62. But,
you will
say
, He was cut off by death as men are. Not
Christ
Himself; for it is impossible either that death should befall what is
divine, or that that should waste away and disappear in death which is
one
in its substance
, and not compounded, nor formed by bringing
together any parts. Who, then,
you ask
, was seen hanging
on the cross? Who dead? The human form,
3361
I reply
, which He had put
on,
3362
and which He
bore about with Him. It is a tale passing belief,
you say
,
and wrapt in dark obscurity; if you will, it is not dark, and is
established by a very close analogy.
3363
If the Sibyl, when she was
uttering and pouring forth her prophecies and oracular responses, was
filled, as you say, with Apollo’s power, had been cut down and
slain by impious robbers,
3364
would Apollo be said to have been
slain in her? If Bacis,
3365
if Helenus, Marcius,
3366
and other soothsayers, had been in
like manner robbed of life and light when raving as inspired, would any
one say that those who, speaking by their mouths, declared to inquirers
what should be done,
3367
had perished according to the
conditions of human life? The death of which you speak was
that
of the human body which He had assumed,
3368
not His own—of that which was
borne, not of the bearer; and not even this
death
would
He
3369
have stooped
to suffer, were it not that a matter of such importance was to be dealt
with, and the inscrutable plan of fate
3370
brought to light in hidden
mysteries.
3361
So the
ms.
, followed by Hildebrand and
Oehler, reads and punctuates
quis mortuus? homo
, for
which all edd. read
mortuus est?
“Who died?”
3362
Here, as in the whole discussion in the second book on the origin and
nature of the soul, the opinions expressed are Gnostic, Cerinthus
saying more precisely that Christ having descended from heaven in the
form of a dove, dwelt in the body of Jesus during His life, but removed
from it before the crucifixion.
3363
So the
ms.
by changing a single letter,
with LB. and others,
similitudine proxim-a
(
ms.
o
)
constitutum
;
while the first ed., Gelenius, Canterus, Ursinus, Orelli, and others,
read
-dini proxime
—“settled very closely to
analogy.”
3364
In
the original
latronibus
; here, as in the next chapter, used
loosely to denote lawless men.
3365
So emended by Mercerus for the
ms.
vatis.
3366
So read in the
ms.
—not
-tius
, as in LB. and Orelli.
3367
Lit., “the ways of things”—
vias rerum.
3368
The
ms.
reads unintelligibly
assumpti-o
which was, however, retained in both Roman edd.,
although Ursinus suggested the dropping of the
o
, which
has been done by all later edd.
3369
The
ms.
reads,
quam nec ipsam
perpeti succubuisset vis
—“would his might,” i.e.,
“would He with His great power have stooped.” Orelli
simply omits
vis
as Canterus, and seemingly the other later edd.
do.
3370
The
ms.
and 1st ed. read
sati-s
, which has clearly arisen from
f
being confounded
with the old form of
s.