1. Cicero, De Finibus, 5.12, 5.14 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arius Didymus • Didymus (Arius?)
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 271, 272; Tsouni (2019), Antiochus and Peripatetic Ethics, 181; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 271, 272
| sup>
5.12 \xa0"Their books on the subject of the Chief Good fall into two classes, one popular in style, and this class they used to call their exoteric works; the other more carefully wrought. The latter treatises they left in the form of note-books. This distinction occasionally gives them an appearance of inconsistency; but as a matter of fact in the main body of their doctrine there is no divergence, at all events among the philosophers I\xa0have mentioned, nor did they disagree among themselves. But on the chief object of inquiry, namely Happiness, and the one question which philosophy has to consider and to investigate, whether this lies entirely within the control of the Wise Man, or whether it can be impaired or destroyed by adversity, here there does appear sometimes to exist among them some divergence and uncertainty. This effect is chiefly produced by Theophrastus\'s book On\xa0Happiness, in which a very considerable amount of importance is assigned to fortune; though if this be correct, wisdom alone could not guarantee happiness. This theory seems to me to be, if I\xa0may so call it, too enervating and unmanly to be adequate to the force and dignity of virtue. Hence we had better keep to Aristotle and his son Nicomachus; the latter\'s elaborate volumes on Ethics are ascribed, it is true, to Aristotle, but I\xa0do not see why the son should not have been capable of emulating the father. Still, we may use Theophrastus on most points, so long as we maintain a larger element of strength and solidity in virtue than he did. <
5.14 \xa0"I\xa0pass over a\xa0number of writers, including the learned and entertaining Hieronymus. Indeed I\xa0know no reason for calling the latter a Peripatetic at all; for he defined the Chief Good as freedom from pain: and to hold a different view of the Chief Good is to hold a different system of philosophy altogether. Critolaus professed to imitate the ancients; and he does in fact come nearest to them in weight, and has a flowing style; all the same, even he is not true to the principles of his ancestors. Diodorus, his pupil, couples with Moral Worth freedom from pain. He too stands by himself; differing about the Chief Good he cannot correctly be called a Peripatetic. Our master Antiochus seems to me to adhere most scrupulously to the doctrine of the ancients, which according to his teaching was common to Aristotle and to Polemo. <'' None |
|
2. Cicero, On The Ends of Good And Evil, 5.12, 5.14 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arius Didymus • Didymus (Arius?)
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 271, 272; Tsouni (2019), Antiochus and Peripatetic Ethics, 181; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 271, 272
sup>
5.12 De summo autem bono, quia duo genera librorum sunt, unum populariter scriptum, quod e)cwteriko/n appellabant, alterum limatius, quod in commentariis reliquerunt, non semper idem dicere videntur, nec in summa tamen ipsa aut varietas est ulla apud hos quidem, quos nominavi, aut inter ipsos dissensio. sed cum beata vita quaeratur idque sit unum, quod philosophia philosophia dett. philosophiam spectare et sequi debeat, sitne ea tota sita in potestate sapientis an possit aut labefactari aut eripi rebus adversis, in eo non numquam variari inter eos inter eos variari R et dubitari videtur. quod maxime efficit Theophrasti de beata vita liber, in quo multum admodum fortunae datur. quod si ita se habeat, non possit beatam praestare vitam vitam praestare BE sapientia. Haec mihi videtur delicatior, delicatior videtur NV ut ita dicam, molliorque ratio, quam virtutis vis gravitasque postulat. quare teneamus Aristotelem et eius filium Nicomachum, cuius accurate scripti de moribus libri dicuntur illi quidem esse Aristoteli, sed non video, cur non potuerit patri similis esse filius. Theophrastum tamen adhibeamus ad pleraque, dum modo plus in virtute teneamus, quam ille tenuit, firmitatis et roboris. Simus igitur contenti his.
5.14 praetereo multos, in his doctum hominem et suavem, Hieronymum, quem iam cur Peripateticum appellem nescio. summum enim bonum exposuit vacuitatem doloris; qui autem de summo bono dissentit de tota philosophiae ratione dissentit. Critolaus imitari voluit antiquos, et quidem est gravitate proximus, et redundat oratio, ac tamen ne is is his R quidem in patriis institutis add. Brem. manet. Diodorus, eius auditor, adiungit ad honestatem vacuitatem doloris. hic hic his R quoque suus est de summoque bono dissentiens dici vere Peripateticus non potest. antiquorum autem sententiam Antiochus noster mihi videtur persequi diligentissime, quam eandem Aristoteli aristotilis R, N ( fort. corr. ex aristotili), V fuisse et Polemonis docet.'' None | sup>
5.12 \xa0"Their books on the subject of the Chief Good fall into two classes, one popular in style, and this class they used to call their exoteric works; the other more carefully wrought. The latter treatises they left in the form of note-books. This distinction occasionally gives them an appearance of inconsistency; but as a matter of fact in the main body of their doctrine there is no divergence, at all events among the philosophers I\xa0have mentioned, nor did they disagree among themselves. But on the chief object of inquiry, namely Happiness, and the one question which philosophy has to consider and to investigate, whether this lies entirely within the control of the Wise Man, or whether it can be impaired or destroyed by adversity, here there does appear sometimes to exist among them some divergence and uncertainty. This effect is chiefly produced by Theophrastus\'s book On\xa0Happiness, in which a very considerable amount of importance is assigned to fortune; though if this be correct, wisdom alone could not guarantee happiness. This theory seems to me to be, if I\xa0may so call it, too enervating and unmanly to be adequate to the force and dignity of virtue. Hence we had better keep to Aristotle and his son Nicomachus; the latter\'s elaborate volumes on Ethics are ascribed, it is true, to Aristotle, but I\xa0do not see why the son should not have been capable of emulating the father. Still, we may use Theophrastus on most points, so long as we maintain a larger element of strength and solidity in virtue than he did. <
5.14 \xa0"I\xa0pass over a\xa0number of writers, including the learned and entertaining Hieronymus. Indeed I\xa0know no reason for calling the latter a Peripatetic at all; for he defined the Chief Good as freedom from pain: and to hold a different view of the Chief Good is to hold a different system of philosophy altogether. Critolaus professed to imitate the ancients; and he does in fact come nearest to them in weight, and has a flowing style; all the same, even he is not true to the principles of his ancestors. Diodorus, his pupil, couples with Moral Worth freedom from pain. He too stands by himself; differing about the Chief Good he cannot correctly be called a Peripatetic. Our master Antiochus seems to me to adhere most scrupulously to the doctrine of the ancients, which according to his teaching was common to Aristotle and to Polemo. <'' None |
|
3. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arius Didymus
Found in books: Bryan (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 271, 272; Wardy and Warren (2018), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, 271, 272
|
4. New Testament, Acts, 2.36 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arianism, influences on Arius • Arius, Ananism
Found in books: Esler (2000), The Early Christian World, 989; Widdicombe (2000), The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius, 210
sup>
2.36 ἀσφαλῶς οὖν γινωσκέτω πᾶς οἶκος Ἰσραὴλ ὅτι καὶ κύριον αὐτὸν καὶ χριστὸν ἐποίησεν ὁ θεός, τοῦτον τὸν Ἰησοῦν ὃν ὑμεῖς ἐσταυρώσατε.'' None | sup>
2.36 "Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified."'' None |
|
5. New Testament, Hebrews, 1.4, 3.2 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arianism, influences on Arius • Arius, Ananism
Found in books: Esler (2000), The Early Christian World, 988; Widdicombe (2000), The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius, 210
sup>
1.4 τοσούτῳ κρείττων γενόμενος τῶν ἀγγέλων ὅσῳ διαφορώτερον παρʼ αὐτοὺς κεκληρονόμηκεν ὄνομα.
3.2 πιστὸνὄντα τῷ ποιήσαντι αὐτὸν ὡς καὶΜωυσῆς ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ οἴκῳ αὐτοῦ.'' None | sup>
1.4 having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have.
3.2 who was faithful to him who appointed him, as also was Moses in all his house. '' None |
|
6. New Testament, Philippians, 2.9-2.10 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arianism, influences on Arius • Arius, Ananism
Found in books: Esler (2000), The Early Christian World, 988; Widdicombe (2000), The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius, 210
sup>
2.9 διὸ καὶ ὁ θεὸς αὐτὸν ὑπερύψωσεν, καὶ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομα, 2.10 ἵνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦπᾶν γόνυ κάμψῃἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων,'' None | sup>
2.9 Therefore God also highly exalted him, and gave to him the name which is above every name; 2.10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, those on earth, and those under the earth, '' None |
|
7. New Testament, Romans, 11.36 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arius • Arius, Ananism
Found in books: Doble and Kloha (2014), Texts and Traditions: Essays in Honour of J. Keith Elliott, 281, 301; Widdicombe (2000), The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius, 211
sup>
11.36 ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ καὶ διʼ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν τὰ πάντα· αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν.'' None | sup>
11.36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things. To him be the glory for ever! Amen. '' None |
|
8. New Testament, John, 1.3-1.4, 10.30 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arianism, influences on Arius • Arius • Arius and Arian controversy • Arius and Arianism • Arius, Ananism
Found in books: Doble and Kloha (2014), Texts and Traditions: Essays in Honour of J. Keith Elliott, 281; Esler (2000), The Early Christian World, 989; Peppard (2011), The Son of God in the Roman World: Divine Sonship in its Social and Political Context, 165; Widdicombe (2000), The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius, 169
sup>
1.3 πάντα διʼ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν. 1.4 ὃ γέγονεν ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων·
10.30 ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν.'' None | sup>
1.3 All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made. 1.4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
10.30 I and the Father are one."'' None |
|
9. Pliny The Younger, Letters, 4.3 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arrius Antoninus
Found in books: Hanghan (2019), Lettered Christians: Christians, Letters, and Late Antique Oxyrhynchus, 177; Hitch (2017), Animal sacrifice in the ancient Greek world, 177
| sup>
4.3 To Arrius Antoninus. That you, like your ancestors of old, have been twice consul, that you have been proconsul of Asia with a record such as not more than one or two of your predecessors and successors have enjoyed - for your modesty is such that I do not like to say that no one has equalled you - that in purity of life, influence and age, you are the principal man of the State, - all these things inspire respect and give distinction, and yet I admire you even more in your retirement. For to season, as you do, all your strict uprightness with charm of manner equally striking, and to be such an agreeable companion as well as such a man of weight, that is no less difficult than it is desirable. Yet you succeed in so doing with wonderful sweetness both in your conversation and above all, when you set pen to paper. For when you talk, all the honey of Homer's old man eloquent * seems to flow from your tongue, and when you write, the bees seem to be busy pouring into every line their choicest essences and charging them with sweetness. That certainly was my impression when I recently read your Greek epigrams and iambics. ** What breadth of feeling they contain, what choice expressions, how graceful they are, how musical, how exact! I thought I was holding in my hands Callimachus or Herodas, or even a greater poet than these, if greater there be, yet neither of these two poets attempted or excelled in both these forms of verse. Is it possible for a Roman to write such Greek? I do not believe that even Athens has so pure an Attic touch. But why go on? I am jealous of the Greeks that you should have elected to write in their language, for it is easy to guess what choice work you could turn out in your mother-tongue, when you have produced such splendid results with an exotic language which has been transplanted into our midst. Farewell. 0 "" None |
|
10. Eusebius of Caesarea, Life of Constantine, 2.64-2.65, 2.69, 2.71 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arianism/Arians/Arius • Arius • Arius of Alexandria, dispute with Alexander • Constantine, Letter to Alexander and Arius
Found in books: Humfress (2007), Oppian's Halieutica: Charting a Didactic Epic, 225; Niccolai (2023), Christianity, Philosophy, and Roman Power: Constantine, Julian, and the Bishops on Exegesis and Empire. 122, 145; Tabbernee (2007), Fake Prophecy and Polluted Sacraments: Ecclesiastical and Imperial Reactions to Montanism, 309, 311
| sup>
2.64 Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Alexander and Arius. I call that God to witness, as well I may, who is the helper of my endeavors, and the Preserver of all men, that I had a twofold reason for undertaking that duty which I have now performed. 2.65 My design then was, first, to bring the diverse judgments formed by all nations respecting the Deity to a condition, as it were, of settled uniformity; and, secondly, to restore to health the system of the world, then suffering under the maligt power of a grievous distemper. Keeping these objects in view, I sought to accomplish the one by the secret eye of thought, while the other I tried to rectify by the power of military authority. For I was aware that, if I should succeed in establishing, according to my hopes, a common harmony of sentiment among all the servants of God, the general course of affairs would also experience a change correspondent to the pious desires of them all. ' "
2.69 I understand, then, that the origin of the present controversy is this. When you, Alexander, demanded of the presbyters what opinion they severally maintained respecting a certain passage in the Divine law, or rather, I should say, that you asked them something connected with an unprofitable question, then you, Arius, inconsiderately insisted on festhieltest). Bag. had gave utterance to, and with this Vales., 1709, and Str. correspond.}-- what ought never to have been conceived at all, or if conceived, should have been buried in profound silence. Hence it was that a dissension arose between you, fellowship was withdrawn, and the holy people, rent into diverse parties, no longer preserved the unity of the one body. Now, therefore, do ye both exhibit an equal degree of forbearance, and receive the advice which your fellow-servant righteously gives. What then is this advice? It was wrong in the first instance to propose such questions as these, or to reply to them when propounded. For those points of discussion which are enjoined by the authority of no law, but rather suggested by the contentious spirit which is fostered by misused leisure, even though they may be intended merely as an intellectual exercise, ought certainly to be confined to the region of our own thoughts, and not hastily produced in the popular assemblies, nor unadvisedly entrusted to the general ear. For how very few are there able either accurately to comprehend, or adequately to explain subjects so sublime and abstruse in their nature? Or, granting that one were fully competent for this, how many people will he convince? Or, who, again, in dealing with questions of such subtle nicety as these, can secure himself against a dangerous declension from the truth? It is incumbent therefore on us in these cases to be sparing of our words, lest, in case we ourselves are unable, through the feebleness of our natural faculties, to give a clear explanation of the subject before us, or, on the other hand, in case the slowness of our hearers' understandings disables them from arriving at an accurate apprehension of what we say, from one or other of these causes the people be reduced to the alternative either of blasphemy or schism. " "
2.71 For as long as you continue to contend about these small and very insignificant questions, it is not fitting that so large a portion of God's people should be under the direction of your judgment, since you are thus divided between yourselves. I believe it indeed to be not merely unbecoming, but positively evil, that such should be the case. But I will refresh your minds by a little illustration, as follows. You know that philosophers, though they all adhere to one system, are yet frequently at issue on certain points, and differ, perhaps, in their degree of knowledge: yet they are recalled to harmony of sentiment by the uniting power of their common doctrines. If this be true, is it not far more reasonable that you, who are the ministers of the Supreme God, should be of one mind respecting the profession of the same religion? But let us still more thoughtfully and with closer attention examine what I have said, and see whether it be right that, on the ground of some trifling and foolish verbal difference between ourselves, brethren should assume towards each other the attitude of enemies, and the august meeting of the Synod be rent by profane disunion, because of you who wrangle together on points so trivial and altogether unessential? This is vulgar, and rather characteristic of childish ignorance, than consistent with the wisdom of priests and men of sense. Let us withdraw ourselves with a good will from these temptations of the devil. Our great God and common Saviour of all has granted the same light to us all. Permit me, who am his servant, to bring my task to a successful issue, under the direction of his Providence, that I may be enabled, through my exhortations, and diligence, and earnest admonition, to recall his people to communion and fellowship. For since you have, as I said, but one faith, and one sentiment respecting our religion, and since the Divine commandment in all its parts enjoins on us all the duty of maintaining a spirit of concord, let not the circumstance which has led to a slight difference between you, since it does not affect the validity of the whole, cause any division or schism among you. And this I say without in any way desiring to force you to entire unity of judgment in regard to this truly idle question, whatever its real nature may be. For the dignity of your synod may be preserved, and the communion of your whole body maintained unbroken, however wide a difference may exist among you as to unimportant matters. For we are not all of us like-minded on every subject, nor is there such a thing as one disposition and judgment common to all alike. As far, then, as regards the Divine Providence, let there be one faith, and one understanding among you, one united judgment in reference to God. But as to your subtle disputations on questions of little or no significance, though you may be unable to harmonize in sentiment, such differences should be consigned to the secret custody of your own minds and thoughts. And now, let the preciousness of common affection, let faith in the truth, let the honor due to God and to the observance of his law continue immovably among you. Resume, then, your mutual feelings of friendship, love, and regard: restore to the people their wonted embracings; and do ye yourselves, having purified your souls, as it were, once more acknowledge one another. For it often happens that when a reconciliation is effected by the removal of the causes of enmity, friendship becomes even sweeter than it was before. "' None |
|
11. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arius • Arius, Ananism • Athanasius, on Arius Thalia • Christ, according to Arius • ingenerate (ἀγέννηιος), Arius • ἴδιος, Arius
Found in books: Esler (2000), The Early Christian World, 979, 982, 983; Goldhill (2022), The Christian Invention of Time: Temporality and the Literature of Late Antiquity, 347; Widdicombe (2000), The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius, 143, 184, 189, 190, 196
|
12. None, None, nan (5th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arrius Antoninus
Found in books: Hanghan (2019), Lettered Christians: Christians, Letters, and Late Antique Oxyrhynchus, 177; Hitch (2017), Animal sacrifice in the ancient Greek world, 177
|
13. None, None, nan (5th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Arianism/Arians/Arius • Arius
Found in books: Kahlos (2019), Religious Dissent in Late Antiquity, 350-450, 32; Tabbernee (2007), Fake Prophecy and Polluted Sacraments: Ecclesiastical and Imperial Reactions to Montanism, 314
|
14. None, None, nan
Tagged with subjects: • Arius Didymus • Arius Dydimus,
Found in books: Brouwer (2013), The Stoic Sage: The Early Stoics on Wisdom, Sagehood and Socrates, 37; Del Lucchese (2019), Monstrosity and Philosophy: Radical Otherness in Greek and Latin Culture, 211; Frede and Laks (2001), Traditions of Theology: Studies in Hellenistic Theology, its Background and Aftermath, 120
|
