem: [1044]1 * profanum vulgus: [1045]1 [1046]2 * præsens et corporalis deus: [1047]1 * præsens numen: [1048]1 [1049]2 * præter nocturnas visiones per dies quoque impletur apud nos spiritu sancto puerorum innocens ætas, quæ in ecstasi videt: [1050]1 * quamquam sciam somnia ridicula et visiones ineptas quibusdam videri, sed utique illis, qui malunt contra sacerdotes credere quam sacerdoti, sed nihil mirum, quando de Joseph fratres sui dixerunt: ecce somniator ille: [1051]1 * qui est super omnia: [1052]1 * qui est super omnia et originem nescit: [1053]1 * qui vitam æternam habet: [1054]1 * quæ sine scelere prodi non poterit: [1055]1 * regula: [1056]1 [1057]2 [1058]3 [1059]4 [1060]5 * regula fide: [1061]1 [1062]2 [1063]3 * regula fidei: [1064]1 [1065]2 * regulæ: [1066]1 * regulæ fide: [1067]1 * renatus in æternum taurobolio: [1068]1 * restitutio in integrum: [1069]1 * revelatio: [1070]1 * salus legitima: [1071]1 * sanctiores feminæ: [1072]1 * sanguine dei: [1073]1 * secundum motum animi mei et spiritus Sancti: [1074]1 * secundum motum animi mei et spiritus sancti: [1075]1 * semper idem: [1076]1 * sub specie aternitatis et Christi: [1077]1 * summum bonum: [1078]1 * termini technici: [1079]1 * tertium genus: [1080]1 * theologia Christi: [1081]1 [1082]2 * theologia patristica: [1083]1 * umbra: [1084]1 * unum: [1085]1 [1086]2 * visibilia: [1087]1 * vita beata: [1088]1 * vulgus: [1089]1 * "Sufficit," said the Marcionites, "unicum opsus deo nostro, quod hominem liberavit summa et præcipua bonitate sua": [1090]1 __________________________________________________________________
Index of Pages of the Print Edition
[1091]iv [1092]v [1093]vi [1094]vii [1095]viii [1096]xix [1097]x
[1098]xi [1099]xii [1100]xiii [1101]xiv [1102]xv [1103]xvi
[1104]xvii [1105]xviii [1106]xix [1107]xx [1108]xxi [1109]xxii
[1110]xxiii [1111]1 [1112]2 [1113]3 [1114]4 [1115]5 [1116]6
[1117]7 [1118]8 [1119]9 [1120]10 [1121]11 [1122]12 [1123]13
[1124]14 [1125]15 [1126]16 [1127]17 [1128]18 [1129]19 [1130]20
[1131]21 [1132]22 [1133]23 [1134]24 [1135]25 [1136]26 [1137]27
[1138]28 [1139]29 [1140]30 [1141]31 [1142]32 [1143]33 [1144]34
[1145]35 [1146]36 [1147]37 [1148]38 [1149]39 [1150]40 [1151]41
[1152]42 [1153]43 [1154]44 [1155]45 [1156]46 [1157]47 [1158]48
[1159]49 [1160]50 [1161]51 [1162]52 [1163]53 [1164]54 [1165]55
[1166]56 [1167]57 [1168]58 [1169]59 [1170]60 [1171]61 [1172]62
[1173]63 [1174]64 [1175]65 [1176]66 [1177]67 [1178]68 [1179]69
[1180]70 [1181]71 [1182]72 [1183]73 [1184]74 [1185]75 [1186]76
[1187]77 [1188]78 [1189]79 [1190]80 [1191]81 [1192]82 [1193]83
[1194]84 [1195]85 [1196]86 [1197]87 [1198]88 [1199]89 [1200]90
[1201]91 [1202]92 [1203]93 [1204]94 [1205]95 [1206]96 [1207]97
[1208]98 [1209]99 [1210]100 [1211]101 [1212]102 [1213]103
[1214]104 [1215]105 [1216]106 [1217]107 [1218]108 [1219]109
[1220]110 [1221]111 [1222]112 [1223]113 [1224]114 [1225]115
[1226]116 [1227]117 [1228]118 [1229]119 [1230]120 [1231]121
[1232]122 [1233]123 [1234]124 [1235]125 [1236]126 [1237]127
[1238]128 [1239]129 [1240]130 [1241]131 [1242]132 [1243]133
[1244]134 [1245]135 [1246]136 [1247]137 [1248]138 [1249]139
[1250]140 [1251]141 [1252]142 [1253]143 [1254]144 [1255]145
[1256]146 [1257]147 [1258]148 [1259]149 [1260]150 [1261]151
[1262]152 [1263]153 [1264]154 [1265]155 [1266]156 [1267]157
[1268]158 [1269]159 [1270]160 [1271]161 [1272]162 [1273]163
[1274]164 [1275]165 [1276]166 [1277]167 [1278]168 [1279]169
[1280]170 [1281]171 [1282]172 [1283]173 [1284]174 [1285]175
[1286]176 [1287]177 [1288]178 [1289]179 [1290]180 [1291]181
[1292]182 [1293]183 [1294]184 [1295]185 [1296]186 [1297]187
[1298]188 [1299]189 [1300]190 [1301]191 [1302]192 [1303]193
[1304]194 [1305]195 [1306]196 [1307]197 [1308]198 [1309]199
[1310]200 [1311]201 [1312]202 [1313]203 [1314]204 [1315]205
[1316]206 [1317]207 [1318]208 [1319]209 [1320]210 [1321]211
[1322]212 [1323]213 [1324]214 [1325]215 [1326]216 [1327]217
[1328]218 [1329]219 [1330]220 [1331]221 [1332]222 [1333]223
[1334]224 [1335]225 [1336]226 [1337]227 [1338]228 [1339]229
[1340]230 [1341]231 [1342]232 [1343]233 [1344]234 [1345]235
[1346]236 [1347]237 [1348]238 [1349]239 [1350]240 [1351]241
[1352]242 [1353]243 [1354]244 [1355]245 [1356]246 [1357]247
[1358]248 [1359]249 [1360]250 [1361]251 [1362]252 [1363]253
[1364]254 [1365]255 [1366]256 [1367]257 [1368]258 [1369]259
[1370]260 [1371]261 [1372]262 [1373]263 [1374]264 [1375]265
[1376]266 [1377]270 [1378]268 [1379]269 [1380]270 [1381]271
[1382]272 [1383]273 [1384]274 [1385]275 [1386]276 [1387]277
[1388]278 [1389]279 [1390]280 [1391]281 [1392]282 [1393]283
[1394]284 [1395]285 [1396]286 [1397]287 [1398]288 [1399]289
[1400]290 [1401]291 [1402]292 [1403]293 [1404]294 [1405]295
[1406]296 [1407]297 [1408]298 [1409]299 [1410]300 [1411]301
[1412]302 [1413]303 [1414]304 [1415]305 [1416]306 [1417]307
[1418]308 [1419]309 [1420]310 [1421]311 [1422]312 [1423]313
[1424]314 [1425]315 [1426]316 [1427]317 [1428]318 [1429]319
[1430]320 [1431]321 [1432]322 [1433]323 [1434]324 [1435]325
[1436]326 [1437]327 [1438]328 [1439]329 [1440]330 [1441]331
[1442]332 [1443]333 [1444]334 [1445]335 [1446]336 [1447]337
[1448]338 [1449]339 [1450]340 [1451]341 [1452]342 [1453]343
[1454]344 [1455]345 [1456]346 [1457]347 [1458]348 [1459]349
[1460]350 [1461]351 [1462]352 [1463]353 [1464]354 [1465]355
[1466]356 [1467]357 [1468]358 [1469]359 [1470]360 [1471]361
[1472]362 __________________________________________________________________
This document is from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library at Calvin College, http://www.ccel.org, generated on demand from ThML source.
References
1. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gen&scrCh=1&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p28.28
2. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gen&scrCh=1&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p28.37
3. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Exod&scrCh=24&scrV=3#ii.ii.ii-p33.5
4. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Exod&scrCh=25&scrV=9#ii.iv.i-p8.1
5. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Exod&scrCh=25&scrV=40#ii.iv.i-p8.1
6. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Exod&scrCh=26&scrV=30#ii.iv.i-p8.2
7. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Exod&scrCh=27&scrV=8#ii.iv.i-p8.3
8. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Num&scrCh=8&scrV=4#ii.iv.i-p8.4
9. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Sam&scrCh=27&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p80.3
10. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Job&scrCh=1880&scrV=0#ii.iii.iv-p42.1
11. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=2&scrV=2#ii.ii.ii-p35.4
12. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=45&scrV=8#ii.iii.iii-p27.18
13. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=51&scrV=19#ii.iii.iii-p34.9
14. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=96&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p92.6
15. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=110&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p27.19
16. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=110&scrV=4#ii.iii.iii-p27.21
17. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=139&scrV=15#ii.iv.i-p11.1
18. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=7&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p78.4
19. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=7&scrV=14#ii.ii.ii-p74.4
20. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=7&scrV=14#ii.ii.ii-p74.6
21. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=9&scrV=1#ii.iii.vi-p9.20
22. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=29&scrV=13#ii.iii.iii-p27.47
23. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Isa&scrCh=53&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p58.5
24. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Dan&scrCh=7&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p32.6
25. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Dan&scrCh=7&scrV=13#ii.iv.i-p14.1
26. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Mic&scrCh=5&scrV=1#ii.iv.i-p14.2
27. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Mal&scrCh=1&scrV=11#ii.iii.iii-p36.4
28. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=1&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p74.3
29. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=5&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p24.1
30. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=9&scrV=13#ii.iii.iii-p27.46
31. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=1#ii.iii.vi-p15.6
32. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=18#ii.ii.ii-p54.16
33. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=18&scrV=17#ii.ii.ii-p54.17
34. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=19&scrV=17#ii.ii.ii-p32.8
35. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=22&scrV=31#ii.ii.ii-p35.6
36. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=24&scrV=36#ii.ii.ii-p32.11
37. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=28&scrV=19#ii.ii.ii-p54.3
38. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=28&scrV=19#ii.iii.iii-p7.8
39. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=1&scrV=15#ii.ii.ii-p32.3
40. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=5&scrV=18#ii.ii.ii-p34.2
41. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=8&scrV=29#ii.ii.ii-p61.6
42. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=10&scrV=45#ii.ii.ii-p33.4
43. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=12&scrV=32#ii.ii.ii-p35.2
44. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=13&scrV=32#ii.ii.ii-p32.10
45. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=4#ii.iii.iii-p7.55
46. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=1&scrV=34#ii.ii.ii-p74.5
47. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=8&scrV=45#ii.iii.iii-p9.26
48. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=10&scrV=27#ii.ii.ii-p35.3
49. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=12&scrV=41#ii.iii.v-p4.4
50. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=24&scrV=26#ii.ii.ii-p61.1
51. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=24&scrV=34#ii.ii.ii-p59.3
52. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=24&scrV=34#ii.iii.iii-p9.24
53. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=24&scrV=51#ii.iii.iii-p30.9
54. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p28.16
55. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=18#ii.iii.iii-p27.95
56. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=30#ii.iv.i-p26.18
57. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=31#ii.iv.i-p26.25
58. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=13#ii.iii.iii-p30.12
59. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=13#ii.iv.i-p26.14
60. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=31#ii.iv.i-p26.16
61. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=2#ii.ii.ii-p54.4
62. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=22#ii.iii.iii-p23.4
63. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=24#ii.iii.iii-p34.5
64. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=62#ii.iii.iii-p30.13
65. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=17#ii.iv.i-p26.11
66. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=21#ii.iv.i-p26.11
67. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=5&scrV=36#ii.iv.i-p26.27
68. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p33.6
69. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=27#ii.iii.iii-p36.26
70. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=33#ii.iv.i-p26.19
71. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=38#ii.iv.i-p26.19
72. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=41#ii.iv.i-p26.19
73. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=44#ii.iv.i-p26.9
74. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=50#ii.iv.i-p26.19
75. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=58#ii.iv.i-p26.19
76. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=62#ii.iv.i-p26.19
77. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=14#ii.iv.i-p26.20
78. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=38#ii.iv.i-p26.28
79. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=40#ii.iv.i-p26.30
80. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=8&scrV=58#ii.iv.i-p26.20
81. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=12&scrV=49#ii.iv.i-p26.32
82. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=15&scrV=15#ii.iv.i-p26.33
83. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p69.2
84. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=4#ii.iv.i-p26.12
85. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=24#ii.iv.i-p26.21
86. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=17#ii.iii.iii-p30.11
87. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=28#ii.iii.iii-p27.76
88. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=29#ii.ii.ii-p61.3
89. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=32&scrV=9#ii.iii.iii-p6.4
90. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=88&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p9.30
91. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=14#ii.iii.iii-p9.27
92. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=32#ii.iii.iii-p30.8
93. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=3&scrV=13#ii.iii.iii-p26.19
94. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=10&scrV=42#ii.iii.iii-p26.23
95. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=14&scrV=11#ii.ii.ii-p97.13
96. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=22#ii.iii.iii-p11.13
97. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=19&scrV=5#ii.ii.ii-p54.9
98. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=20&scrV=28#ii.iii.iii-p27.33
99. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=24&scrV=5#ii.iii.vi-p9.21
100. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=28&scrV=6#ii.ii.ii-p97.14
101. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=28&scrV=31#ii.ii.ii-p53.4
102. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=1&scrV=3#ii.iii.iii-p28.60
103. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=1&scrV=3#ii.iv.i-p20.1
104. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=2&scrV=4#ii.iii.ii-p8.4
105. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=3&scrV=1#ii.ii.iii-p2.1
106. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=4&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p9.9
107. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=4&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p9.35
108. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=5&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p74.12
109. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=6&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p40.5
110. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=6&scrV=1#ii.iii.v-p1.24
111. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=6&scrV=3#ii.iii.iii-p27.23
112. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=6&scrV=3#ii.iii.iii-p27.57
113. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=7&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p40.7
114. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=7&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p36.33
115. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=8&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p14.3
116. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=8&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p41.2
117. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=8&scrV=3#ii.iv.i-p22.3
118. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=8&scrV=29#ii.iv.i-p17.6
119. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=9&scrV=5#ii.iii.iii-p27.44
120. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=10&scrV=6#ii.iii.iii-p30.14
121. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=10&scrV=9#ii.ii.ii-p57.4
122. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=13&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p34.7
123. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=1&scrV=2#ii.ii.ii-p54.23
124. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=1&scrV=12#ii.iii.iii-p9.33
125. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=1&scrV=13#ii.ii.ii-p54.8
126. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=3&scrV=2#ii.ii.i-p17.1
127. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=4&scrV=15#ii.iii-p2.1
128. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=9&scrV=5#ii.iii.iii-p9.34
129. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=9&scrV=9#ii.ii.ii-p74.9
130. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=9&scrV=9#ii.iii.vi-p6.12
131. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=10&scrV=4#ii.ii.ii-p74.10
132. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=11&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p7.4
133. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=11&scrV=10#ii.ii.ii-p74.11
134. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=11&scrV=23#ii.ii.ii-p33.7
135. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=12&scrV=3#ii.ii.i-p17.2
136. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=12&scrV=3#ii.ii.ii-p57.2
137. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=13&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p41.1
138. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p58.7
139. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=1#ii.ii.ii-p60.3
140. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=3#ii.ii.ii-p58.1
141. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=5#ii.ii.ii-p59.2
142. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=5#ii.iii.iii-p9.23
143. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=5#ii.iii.iii-p9.29
144. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=45#ii.iv.i-p20.4
145. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=4&scrV=4#ii.iv.i-p17.2
146. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=5&scrV=17#ii.ii.iii-p5.3
147. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=8&scrV=9#ii.iv.i-p22.1
148. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=13&scrV=13#ii.ii.ii-p54.26
149. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=15#ii.ii.ii-p60.1
150. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=15#ii.ii.iii-p5.5
151. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=18#ii.iii.iii-p9.28
152. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=22#ii.ii.ii-p54.18
153. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p9.4
154. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=1#ii.iii.v-p7.5
155. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=8#ii.iii.iii-p9.32
156. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=11#ii.ii.ii-p65.4
157. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=3&scrV=16#ii.ii.ii-p74.7
158. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=3&scrV=19#ii.ii.ii-p74.7
159. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=4&scrV=22#ii.ii.ii-p74.8
160. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=4&scrV=26#ii.ii.ii-p77.2
161. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=5&scrV=22#ii.ii.ii-p9.5
162. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=1&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p27.26
163. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=1&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p27.55
164. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=1&scrV=4#ii.iv.i-p17.13
165. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=1&scrV=20#ii.iii.iii-p30.7
166. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=1&scrV=22#ii.iv.i-p17.15
167. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=2&scrV=6#ii.iv.i-p17.11
168. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=3&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p28.41
169. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=3&scrV=5#ii.iii.v-p4.11
170. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=4&scrV=9#ii.iii.iii-p30.15
171. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=7&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p27.59
172. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=7&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p28.29
173. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=7&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p28.73
174. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=7&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p28.92
175. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=7&scrV=2#ii.iii.iii-p28.86
176. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=9&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p7.9
177. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=9&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p34.15
178. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=10&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p29.8
179. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=14&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p2.15
180. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=14&scrV=2#ii.iii.iii-p29.12
181. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=17&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p28.43
182. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=18&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p28.15
183. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=19&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p40.3
184. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=20&scrV=0#ii.iii.iii-p36.27
185. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=20&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p28.87
186. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=20&scrV=2#ii.iii.iii-p28.89
187. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=1&scrV=18#ii.ii.i-p17.3
188. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=2&scrV=5#ii.iv.i-p22.5
189. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=2&scrV=6#ii.iv.i-p17.5
190. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=2&scrV=9#ii.ii.ii-p54.24
191. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=1&scrV=15#ii.iv.i-p17.3
192. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=1&scrV=18#ii.iv.i-p17.8
193. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=269&scrV=0#ii.iii.vi-p14.3
194. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=291&scrV=0#ii.iii.vi-p14.4
195. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=409&scrV=0#ii.iii.vi-p2.5
196. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=415&scrV=0#ii.ii.ii-p35.5
197. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=1155&scrV=0#ii.iii.vi-p11.4
198. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=2&scrV=5#ii.iii.iii-p28.83
199. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=3&scrV=16#ii.iii.iii-p7.5
200. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=3&scrV=16#ii.iii.iii-p11.11
201. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=3&scrV=16#ii.iii.iii-p30.18
202. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=6&scrV=20#ii.iii.v-p2.3
203. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p26.24
204. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Titus&scrCh=2&scrV=13#ii.iii.iii-p27.42
205. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Titus&scrCh=2&scrV=13#ii.iii.iii-p27.85
206. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=1&scrV=2#ii.iv.i-p17.4
207. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=10&scrV=25#ii.iii.iii-p2.2
208. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=12&scrV=22#ii.ii.ii-p77.4
209. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=13&scrV=16#ii.iii.iii-p34.30
210. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Jas&scrCh=1&scrV=25#ii.iii.iii-p12.27
211. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Jas&scrCh=1&scrV=27#ii.iii.iii-p34.22
212. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=1&scrV=18#ii.iv.i-p16.1
213. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=1&scrV=20#ii.iv.i-p29.1
214. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=3&scrV=19#ii.iii.iii-p30.16
215. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2Pet&scrCh=1&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p27.43
216. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2Pet&scrCh=1&scrV=1#ii.iii.iii-p27.87
217. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2Pet&scrCh=3&scrV=2#ii.iii.iii-p7.43
218. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=2John&scrCh=10&scrV=11#ii.iii.iv-p17.6
219. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=1&scrV=5#ii.iv.i-p17.10
220. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=3#ii.ii.iii-p5.4
221. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=9#ii.iii.iii-p3.4
222. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=9#ii.iii.iii-p20.4
223. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=3&scrV=9#ii.iii.iii-p20.5
224. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=3&scrV=9#ii.iii.vi-p9.8
225. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=3&scrV=14#ii.iv.i-p17.20
226. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=21&scrV=2#ii.ii.ii-p77.3
227. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3?scrBook=4Macc&scrCh=5&scrV=24#ii.ii.ii-p89.2
228. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.11
229. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.56
230. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.3
231. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.16
232. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.48
233. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.5
234. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.13
235. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.36
236. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.34
237. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.27
238. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.8
239. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p42.1
240. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.24
241. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p10.4
242. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p77.11
243. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.42
244. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.3
245. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.10
246. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p20.2
247. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.41
248. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p2.3
249. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.11
250. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p13.9
251. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.6
252. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii-p1.1
253. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p96.4
254. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.21
255. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p31.2
256. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p13.1
257. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.10
258. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p21.2
259. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.30
260. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p19.4
261. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.17
262. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.60
263. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.16
264. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p22.2
265. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.10
266. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.13
267. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p15.9
268. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p17.5
269. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p23.3
270. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.13
271. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p15.11
272. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.6
273. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p19.1
274. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p19.2
275. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p20.1
276. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p20.3
277. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p20.4
278. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p20.5
279. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p20.6
280. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p20.7
281. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p20.8
282. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p20.9
283. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p23.1
284. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p23.2
285. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p23.3
286. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p24.1
287. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.68
288. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.17
289. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p77.13
290. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.39
291. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p34.6
292. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.15
293. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p9.3
294. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p13.4
295. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p23.2
296. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.22
297. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p77.8
298. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p7.4
299. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.ii-p5.2
300. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.15
301. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-p23.1
302. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p11.6
303. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p58.4
304. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.29
305. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.20
306. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.1
307. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.36
308. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.4
309. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p22.6
310. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.104
311. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.81
312. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.84
313. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.82
314. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p13.6
315. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.17
316. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.20
317. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.20
318. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.16
319. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.34
320. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p32.6
321. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.11
322. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.11
323. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p10.2
324. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.75
325. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p32.3
326. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p20.15
327. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p96.5
328. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.23
329. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p3.3
330. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.27
331. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p34.7
332. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.22
333. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.7
334. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.11
335. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.4
336. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p36.3
337. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p30.17
338. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p2.1
339. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.5
340. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p58.6
341. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.22
342. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p8.6
343. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.6
344. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.9
345. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.28
346. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.12
347. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.14
348. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.57
349. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.5
350. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.24
351. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.25
352. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.12
353. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p15.2
354. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.32
355. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.29
356. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.17
357. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.14
358. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.52
359. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.17
360. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p12.4
361. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.24
362. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.23
363. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.34
364. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.30
365. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.85
366. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.35
367. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.56
368. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p15.1
369. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.14
370. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.5
371. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.5
372. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.9
373. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.47
374. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.6
375. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.19
376. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p3.1
377. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p3.3
378. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p8.1
379. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p4.3
380. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p4.4
381. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p19.7
382. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.24
383. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p9.4
384. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.6
385. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.1
386. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.7
387. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.10
388. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p31.6
389. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p31.5
390. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.13
391. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.ii-p5.1
392. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.10
393. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.28
394. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.16
395. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.5
396. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p70.1
397. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p8.4
398. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.1
399. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.7
400. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.2
401. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p55.2
402. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p55.1
403. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.14
404. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p68.1
405. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p57.3
406. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.58
407. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p20.3
408. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.63
409. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.10
410. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.14
411. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.2
412. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p15.7
413. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.14
414. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p8.3
415. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.1
416. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.70
417. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.17
418. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.25
419. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p2.2
420. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p3.4
421. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p33.8
422. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.13
423. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p31.4
424. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.31
425. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p40.6
426. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p30.20
427. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p10.3
428. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.15
429. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-p5.2
430. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p35.1
431. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p4.1
432. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.13
433. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-p5.1
434. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p6.5
435. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.7
436. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.9
437. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p16.2
438. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.24
439. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.7
440. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.88
441. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.25
442. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p78.9
443. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.52
444. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.39
445. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.38
446. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p40.9
447. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.49
448. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p13.1
449. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p13.3
450. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.4
451. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.37
452. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p15.3
453. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.23
454. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.14
455. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.21
456. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.18
457. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.9
458. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.24
459. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p34.3
460. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.28
461. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.16
462. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.6
463. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.69
464. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p61.7
465. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p8.1
466. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.12
467. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.14
468. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.6
469. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.11
470. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.7
471. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.10
472. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p7.5
473. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p32.9
474. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.19
475. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.17
476. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.1
477. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.11
478. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.15
479. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.32
480. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.30
481. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.3
482. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p4.5
483. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p87.2
484. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p34.4
485. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.10
486. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.17
487. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.13
488. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.15
489. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.3
490. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.42
491. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.44
492. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.9
493. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p87.6
494. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.39
495. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p10.12
496. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p77.12
497. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p63.1
498. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.11
499. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.12
500. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p3.11
501. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.18
502. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.8
503. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.18
504. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.54
505. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.97
506. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.5
507. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.20
508. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p7.1
509. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.21
510. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.29
511. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.89
512. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.95
513. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.30
514. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.31
515. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.30
516. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.10
517. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.38
518. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.82
519. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.28
520. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.37
521. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.40
522. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.93
523. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.94
524. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.15
525. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.90
526. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.18
527. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.64
528. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p78.2
529. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.15
530. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.20
531. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.31
532. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.45
533. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.51
534. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.53
535. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.66
536. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.67
537. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.73
538. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.91
539. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.29
540. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.74
541. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.61
542. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.17
543. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.34
544. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.6
545. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.12
546. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.53
547. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.4
548. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.62
549. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.9
550. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.19
551. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.23
552. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.7
553. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.9
554. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.21
555. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.23
556. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.25
557. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.18
558. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.76
559. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.5
560. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.66
561. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.26
562. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p19.3
563. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.47
564. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.4
565. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p3.2
566. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p19.4
567. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.5
568. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.6
569. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.15
570. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.49
571. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.9
572. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.13
573. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p32.4
574. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.18
575. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.4
576. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p6.6
577. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p6.7
578. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.16
579. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p6.4
580. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.7
581. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.17
582. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.22
583. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.34
584. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.5
585. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.3
586. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.32
587. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p40.2
588. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.61
589. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p40.1
590. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.17
591. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.33
592. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.11
593. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p31.1
594. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p6.1
595. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p20.6
596. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.14
597. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.49
598. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p25.4
599. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p53.5
600. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p15.3
601. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.5
602. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p19.6
603. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p87.8
604. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.11
605. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p13.2
606. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p87.7
607. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p19.3
608. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.16
609. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p17.3
610. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p2.5
611. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.11
612. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p17.1
613. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.19
614. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.8
615. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.70
616. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.5
617. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p22.10
618. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.20
619. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.1
620. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.18
621. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p3.9
622. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.48
623. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p87.9
624. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.16
625. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p6.2
626. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p87.3
627. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p24.2
628. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.35
629. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.45
630. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p40.11
631. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p98.1
632. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p4.2
633. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.10
634. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.33
635. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.15
636. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-p4.1
637. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.27
638. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.5
639. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.18
640. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p33.2
641. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p9.5
642. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.10
643. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p53.2
644. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.11
645. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p77.6
646. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.23
647. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p3.5
648. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.8
649. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.12
650. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.11
651. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p21.2
652. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p20.9
653. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p4.8
654. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.13
655. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.38
656. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.1
657. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.25
658. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p69.4
659. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p9.6
660. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.3
661. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p22.11
662. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.2
663. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p87.5
664. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p40.10
665. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.23
666. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.25
667. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p62.1
668. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p12.1
669. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.54
670. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p106.1
671. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.33
672. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.39
673. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.31
674. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.17
675. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.94
676. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.20
677. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.22
678. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.17
679. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p77.9
680. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.12
681. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p20.5
682. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.19
683. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p40.8
684. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.36
685. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.10
686. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.16
687. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.14
688. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.54
689. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.35
690. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p22.4
691. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.31
692. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.5
693. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.32
694. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.22
695. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.31
696. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p40.4
697. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.44
698. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.50
699. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.3
700. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.78
701. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.6
702. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.35
703. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.6
704. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.8
705. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.21
706. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.9
707. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.1
708. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p13.7
709. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p2.4
710. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p3.2
711. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.6
712. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p60.2
713. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p61.5
714. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p80.4
715. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.32
716. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.4
717. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p61.4
718. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p22.9
719. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.5
720. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p32.2
721. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.88
722. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.12
723. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.27
724. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p20.8
725. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.13
726. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p17.8
727. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.25
728. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.16
729. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p21.3
730. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.35
731. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p11.9
732. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.9
733. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.15
734. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.10
735. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.13
736. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p61.2
737. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.23
738. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.16
739. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.16
740. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.12
741. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.22
742. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.24
743. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.10
744. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.6
745. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.34
746. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.12
747. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.26
748. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.21
749. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.2
750. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.19
751. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p58.2
752. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.13
753. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p4.2
754. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.ii-p4.1
755. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p32.4
756. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.23
757. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.4
758. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p20.2
759. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p25.1
760. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p6.1
761. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.19
762. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p64.1
763. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.17
764. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p13.4
765. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p13.5
766. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.37
767. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p19.6
768. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.26
769. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.27
770. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p78.8
771. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.102
772. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.17
773. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p22.8
774. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p20.7
775. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p21.1
776. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.i-p4.2
777. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.6
778. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.15
779. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p34.5
780. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p3.7
781. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.6
782. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.14
783. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.50
784. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.20
785. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p12.2
786. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p12.3
787. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.14
788. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.1
789. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.15
790. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p26.1
791. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.33
792. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.22
793. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.2
794. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.24
795. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.19
796. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p18.1
797. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.1
798. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p29.2
799. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.55
800. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.31
801. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.86
802. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.1
803. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.3
804. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.27
805. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.19
806. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.20
807. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.8
808. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.16
809. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.7
810. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.9
811. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.21
812. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.3
813. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.13
814. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.40
815. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.36
816. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.10
817. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.50
818. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.67
819. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.74
820. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.25
821. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.36
822. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p25.1
823. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.23
824. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.9
825. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.72
826. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.38
827. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.16
828. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p36.4
829. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.4
830. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.14
831. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.20
832. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p17.12
833. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p6.3
834. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.7
835. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.21
836. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p4.6
837. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.7
838. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p2.1
839. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.84
840. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p4.1
841. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.80
842. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.83
843. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.26
844. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.51
845. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.29
846. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.53
847. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p6.1
848. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.20
849. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.19
850. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.36
851. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.31
852. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p14.3
853. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p26.22
854. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p15.5
855. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.78
856. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p21.1
857. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.20
858. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p32.5
859. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.i-p6.2
860. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p22.7
861. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.58
862. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.24
863. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p23.4
864. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.6
865. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.93
866. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.23
867. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.6
868. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p1.2
869. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p15.4
870. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.5
871. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p32.7
872. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.13
873. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.24
874. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p77.7
875. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.17
876. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p6.7
877. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.90
878. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.10
879. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.3
880. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.11
881. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p3.1
882. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p8.5
883. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p25.3
884. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.46
885. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.12
886. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.8
887. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p21.1
888. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.13
889. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.10
890. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.22
891. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.29
892. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.31
893. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.19
894. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.21
895. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p29.22
896. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.3
897. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p26.1
898. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.79
899. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p30.19
900. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.45
901. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.15
902. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p10.5
903. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p78.7
904. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.11
905. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p13.2
906. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p34.1
907. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.69
908. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.3
909. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.17
910. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p4.7
911. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.2
912. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.6
913. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p9.14
914. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.7
915. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.16
916. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.6
917. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.8
918. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.23
919. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.13
920. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.20
921. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p4.3
922. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p25.3
923. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.8
924. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p17.2
925. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.15
926. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p3.4
927. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.26
928. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.21
929. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.9
930. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.4
931. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p77.5
932. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p25.7
933. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p10.3
934. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.4
935. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.11
936. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.57
937. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p10.1
938. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.11
939. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.23
940. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p10.9
941. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.27
942. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p36.5
943. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p4.5
944. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p12.2
945. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p4.2
946. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p4.5
947. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.25
948. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.15
949. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p11.5
950. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.29
951. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-p8.5
952. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p30.6
953. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p7.2
954. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.98
955. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.8
956. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p10.7
957. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.96
958. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p9.19
959. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.30
960. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p15.2
961. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.24
962. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p3.6
963. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p92.7
964. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.25
965. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.105
966. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p2.4
967. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.20
968. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p17.11
969. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p31.3
970. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p25.12
971. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.46
972. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p4.4
973. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p3.2
974. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p37.22
975. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p5.2
976. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.10
977. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.21
978. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p4.6
979. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p16.4
980. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p16.3
981. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p17.10
982. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p92.4
983. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p65.1
984. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p3.1
985. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p6.3
986. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p3.1
987. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p30.1
988. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p30.4
989. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p25.2
990. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p30.2
991. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p3.2
992. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.9
993. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p99.1
994. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.4
995. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p23.7
996. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p6.1
997. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.16
998. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p2.9
999. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p30.3
1000. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-p26.1
1001. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.65
1002. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p12.18
1003. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.35
1004. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p30.5
1005. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p80.5
1006. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.5
1007. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.63
1008. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p3.3
1009. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p19.1
1010. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p34.1
1011. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.71
1012. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.75
1013. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.77
1014. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.2
1015. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.26
1016. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p92.5
1017. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p30.5
1018. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p54.5
1019. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p13.1
1020. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p7.11
1021. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.21
1022. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p6.6
1023. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p9.2
1024. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p37.3
1025. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.99
1026. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p6.4
1027. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p9.1
1028. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p2.12
1029. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p30.2
1030. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p105.2
1031. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p2.8
1032. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p2.9
1033. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.14
1034. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p19.5
1035. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p8.2
1036. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p100.4
1037. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.1
1038. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.38
1039. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p5.3
1040. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p28.106
1041. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p5.7
1042. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p4.1
1043. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p13.18
1044. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p35.27
1045. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p9.7
1046. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p35.3
1047. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.8
1048. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p96.2
1049. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p9.3
1050. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p12.4
1051. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p12.5
1052. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.41
1053. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.40
1054. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.39
1055. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p12.1
1056. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.5
1057. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.7
1058. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.8
1059. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.10
1060. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p36.2
1061. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.3
1062. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.12
1063. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p26.1
1064. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.1
1065. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p10.2
1066. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p24.6
1067. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.37
1068. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p96.3
1069. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p23.26
1070. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-p16.3
1071. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p105.1
1072. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p4.10
1073. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.39
1074. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p12.6
1075. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p11.16
1076. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p23.8
1077. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-p7.3
1078. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.13
1079. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p36.18
1080. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p3.14
1081. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.41
1082. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p27.79
1083. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-p24.3
1084. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p5.6
1085. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.28
1086. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-p7.29
1087. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p2.11
1088. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-p97.32
1089. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-p9.8
1090. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-p1.5
1091. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#i-Page_iv
1092. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii-Page_v
1093. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_vi
1094. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_vii
1095. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_viii
1096. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xix
1097. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_x
1098. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xi
1099. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xii
1100. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xiii
1101. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xiv
1102. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xv
1103. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xvi
1104. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xvii
1105. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xviii
1106. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xix_1
1107. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xx
1108. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xxi
1109. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.i-Page_xxii
1110. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii-Page_xxiii
1111. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii-Page_1
1112. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_2
1113. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_3
1114. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_4
1115. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_5
1116. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_6
1117. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_7
1118. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_8
1119. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_9
1120. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_10
1121. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_11
1122. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_12
1123. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_13
1124. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_14
1125. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_15
1126. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_16
1127. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_17
1128. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_18
1129. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_19
1130. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_20
1131. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_21
1132. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_22
1133. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_23
1134. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_24
1135. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_25
1136. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_26
1137. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_27
1138. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_28
1139. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_29
1140. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_30
1141. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_31
1142. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_32
1143. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_33
1144. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_34
1145. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_35
1146. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_36
1147. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_37
1148. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_38
1149. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_39
1150. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.i-Page_40
1151. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_41
1152. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_42
1153. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_43
1154. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_44
1155. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_45
1156. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_46
1157. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_47
1158. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_48
1159. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_49
1160. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_50
1161. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_51
1162. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_52
1163. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_53
1164. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_54
1165. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_55
1166. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_56
1167. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_57
1168. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_58
1169. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_59
1170. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_60
1171. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_61
1172. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_62
1173. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_63
1174. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_64
1175. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_65
1176. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_66
1177. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_67
1178. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_68
1179. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_69
1180. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_70
1181. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_71
1182. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_72
1183. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_73
1184. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_74
1185. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_75
1186. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_76
1187. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_77
1188. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_78
1189. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_79
1190. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_80
1191. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_81
1192. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_82
1193. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_83
1194. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_84
1195. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_85
1196. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_86
1197. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_87
1198. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_88
1199. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_89
1200. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_90
1201. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_91
1202. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_92
1203. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_93
1204. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_94
1205. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_95
1206. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_96
1207. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_97
1208. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_98
1209. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_99
1210. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_100
1211. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_101
1212. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_102
1213. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_103
1214. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_104
1215. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_105
1216. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_106
1217. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_107
1218. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_108
1219. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_109
1220. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_110
1221. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_111
1222. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_112
1223. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_113
1224. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_114
1225. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_115
1226. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_116
1227. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_117
1228. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_118
1229. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_119
1230. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_120
1231. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_121
1232. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_122
1233. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_123
1234. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_124
1235. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_125
1236. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_126
1237. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_127
1238. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_128
1239. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.ii-Page_129
1240. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-Page_130
1241. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-Page_131
1242. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-Page_132
1243. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-Page_133
1244. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-Page_134
1245. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-Page_135
1246. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.ii.iii-Page_136
1247. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii-Page_137
1248. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii-Page_138
1249. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii-Page_139
1250. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii-Page_140
1251. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii-Page_141
1252. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.i-Page_142
1253. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.i-Page_143
1254. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.i-Page_144
1255. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.i-Page_145
1256. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-Page_146
1257. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-Page_147
1258. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-Page_148
1259. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-Page_149
1260. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.ii-Page_150
1261. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_151
1262. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_152
1263. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_153
1264. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_154
1265. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_155
1266. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_156
1267. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_157
1268. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_158
1269. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_159
1270. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_160
1271. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_161
1272. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_162
1273. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_163
1274. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_164
1275. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_165
1276. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_166
1277. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_167
1278. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_168
1279. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_169
1280. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_170
1281. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_171
1282. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_172
1283. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_173
1284. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_174
1285. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_175
1286. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_176
1287. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_177
1288. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_178
1289. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_179
1290. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_180
1291. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_181
1292. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_182
1293. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_183
1294. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_184
1295. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_185
1296. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_186
1297. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_187
1298. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_188
1299. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_189
1300. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_190
1301. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_191
1302. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_192
1303. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_193
1304. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_194
1305. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_195
1306. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_196
1307. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_197
1308. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_198
1309. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_199
1310. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_200
1311. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_201
1312. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_202
1313. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_203
1314. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_204
1315. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_205
1316. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_206
1317. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_207
1318. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_208
1319. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_209
1320. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_210
1321. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_211
1322. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_212
1323. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_213
1324. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_214
1325. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_215
1326. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_216
1327. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_217
1328. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_218
1329. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_219
1330. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_220
1331. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_221
1332. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_222
1333. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iii-Page_223
1334. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_224
1335. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_225
1336. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_226
1337. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_227
1338. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_228
1339. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_229
1340. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_230
1341. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_231
1342. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_232
1343. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_233
1344. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_234
1345. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_235
1346. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_236
1347. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_237
1348. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_238
1349. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_239
1350. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_240
1351. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_241
1352. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_242
1353. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_243
1354. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_244
1355. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_245
1356. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_246
1357. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_247
1358. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_248
1359. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_249
1360. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_250
1361. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_251
1362. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_252
1363. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_253
1364. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_254
1365. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_255
1366. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_256
1367. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_257
1368. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_258
1369. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_259
1370. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_260
1371. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_261
1372. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_262
1373. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_263
1374. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_264
1375. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_265
1376. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_266
1377. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.iv-Page_270
1378. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_268
1379. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_269
1380. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_270
1381. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_271
1382. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_272
1383. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_273
1384. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_274
1385. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_275
1386. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_276
1387. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_277
1388. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_278
1389. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_279
1390. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_280
1391. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_281
1392. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_282
1393. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_283
1394. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_284
1395. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_285
1396. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_286
1397. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.v-Page_287
1398. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_288
1399. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_289
1400. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_290
1401. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_291
1402. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_292
1403. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_293
1404. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_294
1405. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_295
1406. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_296
1407. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_297
1408. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_298
1409. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_299
1410. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_300
1411. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_301
1412. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_302
1413. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_303
1414. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_304
1415. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_305
1416. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_306
1417. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_307
1418. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_308
1419. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_309
1420. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_310
1421. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_311
1422. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_312
1423. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_313
1424. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_314
1425. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_315
1426. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_316
1427. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_317
1428. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iii.vi-Page_318
1429. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_319
1430. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_320
1431. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_321
1432. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_322
1433. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_323
1434. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_324
1435. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_325
1436. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_326
1437. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_327
1438. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_328
1439. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_329
1440. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_330
1441. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_331
1442. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.i-Page_332
1443. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.ii-Page_333
1444. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.ii-Page_334
1445. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.ii-Page_335
1446. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_336
1447. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_337
1448. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_338
1449. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_339
1450. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_340
1451. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_341
1452. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_342
1453. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_343
1454. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_344
1455. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_345
1456. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_346
1457. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_347
1458. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_348
1459. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_349
1460. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_350
1461. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_351
1462. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_352
1463. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_353
1464. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_354
1465. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_355
1466. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_356
1467. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_357
1468. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_358
1469. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_359
1470. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_360
1471. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_361
1472. file:///ccel/h/harnack/dogma1/cache/dogma1.html3#ii.iv.iii-Page_362