Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

Potamius was referring, not to doctrine that is capable of explanation about the Trinity (which is what he says was the subject of the previous letter to the "most beloved bishops"), but Potamius says explicitly that he was writing in this letter (LSB) about the figurative meanings that lye hidden beneath the literal texts of the Bible.

And that, Steven, constitutes (is) the entire context of this: "Letter about the Substance of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."
Last edited by Investigator on Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:39 am, edited 2 times in total.
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

Steven Avery wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 6:03 am Instead of playing 20 questions, why not simply place online any pages you think are relevant.

Instead of avoiding 20 questions :?: , why not simply read Potamius :sources: and any pages of Conti's commentary :goodmorning: you think are relevant and then answer the questions. :idea: It's not hard. Unless of course, you only have quotes divorced of context :? :( and don't have a clue :facepalm: :oops: :facepalm: what else Potamius says in and as the context :eek:

For instance, Potamius uses an illustration condemned by other orthodox writers as being tantamount to Tritheism!!! Potamius says the Trinity is made up of "three-fold twins" (or "identical triplets" :o :o :o you could say).

Potamius of Lisbon. "Letter on the Substance of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" in the life and works of Potamius of Lisbon edited and translated by Marco Conti, 1998, p. 150-151.

[Chapter 1, Page 151] "Quippe cum de trina profunditatis unitate, altum venerabilitatis signaculum adtigissem, accidit, ut ex triformibus geminis, et tantum de vocabulo trinitatis uno, cui fixerunt se margaritis..."

[Chapter 1, Page 150] "Therefore since in the matter of the three-fold unity of the mystery I had touched the profound evidence of its venerability, it happened that from three-fold twins, and simply derived from the single term 'Trinity', to which they attached themselves..."

Notice that Potamius speaks in mysterious terms of the oneness "the three-fold unity [or 'oneness'] of the mystery" as well.
Last edited by Investigator on Tue Feb 08, 2022 10:00 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

Potamius was not avoiding hidden, secret, or underlying figurative meanings - he was using them!

Potamius found in the underlying figurative meaning of the Latin version of John's literal text: "and these three are one" something he could use as a reference to the "three-fold oneness of the mystery" of the substance of the Trinity.
Last edited by Investigator on Mon Feb 28, 2022 5:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

Potamius explicitly says ("omnium interpretabile dogma collegit" Chap. 2, LSB) he had covered everything he could manage to "gather together on all the doctrines that are capable of being explained" in "a previous treatise concerning the Trinity" ("superiori tractatu Trinitatis" Chap. 2, LSB).

Potamius contrasted "the doctrines that are capable of being explained" ("interpretabile dogma" Chap. 2, LSB) from a previous tract, with the content and style of the current letter (that is the: "Letter concerning the Substance of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit") which consists of "the secret" and "most hidden meanings" (Chap. 1, LSB) of the Scriptures!

“Epistula de Substantia Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti.” Tranlsated into English from “Potamio De Lisboa,” in Philokalia, Volume 15, by José António Gonçalves e Isidro P. Lamelas, 2011.

[Chapter 1:1-13]: "I have the habit, brothers, as you say and I do not ignore it, yes, I have the habit of penetrating the secrets of the Law, searching the bowels of the dogma, going into the veins of the viscera and probing the most hidden meanings of the parables. But in the midst of these things, lost the agility of movements, with which I moved quickly with oscillating speed and the flicker of the mind through the lands of prophecy and oracles that divine thoughts, looking for the meaning of "substance" and clarifying its nature, I bumped into the limitations of language and the goal of my rambling, around which I was walking."

Put simply the previous letter was on "explainable doctrines" of Scripture, this one (LSB) on "the secret" and "the most hidden meanings" of Scripture.

Including "the secret" and "most hidden meaning" of 1 John 5:8 (note 8) "and these three are one".
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

Steven Avery wrote: Mon Jan 24, 2022 5:03 am
Investigator wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 7:44 am
Steven Avery wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:15 am This would be random mind-reading of no import.

You've been doing this for decades, what's stopping you now?
Nonsense.
Why would Potamius quote Matthew 18:16 "Every verbal statement is to be established upon the basis of two and three witnesses" in favor over or instead of quoting the first part of 1 John 5:7 "because there are three in heaven who bear witness"??? :confusedsmiley: :confusedsmiley: :confusedsmiley:
Last edited by Investigator on Mon Feb 28, 2022 12:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

Latin text of the Epistula de Substantia Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti edited by A. C. Vega in Opuscula Omnia Potamii Episcopi Olisiponensis, Escurial 1934 pp. 37-54

[Marco Conti, 1998, Page 151, Chapter 2:1-15]
“Igitur, quia superiori tractatu Trinitatis excussimus lumen, corusca sideris claritas rutilavit, Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum in suo sibi themate voluminum omnium interpretabile dogma collegit, superest ut indivisae Trinitatis imperium augustam refulgentis nominis substantiam praedicemus. Age ergo, adiuvante deo, cuius hoc nomen est; de conexu quid sit substantia, dilectissimi, propalemus, antistites. Prius est igitur ut ipsam substantiam legis de auctoritate doceam; ut consequenter et vim substantiae, per quam lex aeterna floruit, de figuris subiacentibus demonstremus. Ait propheta: “Non audierunt vocem substantiae, a volatilibus caeli et usque ad pecora expaverunt et vociferabantur, et dabo Iherusalem in transmigrationem.” [Hier. 9:10]. Ecce vocalis substantiae locus de Trinitate dicitur; quid ergo facient qui substantiae verba tulerunt?”

“Therefore, because from our previous examination in the treatise [Or: “tractate”] on the Trinity we were able to elicit forth such light, (oh you flashing star [Or: "constellation"]), which illuminated clearly all doctrine that is capable of explanation which we gathered together into all the books [Or: “the volumes”] by their own theme, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The only thing left over is that I may attempt to make known the substance in a way which is worthy of the splendid name of the supreme authority [Lit., "of the supreme Empire"] of the undivided Trinity. So let us get on with it then, by the help of God, whose name this is, that we may make known what connection might exist with respects to the substance - oh most beloved bishops. The first thing then, that we might teach is the substance itself by the authority of the law, (through which the eternal law has flourished), and as a logical consequence of this, that we may try to prove to you the power of the substance from the figurative meanings that lay hidden beneath [Or: “from the figures that lye hidden underneath” Or: “from the underlying figurative meanings”]. Yes as the prophet says: “They have not heard of the word [Or: “the sound of”] 'substance' from the fleeing birds of heaven, and the cattle which have become terrified, and they are crying out all the time with a loud voice, and I will give Jerusalem over into captivity.” [Jeremiah 9:10 VL [from LXX 9:9(C)-10(A)]] Behold! It is capable of speaking of [Possibly: “capable of prophesying about”] the “substance” in this place concerning the Trinity; but what will they do, then, those who have removed the words about the “substance”?” - (Chapter 2:1-15; “Letter concerning the Substance of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”)

The very next sentence (words that immediately follow the end of this paragraph above) in which Potamius says he was demonstrating his point "from the figurative meanings that lye hidden beneath" (contrasted to the "doctrine that is capable of explanation" from the previous treatise) is the location of the first of Steven Avery and co's three isolated snippets containing the last part of 1 John 5:8 (note verse 8) in which Potamius demonstrates the "the secret ... most hidden meaning" (Chapter 1, LSB) and "figurative meanings that lay hidden underneath" (Chapter 2, LSB) of 1 John 5:8 (note verse 8).

Please note Steven, this text has now been put in it's proper context for the reader (which you and your collaborators divorced it from)!

May the reader of Steven Avery Spencer's comments about Potamius, now be aware of this statement above by Potamius and how it affects Potamius' use of 1 John 5:8 (note 8) in the next sentence, and the entire remaining letter context.

Because Potamius is actually stating, contrary to Steven's claims, "the underlying figurative meaning" of the last part of 1 John 5:8 (note 8).
Last edited by Investigator on Mon Apr 11, 2022 9:31 am, edited 30 times in total.
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

I can see why Steven, you and TWOGG lads left out the immediate context of Potamius' words: "that we may try to prove to you the power of the substance from the figurative meanings that lye hidden beneath"!

How inconvenient for you, for Potamius to talk about "hidden" "figurative meanings" right before his first quotation of 1 John 5:8 (note 8)!
Last edited by Investigator on Mon Mar 07, 2022 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

A doxology of praise directed specifically to Mary with the Trinity at this date, also opens the possibility that the manuscript tradition of Potamius' works have been interfered with by Catholic copyists.
Investigator
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:37 am

Re: Potamius of Lisbon references the heavenly witnesses in writing to Athanasius

Post by Investigator »

But is there any precedent of the final clause (the C-part) of 1 John 5:8 (Comma-less text) being used in the context of Peter and the "three tents" at the Transfiguration being applied in a allegorical context that Potamius and other's could have drawn on?

Yes, there is!

And (ironically) I express my indebtedness to S. A. Spencer, and TWOGG for this particular reference, because this one went under my radar, and I was unaware of it's existence.

Below is a passage from Origen of Alexandria which sets, and is at least one example of a precedent that Potamius of Lisbon could have drawn on for his figurative (or τὰ μυστικὰ "the mystical") interpretation for the numbers (ἓν) "one" and (τρεῖς) from 1 John 5:8(C-part, Comma-less Text) in relation to the Transfiguration account at Mark 9:4 (VL + Vul, 9:5 GNT) (See the full Gospel parallel accounts found in Matthew 17:1-13; Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-36;).

ORIGEN (c. 185-254)
On Matthew, Bk. 12:36-43
The Transfiguration
Relation of Moses and Elijah to Jesus. The Injunction of Silence.

"Fragmenta ex commentariis in evangelium Matthaei"
Ed. E. Klostermann, E. Benz,
Origenes Werke, vol. 12
Ser Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller
41.1 (Leipzig, Teubner, 1941):3-5.


12.43 Μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα γέγραπται, ὅτι <ἀκούσαντες> τῆς φωνῆς <ἐκ> τῆς νεφέλης τῆς μαρτυρούσης τῷ υἱῷ οἱ τρεῖς ἀπόστολοι, μὴ φέροντες τὴν τῆς φωνῆς δόξαν καὶ τὴν ἐπ' αὐτῆς δύναμιν, ἱκέτευσαν πεσόντες <ἐπὶ πρόσωπον> τὸν θεόν· <σφόδρα> γὰρ <ἐφοβήθησαν> τὸ παράδοξον τοῦ θεάματος καὶ τῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ θεάματος λελεγμένων. πρόσχες δέ, εἰ δύνασαι καὶ ταῦτα εἰπεῖν περὶ τῶν κατὰ τὸν τόπον ὅτι, νοήσαντες οἱ μαθηταὶ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ κεχρηματικέναι Μωσεῖ καὶ αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν εἰρηκότα· "οὐ γὰρ ὄψεται ἄνθρωπος τὸ πρόσωπόν μου καὶ ζήσεται", καὶ <ἰδόντες γενόμενον <τὸ πρόσωπον> τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ <ὡς ὁ ἥλιος> καὶ> τὴν περὶ αὐτοῦ μαρτυρίαν τοῦ θεοῦ προσλαβόντες, ὡς μὴ φέροντες τὰς τοῦ λόγου αὐγὰς ἐταπεινώθησαν "ὑπὸ τὴν κραταιὰν χεῖρα τοῦ θεοῦ". ἀλλὰ μετὰ τὴν ἁφὴν τοῦ λόγου <τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἐπάραντες εἶδον Ἰησοῦν μόνον,> καὶ <οὐδένα> ἄλλον. ἓν γὰρ οἶμαι γέγονε Μωσῆς ὁ νόμος καὶ Ἠλίας ἡ προφητεία Ἰησοῦ τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, καὶ οὐχ ὥσπερ ἦσαν πρότερον τρεῖς, οὕτω μεμενήκασιν, ἀλλὰ γεγόνασιν οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν. ταῦτα δέ μοι νόει ὡς πρὸς τὰ μυστικὰ πράγματα. πρὸς γὰρ τὸ ψιλὸν τοῦ γράμματος βούλημα <Μωσῆς καὶ Ἠλίας> "ὀφθέντες ἐν δόξῃ" καὶ <συλλαλήσαντες> τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἀπεληλύθασιν, ὅθεν ἐληλύθεισαν, τάχα τῶν λόγων μεταδώσοντες, ὧν ἐλάλησε μετ' αὐτῶν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, τοῖς ὅσον οὐδέπω <εὐεργετηθεῖσιν ὑπ' αὐτοῦ>, εὐεργετη- θησομένοις ὑπ' αὐτοῦ κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν τοῦ πάθους, ὅτε ἔμελλε "πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων", ἀνοιχθέντων αὐτῶν τῶν μνημείων, ἀπιέναι "εἰς τὴν" ἀληθῶς "ἁγίαν πόλιν", τὴν μὴ κλαιομένην ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ Ἱερουσαλήμ, καὶ ἐκεῖ ἐμφανίζεσθαι "πολλοῖς". Μετὰ δὲ τὴν ἐν τῷ ὄρει οἰκονομίαν <καταβαινόντων ἐκ τοῦ ὄρους> τῶν μαθητῶν, ἵνα ἐλθόντες "πρὸς τὸν ὄχλον" ὑπηρετήσωσι τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ περὶ τῆς ἐκείνων σωτηρίας, <ἐνετείλατο ὁ Ἰησοῦς> τοῖς μαθηταῖς <λέγων· μηδενὶ εἴπητε τὸ ὅραμα ἕως οὗ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῇ.> τὸ δὲ <μηδενὶ εἴπητε τὸ ὅραμα> παραπλήσιον τῷ ἐν τοῖς ἀνωτέρω ἐξετασθέντι, ὅτε "διεστείλατο τοῖς μαθηταῖς ἵνα μηδενὶ εἴπωσιν, ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός". διὸ τὰ εἰς ἐκεῖνον εἰρημένα τὸν τόπον δύναται ἡμῖν εἶναι χρήσιμα καὶ πρὸς τὸ προκείμενον, ἐπεὶ καὶ κατὰ ταῦτα βούλεται ὁ Ἰησοῦς μὴ λεχθῆναι τὰ τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ πρὸ τῆς μετὰ τὸ πάθος δόξης αὐτοῦ· ἐβλάβησαν γὰρ ἂν οἱ ἀκούοντες, καὶ μάλιστα ὄχλοι, τὸν οὕτω δεδοξασμένον ὁρῶντες σταυρούμενον. διόπερ ἐπεὶ συγγενὲς ἦν τῇ μεταμορφώσει αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ ὀφθέντι αὐτοῦ προσώπῳ <ὡς ὁ ἥλιος> τὸ δοξασθῆναι αὐτὸν τῇ ἀναστάσει, διὰ τοῦτο βούλεται τότε ταῦτα ὑπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων λαληθῆναι, ἡνίκα <ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῇ.>

Fragm from Book II preserved in Philokalia, 6. Engl. ANF 10; tr. J. Patrick, (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1990) 413-512 [TLG 2042.31]

12.43. "But after these things it is written that, when they heard the voice from the cloud bearing testimony to the Son, the three Apostles, not being able to bear the glory of the voice and power resting upon it, “fell on their face,” (Matt 17:6) and besought God; for they were sore afraid at the supernatural sight, and the things which were spoken from the sight. But consider if you can also say this with reference to the details in the passage, that the disciples, having understood that the Son of God had been holding conference with Moses, and that it was He who said, “A man shall not see My face and live,” (Exod 30:20) and taking further the testimony of God about Him, as not being able to endure the radiance of the Word, humbled themselves under the mighty hand of God; (1 Pet 5:6) but, after the touch of the Word, lifting up their eyes they saw Jesus only and no other. (1 Pet 5:6) Moses, the law, and Elijah, the prophet, became one only with the Gospel of Jesus; and not, as they were formerly three, did they so abide, but the three became one, But consider these things with me in relation to mystical matters; for in regard to the bare meaning of the letter, Moses and Elijah, having appeared in glory and talked with Jesus, went away to the place from which they had come, perhaps to communicate the words which Jesus spake with them, to those who were to be benefited by Him, almost immediately, namely, at the time of the passion, when many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep, their tombs being opened, were to go to the city which is truly holy—not the Jerusalem which Jesus wept over—and there appear unto many. (Matt 27:52, 53) But after the dispensation in the mountain, when the disciples were coming down from the mountain in order that, when they had come to the multitude, they might serve the Son of God concerning the salvation of the people, Jesus commanded the disciples saying, “Tell the vision to no man until the Son of man rise from the dead.” (Matt 17:9) But that saying, “Tell the vision to no man,” is like that which was investigated in the passage above, when “He enjoined the disciples to tell no man that He was the Christ.” (Matt 16:20) Wherefore the things that were said at that passage may be useful to us also for the passage before us; since Jesus wishes also, in accordance with these, that the things of His glory should not be spoken of, before His glory after the passion; for those who heard, and in particular the multitudes, would have been injured when they saw Him crucified, who had been so glorified. Wherefore since His being glorified in the resurrection was akin to His transfiguration, and to the vision of His face as the sun, on this account He wishes that these things should then be spoken of by the Apostles, when He rose from the dead."

This Webpage was created for a workshop held at Saint Andrew's Abbey, Valyermo, California in 1990
http://ldysinger.stjohnsem.edu/@texts/0 ... transf.htm

[NOTE]: John Patrick, in his 1896 translation, or the editors of the ANF series, do not give any reference to 1st John 5:8(C-Part/Clause) or 1st John 5:7, for that matter. This is highly irregular. Surely the translator noticed the familiar Greek text? Was this a deliberate omission of a Scripture reference?


There are variations in the printed texts, so I've provided alternative translations that go with each.

Please take note, I can find absolutely no reference or evidence in any of the sources I've checked thus far, that any manuscript variations exist for the quotation of 1st John 5:8(C-part, Comma-less Text).

There exists some variants for some words in the near context (see below), but in all honesty (as of today 06/04/22) I personally cannot find any for 1st John 5:8(C-part) part of the text.

Here's Klostermann's text below.

Origen of Alexandria
(circa. 185-254 C.E.)
“Commentary On Matthew,”
Book 2, Section 45,
(commenting on Matthew 17:8)


ἓν γὰρ οἶμαι γέγονε Μωσῆς ὁ νόμος καὶ Ἠλίας ὁ προφήτης Ἰησοῦ τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, καὶ οὐχ ὥσπερ ἦσαν πρότερον τρεῖς οὕτω μεμενήκασιν, ἀλλὰ γεγόνασιν οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν. [1 John 5:8(C) GNT] ταῦτα δέ μοι νόει ὡς πρὸς τὰ μυστικὰ πράγματα. πρὸς γὰρ τὸ ψιλὸν τοῦ γράμματος βούλημα Μωσῆς καὶ Ἠλίας «ὀφ θέντες ἐν δόξῃ» καὶ συλλαλήσαν τες τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἀπεληλύθασιν, ὅθεν ἐληλύθεισαν, τάχα τῶν λόγων μετα [Cf., (TWOGG) “The Witness of God is Greater,” Mike Ferrando Page 45] δώσοντες, ὧν ἐλάλησε μετ' αὐτῶν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, τοῖς ὅσον οὐδέπω <εὐερ γετηθεῖσιν ὑπ' αὐτοῦ>, εὐεργετη θησομένοις ὑπ' αὐτοῦ κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν τοῦ πάθους, ὅτε ἔμελλε «πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων», ἀνοιχθέντων αὐτῶν τῶν μνημείων, ἀπιέναι «εἰς τὴν» ἀληθῶς «ἁγίαν πόλιν», τὴν μὴ κλαιομένην ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ Ἱερουσαλήμ, καὶ ἐκεῖ ἐμφανίζεσθαι «πολλοῖς».

My Translation

“For I suppose that the law of Moses and the prophecy of Elijah has become one with the Gospel of Jesus, and so these did not remain as three, as they had been formerly, but instead they became [Or: “they have been made into” “they have become”], 'these three agree as one,' [Or: “these three agree as to the one thing” “these three agree to the one thing”] [1 John 5:8(C) GNT].” But you will need to think these things out [as you follow along] with me, as to there relation to mystical matters. For in regards to the plain [Lit., “naked/bare” Or: “simple”] meaning of the text...”

Origenes Werke, Vol. XII. “Commentarius in Matthaeum III,1.” E. Klostermann & E. Benz, 1941.
https://digilib.bbaw.de/digitallibrary/ ... /GCS_41_1/

Page 157, Matthew 17:8
https://www.wbc.poznan.pl/dlibra/public ... 17/content

https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/die ... le-online/


Here's the Migne/LaRue text.


Origen of Alexandria
(circa. 185-254 C.E.)
“Commentary On Matthew,”
Book 2, Section 45,
(commenting on Matthew 17:8)

CAROL. VINCENT. DELARUE, 1834.
Page 202, "Origenis Commentariorum,"
Migne, PG, Vol., 13, Col. 1083-1084, Sections A-C.


ἓν γὰρ μόνον γέγονε Μωσῆς ὁ νόμος καὶ Ἠλίας ἡ προφητεία{5} Ἰησοῦ τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, καὶ οὐχ ὥσπερ ἦσαν πρότερον τρεῖς, οὕτω μεμενήκασιν, ἀλλὰ γεγόνασιν οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν. [1 John 5:8(C) GNT] ταῦτα δέ μοι νόει ὡς πρὸς τὰ μυστικὰ πράγματα. πρὸς γὰρ τὸ ψιλὸν τοῦ γράμματος βούλημα Μωσῆς καὶ Ἠλίας «ὀφ θέντες ἐν δόξῃ» καὶ συλλαλήσαν τες τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἀπεληλύθασιν, ὅθεν ἐληλύθεισαν, τάχα τῶν λόγων μετα [Cf. (TWOGG) "The Witness of God is Greater," By Mike Ferrando, 2021, Page 45] δώσοντες, ὧν ἐλάλησε μετ' αὐτῶν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, τοῖς ὅσον οὐδέπω <εὐερ γετηθεῖσιν ὑπ' αὐτοῦ>, εὐεργετη θησομένοις ὑπ' αὐτοῦ κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν τοῦ πάθους, ὅτε ἔμελλε «πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων», ἀνοιχθέντων αὐτῶν τῶν μνημείων, ἀπιέναι «εἰς τὴν» ἀληθῶς «ἁγίαν πόλιν», τὴν μὴ κλαιομένην ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ Ἱερουσαλήμ, καὶ ἐκεῖ ἐμφανίζεσθαι «πολλοῖς».
[FOOTNOTE 5, Book 12.43]: Codd. Anglicanus, Vaticanus et Tarinianus (recte): ὴ προφητεία. Editio Huetli: οί προφηταί (non προφηται. R.

“For he has become one alone as the Law of Moses and Elijah the prophet with the Gospel of Jesus [Or: “and the prophecies of Elijah, with the Gospel of Jesus,” “and Elijah's prophecy about Jesus, with the Gospel”], and so, these three did not remain as they had been formerly, but instead they have become 'these three agree as one.' [Or: “these three agree as to the one thing” “these three agree to the one thing”] [1 John 5:8(C) GNT] But you will need to think these things out [as you follow along] with me, as to there relation to mystical matters. For in regards to the plain [Lit., “naked/bare” Or: “simple”] meaning of the text...”

NOTE: Migne does not list 1st John 5:8(C-Part) or 1st John 5:7, or any reference to the Comma at all, in the Scripture references at the bottom of Columns 1083-1084. Knowing Migne, and his track record with the Comma in his other references and texts, this is probably (most probably IMO) a deliberate omission.

https://archive.org/details/operaomniaq ... ew=theater


Here we see an unmistakable contrast between the text's relation to mystical matters, (i.e. interpretation/meaning), and the literal meaning of the text.

Origen's commentaries were held in high regard by Greek and Latin writers alike during the centuries before the Origenist controversies, and were also subject to a great deal of retro-editing (tampering) to be more supportive of the Orthodoxy of the later times than they really were.

Hilary of Poitiers evidently drew on Origen's commentary.

THE FATHERS OF THE CHURCH
ST. HILARY OF POITIERS
"COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW"
Translated by D. H. Williams, 2012
[Page 186, On Matthew, Chapter 17.2]


“After six days, Peter, James, and John were taken apart from the others and brought to the top of a mountain.{8} As they were looking on, the Lord was transfigured and resplendent in all the brilliance of his garments.{9} In this manner there is preserved and underlying principle,{10} a number, and an example.{11} It was after six days that the Lord was shown in his glory by his clothing ; that is, the honor of the heavenly Kingdom is prefigured in the unfolding of six thousand years.{12} By the three disciples who were taken apart is shown the future election of the people who were to come from a threefold origin : Shem, Ham, and Japheth.{13} That Moses and Elijah, out of the entire company of saints, were standing by,{14} shows Christ in his Kingdom standing among the Law and the prophets, with whom he will judge Israel, in whose testimonies he was foretold. So too, the reason that Moses was visibly standing by was to teach that the glory of the resurrection was designated for human bodies. As the Lord became brighter than snow or the sun,{15} he was conspicuous with a splendor that exceeds even our view of the heavenly lights. But to Peter, who offered to make there three tabernacles, he did not respond at all; for it was not yet the time that the Lord should be found in his glory.”

FOOTNOTES:
8. Mt 17.1.
9. Mt 17.2.
10. ratio.
11. ratio (a plan), numerus (numerology), and exemplum (lesson to be learned).
12. This is the number of the world's duration according to tradition reflected in Cyprian, Exhort. ad Mart, praef. 2; Lactantius, Inst. 7.14. See Sur Matt. 11.63. n.6.
13. Supra, 8.4.
14. Mt 17.3.
15. Mt 17.2.

There is no Comma Johanneum quotation or reference in Origen's Commentary in English, in the Printed Greek texts, or in the Manuscripts for his "Commentary On The Gospel According to Matthew".

Nor is there any genuine Comma Johanneum quotation or reference in Potamius of Lisbon's works, who simply read his own eisegesis (de figuris subiacentibus demonstremus "that we may try to prove to you the power of the substance from the underlying figurative meanings") into the Comma-less text of 1st John 5:8(C-Part), and in all probability drew on, and/or at least was aware of the precedent Origen set in his use of 1st John 5:8(C-Part, Comma-less Text).

Links below for manuscript images for all three (ironically) of Origen's Comma-less Greek quotations of 1st John 5:8(C-Part).

Origen of Alexandria (circa. 185-254 C.E.)
“Commentary on the Gospel of John,” Book 6, Chapter 26, (commenting on John 1:26)

ἀνέγραψεν τὰ τρία εἰς ἓν γινόμενα
Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München Cod.graec. 191 [or Codex Monacensis] (circa. 13th century A.D./C.E.)
Folio 169r Digital viewer: [343/620] [Image 00343]
http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/000 ... &seite=343

Origen of Alexandria (circa. 185-254 C.E.)
“Commentary On Matthew,” Book 12, Section 43, (commenting on Matthew 17:8)

ἀλλὰ γεγόνασιν οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν
Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München Cod.graec. 191 [or Codex Monacensis] (circa. 13th century A.D./C.E.)
Folio 37v Digital viewer: [78/620] [Image 0078]
https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/v ... page=78,79

Psuedo-Origen of Alexandria (circa. 185-254 C.E.)
(σχόλια Ώριγένουϛ) “Scholia Origenous,” or “Selecta in Psalmos,” or “Origen's Marginal Annotations,” [Catena] Psalm 122:2 LXX (Eng. 123:2)

οἱ γὰρ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν
Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Cod. Theol. gr. 8 (circa. 11th century A.D./C.E.)
Folio 236v Digital viewer: [482/567]
http://digital.onb.ac.at/RepViewer/view ... iew=SINGLE

Final note, it also appears (as of today 06/04/22) in both manuscripts of Origen's Commentary on Matthew itself, and in the manuscripts of the Catena with this commentary in the margins, none appear to have a Comma-inclusive text. I'll qualify that by honestly saying that I haven't as yet checked all available manuscripts to the Catena, but plan to research these in the near future. But from looking at the various printed texts (that I can reasonably access right now) they show no variation in the Catena texts for the words ἀλλὰ γεγόνασιν οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν.

So the point is, did anyone use the Comma-less 1st John 5:8(C-part/clause) Greek text with a figurative meaning (in Origen's case, figurative meanings plural, because he explored several figurative and spiritual meanings in the context) before Potamius?

That Potamius (and other's) could draw on?

In the context of the Transformation account with Peter and the "three tents"?

The answer is yes! A resounding yes!

So this is just one (out of many) lines of evidence that go directly, and devastatingly against Avery INC's erroneous claims about both Potamius and Origen, and the Psuedo-Origen Catena.

So then, with this solid empirical evidence we can now explore the REAL implications and historical connections that this REAL evidence presents.
Post Reply