Technische verwerking bevestigt geen inhoudelijke beoordeling of toestemming voor openbare publicatie.
Versie df7a394237de4c04db581f7785a13f48dc7ef5c52880ef8b55869186bc4684c7
{"author":null,"canonical_references":[],"database_sha256":"8cfbe7284c6936871d57c02dc6aa63ebbdfd4722422d539dd9f716e46e91112e","date_end":null,"date_start":null,"edition_year":null,"id":"sermonindex-ecf-5975","native_reference":{"book_number":10,"chapter_from":3,"chapter_to":3,"system":"MyBible module coordinates (mapping unverified)","verse_from":1,"verse_to":1},"public_import_allowed":false,"record_kind":"verse-keyed-module-record","review_required":["English edition and exact text","author/work attribution","dating","verse mapping and citation kind","reuse and attribution","split author quotations and deduplicate"],"review_status":"unreviewed","source_html":"<p><b>Ambrose of Milan</b>: In the statement 'the serpent was more cunning' you understand to whom reference is made. This is our Adversary, whose wisdom is of this world. Gratification of pleasure has been fittingly called wisdom, because it is called the wisdom of the flesh as in the statement, 'The wisdom of this flesh is hostile to God.' [ Romans 8:7 ] The seekers after pleasure are shrewd in their choice of means for its gratification. If you understand, therefore, gratification of pleasure to be, in fact, an act contrary to the divine command and hostile to our senses, this is in accord with what Paul states: 'I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind and making me prisoner in the law of sin. [ Romans 7:23 ] If you ascribe this to the Devil, what other cause of enmity is there except envy? As Solomon says: 'By the envy of the devil death came into the world.' [ Wisd. 2:24 ] The cause of envy was the happiness of man placed in Paradise, because the Devil could not brook the favors received by man. His envy was aroused because man, though formed in slime, was chosen to be an inhabitant of Paradise. The Devil began to reflect that man was an inferior creature, yet had hopes of an eternal life, whereas he, a creature of superior nature, had fallen and had become part of this mundane existence. This is the substance of his invidious reflection: 'Will this inferior acquire what I was unable to keep? Will he leave the earth and attain heaven, whereas I have fallen to earth thrust down from heaven? I have many ways and means by which to deceive man. He was made of slime, earth is his mother, and he is involved in things corruptible. Although of superior nature, his soul is nevertheless subject to temptation, since it exists in the prison house of the body-witness my own experience in being unable to avoid sin. This, therefore, is my first approach, namely, to deceive him while he is desirous of improving his condition. In this way an attempt will be made to arouse his ambition. The next approach is by way of the flesh, promising fulfillment of all his desires. Finally, how else can I appear to be wiser than all men if not by the exercise of cunning and fraud in my warfare of entrenchment against man?' Accordingly, he contrived not to attack Adam first. Rather, he aimed to circumvent Adam by means of the woman. He did not accost the man who had in his presence received the heavenly command. He accosted her who had learned of it from her husband and who had not received from God the command which was to be observed. There is no statement that God spoke to the woman. We know that he spoke to Adam. Hence we must conclude that the command was communicated through Adam to the woman.<br/>The nature of the temptation presented on this occasion is now clear. In addition to this, there are other occasions when many other kinds of temptations are in store for us. Some of these come from the Prince of this world, who has vomited into this world what might be called poisonous wisdom, so that men believe the false to be true and are emotionally carried away by mere appearance. The Enemy's attack is not always in the open. There are certain powers who put on the external form of what is desirable and gratifying so as to pour into our thoughts the poison of their iniquities. From this source come those sins which arise from indulgence in pleasures or from some infirmity of the mind. There are still other powers who may be said to wrestle with us, as the Apostle says: 'For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood but against the Principalities and Powers, against the worldrulers of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness on high.' [ Ephesians 6:12 ] They wish by this belligerency of theirs to break us and, so to speak, to force out the breath of life from our bodies. Wherefore, like a good athlete, Paul knew how to parry the blows of the opposing powers and even to strike them as they advanced to the attack. Hence he says: 'I strike with my fists, not as one beating the air.' [ 1 Corinthians 9:26 ] And so like a good athlete he merited the crown of victory. [ 2 Timothy 4:8 ] The temptations of the Devil, then, are manifold. For that reason he is believed to be a deadly, doubletongued serpent, doing the Devil's work by saying one thing with the tongue and by harboring other thoughts in his mind. There are other servants of the Devil who aim at us poisonous shafts of word and thought, such as are described by the Lord: 'You brood of vipers, how can you speak good things when you are evil?' [ Matthew 12:34 ]<br/><i>— On Paradise, 12.54-55</i></p><p><b>Ambrose of Milan</b>: The cause of envy was the happiness of man placed in paradise, because the devil could not brook the favors received by man. His envy was aroused because man, though formed in slime, was chosen to be an inhabitant of paradise. The devil began to reflect that man was an inferior creature yet had hopes of an eternal life, whereas he, a creature of superior nature, had fallen and had become part of this mundane existence.<br/><i>— On Paradise, 12.54</i></p><p><b>Ambrose of Milan</b>: But since all creatures are subject to passions, lust, with the stealth of a serpent, has crept over man's affections: well therefore has holy Moses represented lust under the similitude of a serpent; for it creeps upon its belly like a serpent, not walking on foot, nor raised up on legs, gliding along by the sinuous contortions, as it were, of its whole body. Its food, as that of the serpent, is earthly, for it knows not heavenly food, but feeds on carnal things, and changes itself into various kinds of desire, and bends to and fro in tortuous wreaths. It has poison in its fangs, whereby the belly of every luxurious man is ripped up, the glutton is slain, the licker up of dishes perishes.<br/><i>— Letter 45.10</i></p><p><b>Ambrose of Milan</b>: [The Devil] aimed to circumvent Adam by means of the woman. He did not accost the man who had in his presence received the heavenly command. He accosted her who had learned of it from her husband and who had not received from God the command which was to be observed. There is no statement that God spoke to the woman. We know that he spoke to Adam. Hence we must conclude that the command was communicated through Adam to the woman.<br/><i>— On Paradise, 12.54</i></p><p><b>Augustine of Hippo</b>: The serpent signifies the devil, who was certainly not simple. His cleverness is indicated by the fact that he is said to be wiser than all the beasts. The serpent was not said to be in paradise, though the serpent was among the beasts that God made. For paradise signifies the happy life, from which the serpent was absent, because it was already the devil. He had fallen from his beatitude because he did not stay in the truth. And we must not be confused as to how the serpent could speak to the woman, when she was in paradise and it was not. The serpent entered the paradise spiritually and not bodily, as the apostle suggests: \"You were living by the principles of this world, obeying the ruler who dominates the air, the spirit who is at work in those who rebel.\"<br/><i>— TWO BOOKS ON GENESIS AGAINST THE MANICHAEANS 2.14.20</i></p><p><b>Bede</b>: He then said to the woman: \"Did God really command you not to eat from any tree in the Garden?\" To which the woman replied: \"We may eat the fruit of the trees in the garden, but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God commanded us not to eat, nor to touch it, lest perhaps we die.\" \"Therefore, first the serpent asked and the woman answered this so that the transgression would be inexcusable, and it could not in any way be said that the woman had forgotten what God had commanded.\"<br/><i>— Commentary on Genesis (Hexaemeron)</i></p><p><b>Bede</b>: But the serpent was more cunning than all the animals of the earth that the Lord God had made. This serpent can be said to be more cunning than all the animals, not by its own irrational soul, but by an external spirit, that is, a diabolic one. For although the transgressing angels were cast down from the heavenly seats due to their perversions and pride, they are still in nature superior to all the animals of the earth due to their excellence of reason. Therefore, it is not surprising that the devil, filling the serpent by his own impulse and mixing his spirit with it, as the soothsayers of demons are often filled, made it the most cunning of all the animals of the earth. Or, as another version has it, the wisest of the beasts according to the irrational living soul. \"Therefore, if it is asked why God allowed man to be tempted, knowing that he would consent to the tempter; the true reason occurs, that man would not have been of great praise, if he could live well because no one would persuade him to live badly, since in nature he had the power to do, and in his power to will not to consent to the one persuading, with the help, however, of Him who resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. Nor is it to be thought that this tempter would have overthrown man unless there had been some pride in the soul of man to be suppressed, so that through the humiliation of sin, which he had falsely presumed about himself, he might learn truly: for it is said: Pride goes before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall (Prov. XVI, 18). Thus, however, some are moved by the temptation of the first man, as if God allowed it to happen, now they do not see the entire human race being continually vexed by the devil's snares; why did God allow this as well? Is it because virtue is tested and proven, and it is more glorious to have been tempted and not consented than not to have been able to be tempted? If it is asked why the devil was permitted to tempt especially through the serpent, this was already done for the sake of signifying, not that the devil wished to signify anything for our instruction, but because he could not approach to tempt unless permitted, nor could he do so except through what was permitted. Therefore, whatever that serpent may have signified, it must be attributed to that providence under which even the devil has his desire to harm but his ability is only what is given, whether for subverting and destroying vessels of wrath or for humbling or testing vessels of mercy. The serpent did not understand the sounds of words which were made to the woman from him: for it is not to be believed that his soul was transformed into a rational nature, since not even the men, whose nature is rational, when a demon speaks in them with that passion which is required by the exorcist, know what they say: how much less would that serpent understand the sounds of words which the devil made through him and from him in that manner, as would not a man free from diabolic passion understand if he heard him speaking?\"<br/><i>— Commentary on Genesis (Hexaemeron)</i></p><p><b>Cosmas Indicopleustes</b>: On the sixth day the demon who hates good, seeing man honoured and thought worthy to have great care bestowed on him, became envious, and formed a design to drag him down to ruin with himself. But when he was at a loss how to assail him, he happened to perceive the beasts running straightway to their food, while the object of his envy, looking around him at such of the trees as were pleasant to the eye, remained quite unmoved the while by the calls of appetite; whence he concluded he had received some command from God about them. Having then approached nearer in the form of the serpent, he sought to learn the nature of the command, and craftily says: What! hath God said ye shall not eat of every tree in the Garden? Then the woman who had just been brought into the world, and was far inferior to the other in quickness of intelligence, answered his enquiry. Then, pretending he had already known the command (which he had only that moment learned), he began to accuse God of giving grudgingly, and to entice man to eat of the fruit, advising him at the same time to transfer his allegiance to himself; and thus, forsooth, become as God, infecting him in this way with his own disease. The man was, in fact, persuaded in the afternoon, and was that same day cast out of the garden, just as his tempter had himself, as soon as he sinned, been cast out of Heaven. Then the man heard the sentence of death pronounced upon him: Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return<br/><i>— The Christian Topography, Book 2</i></p><p><b>Desert Fathers</b>: [Hyperichius] also said, 'The serpent whispered to Eve and cast her out of paradise. The man who whispers against his neighbour is like the serpent. He condemns the soul of whoever listens to him, and he does not save his own.'<br/><i>— The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks</i></p><p><b>Ephrem the Syrian</b>: The serpent could not<br/>enter paradise,<br/>for neither animal<br/>nor bird<br/>was permitted to approach<br/>the outer region of paradise,<br/>and Adam had to go out<br/>to meet them;<br/>so the serpent cunningly learned,<br/>through questioning Eve,<br/>the character of paradise,<br/>what it was and how it was ordered.<br/>When the accursed one learned<br/>how the glory of that inner tabernacle,<br/>as if in a sanctuary,<br/>was hidden from them,<br/>and that the Tree of Knowledge,<br/>clothed with an injunction,<br/>served as the veil<br/>for the sanctuary,<br/>he realized that its fruit<br/>was the key of justice<br/>that would open the eyes of the bold<br/>and cause them great remorse.<br/><i>— HYMNS ON PARADISE 3.4-5</i></p><p><b>Ephrem the Syrian</b>: Having spoken of their naked state--which, because it was adorned with a heavenly raiment, was not shameful--Scripture turns to write about the astuteness of the serpent, as follows: \"And the serpent was more astute than all the other wild animals that the Lord had made. \" [ Gen. 3:1a ] Now even though it was astute, it was only more astute than the dumb animals which are under the control of mankind: it had not yet, just by reason of its having surpassed the level of animals in its astuteness, been raised to the level of mankind. That irrational creature was only more astute than the cattle; that mindless serpent was only more crafty than other animals. For it is clear that the serpent did not have a human mind, seeing that it did not possess human wisdom; whereas Adam, who surpassed the serpent in the way he was fashioned, by having a soul and an intellect, by his glory and by his location, clearly also infinitely surpassed the serpent in astuteness. For Adam, who had been set in authority and control over animals, was wiser than all the animals, and he who gave names to them all was certainly more astute than them all. For just as Israel could not look upon the face of Moses, [Exod. 34:33-35] neither were the animals able to look upon the radiance of Adam and Eve: at the time when they received names from him they passed in front of Adam with their eyes down, since their eyes were incapable of taking in his glory. So even though the serpent was more astute than the other animals, compared to Adam and Eve, who had authority over animals, it was foolish.</p><p>Having spoken of the serpent's astuteness, it turns to describe how the deceitful one came to Eve, as follows: \"And the serpent said to the woman, 'Did God really tell you not to eat of any of the trees of Paradise?'\" [ Gen. 3:1b ] On the matter of the serpent's words: either Adam knew the serpent's own language, or Satan spoke through it; or the serpent asked the question mentally, and speech was granted it, or Satan asked God that speech should temporarily be granted to the serpent.</p><p><b>Ephrem the Syrian</b>: Although the serpent was cunning, it was only more cunning than the dumb animals that were governed by Adam. It is not true that because the serpent surpassed the level of animals in cleverness, it was immediately raised up to the level of human rationality. It was only more clever than those animals that lack reason and was only more crafty than the animals that had no mind. For it is clear that the serpent, which did not have the mind of man, did not possess the wisdom of mankind. Adam was also greater than the serpent by the way he was formed, by his soul, by his mind, by his glory and by his place. Therefore it is evident that in cunning also Adam was infinitely greater than the serpent.<br/><i>— COMMENTARY ON Genesis 2.15.1</i></p><p><b>Ephrem the Syrian</b>: As for the serpent's speech, either Adam understood the serpent's own mode of communication, or Satan spoke through it, or the serpent posed the question in his mind and speech was given to it, or Satan sought from God that speech be given to the serpent for a short time.<br/><i>— COMMENTARY ON Genesis 2.16.1</i></p><p><b>Jerome</b>: (Chapter 3, Verse 1) Now the serpent was more cunning than any other wild animal that was on the earth. In Hebrew, the word for cunning is Arom (אָרוּם), which Aquila and Theodotion translate as πανοῦργον. This means wicked and deceitful. Therefore, from this word, it is demonstrated more of a craftiness and cunningness than wisdom.<br/><i>— Hebrew Questions on Genesis</i></p><p><b>John Chrysostom</b>: We must, however, listen to the words that have been read. Blessed Moses, remember, told us that they were naked without feeling shame (for they did not know, after all, that they were naked, clad as they were in ineffable glory, which adorned them better than any clothing), and added: \"But the serpent was the wiliest of all the beasts upon the earth made by the Lord. The serpent said to the woman: 'Why is it that God said, Do not eat of any tree of the garden?'\" [ Genesis 3:1 ] See the evil spirit's envy and devious scheming. I mean, he saw that the human being, creature though he was, had the good fortune to enjoy the highest esteem and was scarcely inferior in any respect to the angels, as blessed David also says, \"You have placed him on a level scarcely lower than the angels,\" [ Psalms 8:5 ] and even this \"scarcely lower\" was the result of disobedience, the inspired author, after all, uttering this after the disobedience. The author of evil, accordingly, seeing an angel who happened to live on earth, was consumed by envy, since he himself had once enjoyed a place among the powers above but had been cast down from that pinnacle on account of his depravity of will and excess of wickedness. So he employed considerable skill so as to pluck the human being from God's favor, render him ungrateful and divest him of all those goods provided for him through God's loving kindness. What did he do? He discovered this wild animal, namely, the serpent, over coming the other animals by his cunning, as blessed Moses also testified in the words, \"The serpent was the wiliest of all the beasts on the earth made by the Lord God.\" He made use of this creature like some instrument and through it inveigled that naive and weaker vessel, namely, woman, into his deception by means of conversation. \"The serpent spoke to the woman,\" the text says.<br/>Consider from this, dearly beloved, how in the beginning none of the wild beasts then existing caused fear either to the man or to the woman; on the contrary, they recognized human direction and dominion, and as with tame animals these days, so then even the wild and savage ones proved to be subdued. But perhaps in this case some may raise a difficulty and seek to find out if the wild animals also shared the power of speech. Not so perish the thought; rather, people, following Scripture, need to consider the fact that the words came from the devil, who was spurred on to this deception by his own ill will, while this wild animal he employed like some convenient instrument so as to be able to set the bait for his own deception and thus upset the woman first of all, being ever more readily susceptible of deception, l and then, through her, man the firstformed. So he employs this irrational animal for laying his plan, and by means of it he speaks to the woman in these words: \"'Why is it that God said, Do not eat of any tree of the garden?'\" Notice in this case the extreme subtlety of his malice: in the unfolding of his planning and inquiry he introduces words not spoken by God and acts as though motivated by care for them. This, in fact, is what emerges from his words, \"'Why is it that God said, Do not eat of any tree in the garden?'\" As if the evil demon were saying, Why did he deprive you of such enjoyment? Why does he not allow you to share in the good things in the garden instead of granting you the pleasure of looking at them while not permitting you to possess them and thus gain the greater enjoyment? \"'Why is it that God said?'\" What, he is saying, is the reason for this? What is the advantage of life in the garden when you aren't free to enjoy the things in it, but are even worse off in incurring the more intense pain of having sight of things but missing out on the enjoyment that comes from possessing them?<br/>Do you see how he uses the words like a bait to inject his poison? The woman should have been able from his very approach to recognize the extremity of his frenzy and the fact that he deliberately said what was not the case and made a pretense of care for them as part of his plan so as to be in a position to find out the instructions they had been given by God, and thus lead them to their downfall. So he did not want her to be able to recognize his trickery immediately and thus abandon converse with him as being idle speech and so avoid being dragged down to a low level. After all, there was no need for her to get involved in conversation with him in the first place; she should rather have conversed with the person for whose sake she came into being, with whom she shared everything on equal terms, and whose helpmate she had been made.<br/>But acting impetuously how, I know not she got involved in conversation with the serpent and through him as through an instrument she took in the devil's deadly words; so it ensued that she learnt from the devil's speech the very opposite to the words' real sense, and that whereas the Creator gave one set of directions, the devil said the opposite to the Creator about avoiding him, quitting further conversation with him and having only abhorrence for the creature presuming to sharpen his tongue against the direction given to them. In fact, through her grave negligence she not only failed to turn away but revealed the whole secret of the Lord's direction, thus casting pearls before swine and fulfilling what was said by Christ: \"Don't cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under foot, turn on you and tear you to pieces,\" [ Matthew 7:6 ] as in fact happened in this case. I mean, she exposed to swine, to that evil beast, that is, to the demon acting through it, the divine pearls; he not only trampled on them and opposed them with his words, but turned and led into the rupture of disobedience not only her but also the firstformed man with her. Such is the evil of idly and casually exposing to all and sundry the divine mysteries. Let those give heed who idly and indiscriminately open their mouths to everyone.<br/>Christ, after all, is not talking about real swine in that verse, but referring to people who behave like swine and, in the manner of animals, roll in the mire of sin; he thus teaches us to recognize differences in people and look to the propriety of their life style whenever it is necessary to keep secret any of the divine sayings, lest we bring harm on them and ourselves. Such people, after all, not only reap no benefit from what is said, but of the times even drag down into the same depths of ruin as themselves those who incautiously offer them these beautiful pearls. Hence we must guard them scrupulously lest we suffer the same fate as those who are deceived in this regard. You see, if in the present instance also the woman had decided not to offer pearls to swine, she would not have fallen into the abyss herself nor dragged her husband down with her.</p><p><b>John Damascene</b>: Before the fall, all things were subject to the control of man, because God had made him ruler over all the things on the earth and in the water. And the serpent was on intimate terms with man, associating with him more than all the rest and conversing agreeably with him. For that reason it was through this relation that the devil, who is the source of evil, made that most evil suggestion to our first parents.<br/><i>— ORTHODOX FAITH 2.10</i></p><p><b>Severian of Gabala</b>: Do not think of the snake the way he currently is, since we now run from him and are disgusted by him. It was not this way in the beginning; the snake was a friend of humanity, even the closest of servants. What, then, made him our enemy? The declaration of God: \"You are more cursed than all the cattle, and more than every wild animal. I will place hostility between you and the woman.\" This hostility destroyed the friendship. I say \"friendship,\" but I do not mean an intellectual relationship, it was instead one which mindless creatures are capable of having. The snake used to serve humans in the same way the dog displaces friendship—not with word but by body language. Since it was a creature who held such great closeness to humanity, the snake was a convenient tool for the devil.…So the devil spoke through the snake in order to deceive Adam. Please hear me in love and do not receive my words carelessly. My question is not easy to take. Many scoff, \"how did the snake speak, with a human's voice or with a snake's hiss?\" or \"how did Eve understand him?\" Before the fall, Adam was filled with wisdom, discernment and prophecy.… When the devil noticed the snake's intelligence and Adam's high opinion of it (Adam considered the snake very wise), the devil spoke through the snake so that Adam would think that the snake, being intelligent, was able to imitate even human speech.<br/><i>— ON THE CREATION OF THE WORLD 6.2</i></p><p><b>Ambrosiaster</b>: IS IT TRUE THAT IT WAS A SERPENT WHO SPOKE WITH THE WOMAN, OR IS IT THE VERY ACT OF THE DEVIL WHO HAS SEDUCED HER, WHO HAS GIVEN HER THE NAME OF SERPENT? — If we keep to the historical narrative, it is true that the serpent was the finest of all the animals that the Lord God had formed on earth. Besides, it is against the serpent that God has pronounced his sentence. What, indeed, would it be astonishing that the devil was finer than the animals, the Apostle of whom said, \"Do you not know the depths of Satan (II Cor. 2:11)?” Another proof that it was a true serpent is that God said to him, \"You shall crawl on your stomach, and you shall eat of the earth all the days of your life (Gen. 3:14).” This punishment is in no way suited to the nature of Satan, since he is neither clothed in body nor subject to death. If we examine things more closely, we shall see that this sentence did not aggravate the condition of the serpent, and that it was condemned to remain in the state in which God had created it. He had been the instrument of Satan to subdue the man to whom God had subjected everything; for this reason God represses the pride of the serpent by that subjugation in which he had placed all creatures before man, because he had been a minister of pride to man. The man appeared to have submitted to the serpent, following the advice which he gave him of transgressing the law which he had imposed upon him. The Lord Himself testifies to the prudence of serpents, when he says, \"Be careful as serpents (Mt. 10:16).\" It is therefore well established that the serpent truly spoke with Eve; it now remains for us to examine whether he has been sufficiently sly and cunning enough to deceive her. For if it were finer than other animals, it could be no more than men, since no animal is endowed with reason, except man. It is impossible, therefore, that the serpent should be the author of these subtle insinuations; let him be in good health, but his finesse cannot go beyond his nature. It cannot deliberate, reflect, or take advice. It is therefore certain that it was the devil, who in the form of the serpent, sought to seduce the woman. By slipping into the form of the serpent, he used it as an instrument, so that the woman, who knew the serpent's fineness, could not suspect the cunning of the demon hiding in this form. Hence the sentence of condemnation carried out against the serpent, falls spiritually upon Satan, because the sentence must reach the true culprit. This sentence does not come from man, who by error or malice might condemn an innocent man; it comes from God who is infallible, and whose judgment reaches only the one guilty. Satan, though invisible, makes his snares outwardly; the sentence of condemnation is pronounced externally, but it falls spiritually upon him whose crime has necessitated the sentence. Indeed, Satan, that audacious and impure spirit, has been thrown from the sacred dwelling of heaven and condemned to crawl and groan on earth. I may be asked in what language the serpent spoke to the woman; I answer, in the language of the serpent. If there are any, who now understand the signification of the barking of dogs, the howling of wolves, the cries of elephants, the chanting of cocks, why the woman who then had no less intelligence, could not she have understood the snake's throat, when we know many who understand the signification of the song of the birds? It is certain that the devil used the tongue of the one in whose body he had entered, otherwise he could not have deceived the woman. He therefore spoke the language of the serpent which he had chosen as his instrument. [Questions On The Old And New Testaments, PL 35,<br/><i>— QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON GENESIS, Q. 4, 2 nd part (tr. J. Litteral, draft)</i></p>","source_html_sha256":"b7749a1be6fae05b8ef2997e0ab3e8c8cdf33fda0c5ecf5a713884fcbfb200e7","source_module":"ECF","source_row_id":5975,"source_url":"https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/ecf/","text_sha256":"aff40316ea771c7240352a62edeb75fbe0815555032a942b8188ba3ac1d0aa5b","translator":null,"work":null}references: [] | work_id: | origin: existing-private-derived-record | source: https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/ecf/