Hello everyone, and Scholiast and bearded in particular!
Only three confusing sentences from Origen's Homilies on Luke are left. Here is the first one of these:
'Cuius rei notitiam ad liquidum Deus noverit, et si quis, licet raro, fuerit inventus, quem Christus instruxerit.'
And an attempt to understand it:
'Whose guilt [thing?] will be clearly seen by God, and if someone, although it occurs rarely, is found, he is enlightened by Christ.'
The context: it is a shame for an angel when a righteous person trusts him and commits a sin. Conversely, an angel is praised when the person entrusted to him is saved, as in accordance with the merits of the ones who they [angels] take care of, angels more clearly or less clearly, more often or less often, see the face of the Father. And then comes this sentence.
Is this interpretation close to the original sentence?
Thank you.
Only three confusing sentences from Origen's Homilies on Luke are left. Here is the first one of these:
'Cuius rei notitiam ad liquidum Deus noverit, et si quis, licet raro, fuerit inventus, quem Christus instruxerit.'
And an attempt to understand it:
'Whose guilt [thing?] will be clearly seen by God, and if someone, although it occurs rarely, is found, he is enlightened by Christ.'
The context: it is a shame for an angel when a righteous person trusts him and commits a sin. Conversely, an angel is praised when the person entrusted to him is saved, as in accordance with the merits of the ones who they [angels] take care of, angels more clearly or less clearly, more often or less often, see the face of the Father. And then comes this sentence.
Is this interpretation close to the original sentence?
Thank you.