5.
Various opinions have been entertained as to the position which Arnobius occupied with regard to the Bible. We cannot here enter into a discussion of these, and shall merely present a brief statement of facts.
It is evident that with regard to the Jews and the Old Testament Arnobius was in a state of perfect ignorance; for he confounds the Sadducees with the Pharisees, 1 makes no allusion to the history of the Israelites, and shows that he was not acquainted with their forms of sacrifice. 2
He was evidently well acquainted with the life of Christ and the history of the Church, and alludes at times to well-known Christian sayings; but how far in so doing he quotes the Gospels and Epistles, is not easily determined. Thus it has been supposed, and with some probability, that in referring to the miracles of Christ he must allude to the Gospels as recording them. But it must be observed that he ascribes to Christ a miracle of which the New Testament makes no mention,--of being understood by men of different nations, as though He spoke in several languages at the same moment. 3 So, too, his account 4 of the passion differs from that of the New Testament. On the other hand, we find that he speaks of Christ as having taught men "not to return evil for evil," 5 as "the way of salvation, the door of life, by whom alone there is access to the light," 6 and as having been seen by "countless numbers of men" after His resurrection. 7 Still further, he makes frequent references to accounts of Christ written by the apostles and handed down to their followers, 8 and asks why their writings should be burned. 9 In one place, 10 also, he asks, "Have the well-known words never rung in your ears, that the wisdom of man is foolishness with God?" where the reference seems to be very distinct; 11 but he nowhere says that he is quoting, or mentions any books.
This is, however, less remarkable when we take into account his mode of dealing with Clemens Alexandrinus and Cicero. The fourth, fifth, and sixth books are based on these two authors, and from Clement, in particular, whole sentences are taken unchanged. 12 Yet the only reference made to either is the very general allusion in the third and fourth books. 13
On the other hand, he quotes frequently and refers distinctly to many authors, and is especially careful to show that he has good authority for his statements, as will be seen by observing the number of books to which he refers on the mysteries and temples. If we bear this in mind, the principle which guided him seems to have been, that when he has occasion to quote an author once or twice, he does so by name, but that he takes it for granted that every one knows what are the great sources of information, and that it is therefore unnecessary to specify in each case what is the particular authority.
There are many interesting questions connected with his subject, but these we must for the present leave untouched.
Book iii. cap. 12, note. ↩
Cf. book vii., on sacrifices generally. [Proves nothing.] ↩
Book i. cap. 46, note. ↩
Book i. cap. 53, note. ↩
Book i. cap. 6. ↩
Book ii. cap. 65, note. ↩
Book i. cap. 46; cf. 1 Cor. xv. 6. ↩
i. 55, 56, 58, 59. ↩
iv. 36. ↩
ii. 6, note. ↩
Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 19. ↩
[Compare the Exhortation of Clement, vol. ii. p. 171, passim; and Tertullian, vol. iii. and passim.] ↩
Book iii. cap. 7, and book iv. cap. 13, note. ↩
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ab60e/ab60ea1b1c35d432df2d8e2df8e555a55a872aa0" alt="pattern"