{"slug":"khazarzar-theodorus-fragmenta-in-epistulam-ad-hebraeos","id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-theodorus-fragmenta-in-epistulam-ad-hebraeos","title":"Fragmenta in epistulam ad Hebraeos","title_source":"Fragmenta in epistulam ad Hebraeos","author":"Theodorus","genre":"letter","date":"","tradition":"greek","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-15T07:25:26Z","cost_usd":0.00907},"source":{"registry_id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-theodorus-fragmenta-in-epistulam-ad-hebraeos","work_id":"khazarzar-theodorus-fragmenta-in-epistulam-ad-hebraeos","edition":"khazarzar","language":"","license":"Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer","url":"http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Theodorus_PG%2086a/Fragmenta%20in%20epistulam%20ad%20Hebraeos.pdf"},"stats":{"passages":17,"english_words":4557,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":18231,"commentary_units":99,"commentary_kinds":8,"derived_notes":0,"ambiguities":23,"work_notes":5,"external_links":4,"timeline":6},"summary":{"work":"khazarzar-theodorus-fragmenta-in-epistulam-ad-hebraeos","abstract":"Theodorus of Mopsuestia's commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews survives only in fragmentary form, preserved in catenae and later florilegia. Theodorus (ca. 350–428) wrote this work late in his career, likely in the late 4th or early 5th century. The fragments argue that Hebrews was addressed to committed Christians, not unbelievers, and that Paul was the author, with his name omitted due to strategic apostolic labor divisions. Theodorus uses the epistle's closing verses (13:22-23) to support his claims about audience and authorship. The complete text was lost after the Second Council of Constantinople (553) condemned Theodorus's exegesis. The surviving fragments are too sparse and disconnected to reconstruct the original argument or structure, and some attributions may be uncertain.","historical_context":"Theodorus of Mopsuestia was a leading Antiochene exegete active in the late 4th and early 5th centuries, primarily in Cilicia (modern-day Turkey). His commentary on Hebrews was composed in Greek, likely in the late 390s or early 400s, as part of his mature exegetical output. The work reflects the Antiochene school's emphasis on literal and historical interpretation, contrasting with Alexandrian allegory. Theodorus's views on Hebrews, including his defense of Pauline authorship, were later condemned at the Second Council of Constantinople (553) as part of the Three Chapters controversy, leading to the systematic destruction of his works. The fragments survive only through citations in later Greek catenae (chain commentaries) and florilegia, often excerpted without full context. The transmission is thus indirect and selective, with some fragments possibly misattributed. No continuous manuscript of the commentary exists, and the original structure remains unknown.","significance":"The fragments provide rare insight into Antiochene exegesis of Hebrews, particularly Theodorus's arguments for Pauline authorship and his understanding of the epistle's audience. They also illustrate the impact of posthumous condemnation on textual survival, as the work was deliberately suppressed. The fragments are a key source for studying the reception of Hebrews in the early church and the history of biblical interpretation.","timeline":[{"date":"ca. 350","event":"Birth of Theodorus of Mopsuestia."},{"date":"Late 4th–early 5th c.","event":"Theodorus writes his commentary on Hebrews."},{"date":"428","event":"Death of Theodorus."},{"date":"553","event":"Second Council of Constantinople condemns Theodorus's works, leading to loss of the complete commentary."},{"date":"6th–10th c.","event":"Fragments preserved in Greek catenae and florilegia."},{"date":"Modern","event":"Fragments collected and edited from catenae sources."}],"relations":[{"work":"Epistle to the Hebrews","relation":"Subject of commentary","key":"wikipedia:Epistle to the Hebrews","label":"Wikipedia: Epistle to the Hebrews","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Hebrews"},{"work":"Catenae (patristic commentaries)","relation":"Preserve the fragments","key":"wikipedia:Catenae (patristic commentaries)","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Three Chapters","relation":"Condemnation context","key":"wikipedia:Three Chapters","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Antiochene school","relation":"Exegetical tradition","key":"wikipedia:School of Antioch","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Theodorus of Mopsuestia","relation":"Author","key":"wikipedia:Theodore of Mopsuestia","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[{"key":"wikipedia:Theodore of Mopsuestia","label":"Theodore of Mopsuestia","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_of_Mopsuestia","reason":"Biographical context for the author."},{"key":"wikipedia:Epistle to the Hebrews","label":"Epistle to the Hebrews","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Hebrews","reason":"Subject of the commentary."},{"key":"wikipedia:Three Chapters","label":"Three Chapters","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Chapter_Controversy","reason":"Historical context for the work's condemnation."},{"key":"wikipedia:School of Antioch","label":"School of Antioch","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_Antioch","reason":"Exegetical tradition of Theodorus."}],"cautions":["The fragments are preserved only in catenae and florilegia; no continuous manuscript survives.","Attribution to Theodorus is based on later citations; some fragments may be misattributed or excerpted out of context.","The original argument and structure cannot be reconstructed due to the sparse and disconnected nature of the fragments.","The date of the commentary is uncertain; it is placed in the late 4th or early 5th century based on Theodorus's career."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.00051,"generated":"2026-11-15T07:25:26Z"},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Patrologia Graeca text (khazarzar mirror)","url":"http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Theodorus_PG%2086a/Fragmenta%20in%20epistulam%20ad%20Hebraeos.pdf"}],"checks":{"work":"khazarzar-theodorus-fragmenta-in-epistulam-ad-hebraeos","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":17,"translated":17,"commentary_passages":17,"commentary_units":99,"english_words":4557,"source_letters":18231,"commentary_kinds":8},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The fragments survive only in catenae and later florilegia; no continuous manuscript of Theodorus’ commentary on Hebrews is extant.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus of Mopsuestia (ca. 350–428) wrote this commentary late in his career; the work is dated to the late 4th or early 5th century.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus’ exegesis of Hebrews was condemned at the Second Council of Constantinople (553), which led to the loss of the complete text.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The attribution of these fragments to Theodorus is based on citation in later sources; some may be misattributed or excerpted out of context.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This edition cannot reconstruct Theodorus’ original argument or structure; the fragments are too sparse and disconnected.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: letter in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 17 narrative."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: khazarzar — Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":17},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"0 Ὡς οὐκ ἀπίστοις ἔγραφε τοῖς ἄσπονδον πρὸς αὐτὸν μῖσος κεκτημένοις, ἀλλὰ τοῖς μετεσχηκόσιν ἁπάντων ὧν δεῖ μετεῖναι τοῖς πιστεύουσιν· εἶτα οὐδὲ τοῖς τυχοῦσιν ἁπλῶς, ἀλλὰ γὰρ τοῖς ἐπὶ τῶν ἔργων τῆς πίστεως τὴν βεβαίωσιν καὶ τῆς ἀρετῆς τὴν ἀκρίβειαν ἐπιδειξαμένοις, ὡς καὶ τὰ ἐν τῇ ἐπιστολῇ κείμενα δείκνυσιν. ὥστε καὶ ἀποδεδόσθαι αὐτοῖς ἔδει τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ὡς Παύλου γεγραφότος αὐτοῖς, ὥσπερ οὖν καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν λοιπῶν ἐγίνετο· οὐδὲ γὰρ αὐτοὺς ὠφελεῖν τε τὰ ἀναγεγραμμένα ἐδύνατο μὴ τούτου γιγνομένου. πρὸς δ' αὖ τούτοις καὶ τὰ πρὸς τῷ τέλει τῆς ἐπιστολῆς γεγραμμένα δείκνυσιν ὅ φημι· παρακαλῶ γὰρ ὑμᾶς, φησίν, ἀδελφοί, ἀνέχεσθαι τοῦ λόγου τῆς παρακλήσεως· καὶ γὰρ διὰ βραχέων ἐπέστειλα ὑμῖν. τίσι δὲ ἔγραφεν ὅτι ἐπέστειλα ὑμῖν, οὐκ ὄντων ἐκείνων οἷς ἀποδεδόσθαι ἦν ἀνάγκη τὸ γράμμα; εἶτα ἐπάγει· γινώσκετε τὸν ἀδελφὸν Τιμόθεον ἀπολελυμένον, μεθ' οὗ ἐὰν τάχιον ἔρχηται ὄψομαι ὑμᾶς. ὁρᾷς ὅτι δῆλος ἦν ὁ καὶ τῇ ἐπιστολῇ τοῦ γράμματος διακονησάμενος, μεθ' οὗ καὶ ὄψεσθαι αὐτοὺς εἰ τάχιον ἐπανέλθοι, σαφῶς ὑπισχνεῖται. τίς οὖν ἡ τούτου αἰτία τοῦ μὴ προτετάχθαι αὐτοῦ τὸ ὄνομα; εὔδηλος καὶ ἄγαν σαφής. διείλοντο Βαρνάβας τε καὶ αὐτὸς μετὰ τῶν περὶ τὸν μακάριον Πέτρον τὸ κήρυγμα, οὐχ ἵνα τὰ μὲν οὗτοι, τὰ δὲ ἐκεῖνοι διδάσκωσινεἷς γὰρ ἦν αὐτοῖς ὁ σκοπός ἀλλ' ἵνα οἱ μὲν τοὺς ἀπὸ ἐθνῶν, οἱ δὲ τοὺς ἀπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων τῇ πίστει προάγωσιν, διὰ τὴν τότε κρατοῦσαν ἔτι φιλονεικίαν ἀπὸ τῆς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ συνηθείας τῶν Ἰουδαίων τοῖς ἐξ ἐθνῶν ἐπιμίγνυσθαι οὐκ ἀνεχομένων, οἰκονομικώτερον τῇ διαιρέσει ταύτῃ χρησάμενοι.","english":"He did not write to those who were faithless, possessing implacable hatred toward him, but to those who had partaken of all that believers must share. Then, not simply to ordinary people, but to those who had shown in their works the confirmation of faith and the precision of virtue, as the contents of the epistle also demonstrate. So it was necessary that the epistle be delivered to them as Paul having written to them, just as also happened in the case of the others. For what was written could not benefit them unless this was done. Moreover, what is written near the end of the epistle shows what I say: \"For I exhort you, brothers,\" he says, \"to bear with the word of exhortation; for I have written to you briefly.\" To whom did he write, saying \"I have written to you,\" if those to whom the letter had to be delivered were not present? Then he adds: \"You know that brother Timothy has been released, with whom, if he comes more quickly, I will see you.\" Do you see that the one who also ministered the delivery of the letter was known, with whom he clearly promises to see them if he returns more quickly? What then is the reason that his name is not placed at the beginning? It is quite clear and very obvious. Barnabas and he himself divided the proclamation with those around the blessed Peter, not so that some would teach one thing and others another—for their purpose was one—but so that some would lead those from the Gentiles, and others those from the Jews, to the faith, because of the contentiousness still prevailing at that time, as the Jews, from their custom in the law, did not tolerate mingling with those from the Gentiles, and they used this division more economically.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὡς οὐκ ἀπίστοις ἔγραφε","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus argues that the epistle was not written to unbelievers but to those already sharing in the faith, establishing the intended audience as committed Christians.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"παρακαλῶ γὰρ ὑμᾶς, φησίν, ἀδελφοί, ἀνέχεσθαι τοῦ λόγου τῆς παρακλήσεως","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus quotes Hebrews 13:22, citing the author's exhortation to bear with the word of exhortation, to support his argument about the letter's delivery.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"γινώσκετε τὸν ἀδελφὸν Τιμόθεον ἀπολελυμένον","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus references Hebrews 13:23, mentioning Timothy's release, to identify the letter carrier and argue for Pauline authorship.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"διείλοντο Βαρνάβας τε καὶ αὐτὸς μετὰ τῶν περὶ τὸν μακάριον Πέτρον τὸ κήρυγμα","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus describes a division of missionary labor between Barnabas, Paul, and Peter's circle, targeting Jews and Gentiles separately due to Jewish legal scruples.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"τίς οὖν ἡ τούτου αἰτία τοῦ μὴ προτετάχθαι αὐτοῦ τὸ ὄνομα","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus addresses the anonymity of Hebrews, explaining that Paul's name was omitted due to the strategic division of apostolic labor, a common patristic explanation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"πρὸς δ' αὖ τούτοις καὶ τὰ πρὸς τῷ τέλει τῆς ἐπιστολῆς γεγραμμένα δείκνυσιν ὅ φημι","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus uses the closing verses of Hebrews (13:22-23) as evidence for his argument, showing a structural appeal to the epistle's conclusion.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of the letter carrier (Timothy) is assumed but not explicitly stated in the quoted text; Theodorus interprets it as Timothy."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"ἐχρημάτιζον οὖν οἱ μὲν ἐθνῶν ἀπόστολοι, οἱ δὲ τῶν ἐκ περιτομῆς· οἱ δέ γε πεπιστευκότες κοινούς, ὡς εἰκός, διδασκάλους τε καὶ ἀποστόλους ἐνόμιζον εἶναι. ὅτε μὲν οὖν ἔγραφε τοῖς ἀπὸ ἐθνῶν, εἰκότως ὡς αὐτῶν ἀπόστολος αὐτοῖς ἐπιστέλλει, ὅτε δὲ πρὸς τοὺς ἀπὸ Ἑβραίων, οὐκέτι.\n\nΔι' οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας ἐποίησεν. ὁ αἰὼν φύσις μέν ἐστιν οὐδεμία ἐν ὑποστάσει τὸ εἶναι ἔχουσα, διάστημα δέ τι νοεῖται εἶναι. ἀπό τινος οὖν ἐπινοούμενον ἀρχὴν τοῦ εἶναι ἔχοντος ἄχρις τῆς ἐκείνου τελευτῆς, ἢ ἑτέρου τινὸς ἀρχὴν εἰληφότος ὁμοίως· οὐ γὰρ ἐν ἰδίᾳ ὑποστάσει τὰ χρονικὰ νοοῦμεν διαστήματα, τοῖς δὲ ἀρχὴν τοῦ εἶναι εἰληφόσιν αὐτὰ συνεπινοοῦμεν, ἐκείνοις τῆς τε ἀρχῆς αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ τέλους τὴν φαντασίαν δεχόμενοι. οὐχ ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ λεγόντων ὅτι ἦν μόνον ὃς ἐπειδήπερ ἦν ἀεί, οὐ δυνατὸν ἡμᾶς αὐτοῦ συνόντα ἐπινοεῖν διαστήματα τῇ ζωῇ. τὸ τοίνυν εἰπεῖν τῶν αἰώνων ποιητὴν οὐδὲν ἕτερόν ἐστιν εἰπεῖν ἢ ἀΐδιον, παντὸς ὑπερκείμενον διαστήματος, ἀπέραντον ἔχοντα τὴν οἰκείαν ὕπαρξιν. ὁ μὲν γὰρ ποιητὴς πρότερός ἐστι τῶν ποιηθέντων, τῷ δὲ ἀρχὴν ἔχοντι συνεπινοεῖσθαι διάστημα ἀνάγκη. ὥσπερ δὲ ὅταν λέγῃ ὁ μακάριος Δαυίδ· ὁ ὑπάρχων πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων, οὐ τοῦτο βούλεται εἰπεῖν ὅτι τῶν οὐχ ὑφεστώτων προϋπάρχει, ἀλλ' ἵνα εἴπῃ ὅτι παντός ἐστι διαστήματος ἀνώτερος ἀεὶ τὸ εἶναι ἔχων. οὕτως, ὅταν λέγῃ· δι' οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας ἐποίησεν, οὐχὶ τῶν οὐχ ὑφεστώτων βούλεται αὐτὸν ποιητὴν εἰπεῖν, ἀλλ' ἀεὶ ὄντα καὶ τῶν ἀρχὴν ἐσχηκότων αἴτιον ἁπάντων. Ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ.","english":"Thus some were apostles of the Gentiles, others of those from the circumcision; and those who had believed considered them, as is reasonable, common teachers and apostles. So when he wrote to those from the Gentiles, he naturally writes to them as their apostle, but when to those from the Hebrews, no longer.\n\nThrough whom he also made the ages. The age is no nature having its being in a hypostasis, but is conceived as a certain interval. It is therefore conceived from some beginning of being up to the end of that, or of something else similarly having taken a beginning; for we do not think of temporal intervals in their own hypostasis, but we conceive them together with things that have taken a beginning of being, receiving the impression of both its beginning and its end from those things. Not as in the case of God, when they say that he alone was, since he always was, it is not possible for us to conceive intervals coexisting with his life. Therefore to say maker of the ages is nothing other than to say eternal, transcending every interval, having his own existence without limit. For the maker is prior to the things made, and an interval must be conceived together with that which has a beginning. Just as when the blessed David says, \"the one existing before the ages,\" he does not mean that he pre-exists things that do not subsist, but to say that he is above every interval, always having being. So, when he says, \"through whom he also made the ages,\" he does not mean to call him maker of things that do not subsist, but to say that he always is and is the cause of all things that have had a beginning. Who is the radiance of his glory and the character of his hypostasis.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐχρημάτιζον οὖν οἱ μὲν ἐθνῶν ἀπόστολοι, οἱ δὲ τῶν ἐκ περιτομῆς","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus distinguishes apostles of the Gentiles from those of the circumcision, reflecting early Christian tensions between Pauline and Jewish-Christian missions. This aligns with the Antiochene exegetical tradition's emphasis on historical context.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"αἰών","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus defines αἰών (age) as a temporal interval (διάστημα) without independent hypostasis, conceived only in relation to beings with a beginning. This technical usage is central to his anti-Origenist polemic against pre-existent aeons.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"ὁ ὑπάρχων πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus cites the phrase 'the one existing before the ages' as from the blessed David, likely alluding to Psalm 90:2 LXX (πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων). The reference supports his argument that God transcends temporal intervals.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"δι' οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας ἐποίησεν","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'through whom he also made the ages' echoes Hebrews 1:2 (δι' οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας ἐποίησεν), which Theodorus interprets to affirm God's eternal nature and causality, not creation of non-existent things.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus describes the Son as 'radiance of glory and character of hypostasis,' a formulation later contested in Arian and Nestorian controversies. This reflects Antiochene subordinationist Christology, distinguishing the Son's derived being from the Father's.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"οὐχ ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ λεγόντων","severity":"caution","text":"Theodorus's argument that God's eternity precludes conceiving intervals coexisting with his life may be misread as denying divine temporality. The text is a polemic against Origenist speculation, not a systematic ontology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Coptic Vorlage for this Greek passage is not extant; the Greek text is from the Khazarzar edition, which may reflect later scribal interventions. The phrase 'οἱ δέ γε πεπιστευκότες κοινούς' is ambiguous: it could mean 'those who had believed considered them common' or 'those who had believed common teachers.' The English draft opts for the latter."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"καλῶς οὐκ εἶπεν τοῦ θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τῆς δόξης, τῷ καταπληκτικῷ τοῦ ὀνόματος οὐδὲ περιεργάζεσθαι τὰ τῆς φύσεως ἐκείνης ἐπιτρέπων ἡμῖν, ὡς ἂν μόνον δοξάζεσθαι ὀφειλούσης παρ' ἡμῶν· τῇ μὲν παραβολῇ τοῦ ἀπαυγάσματος χρησάμενος εἰς ὃ μάλιστα ἀναγκαῖον ἐνόμιζεν, τῇ δὲ ἐπαγωγῇ τὸ ἀπεμφαῖνον τῆς παραβολῆς ἐκλύσας· ἀκριβῆ γάρ, φησί, σώζει τὸν χαρακτῆρα τῆς\n\nφύσεως, ὥστε ὅπερ ἂν ἐκείνην νοήσῃς τὴν ὑπόστασιν, τοῦτο νόει καὶ ταύτην εἶναι, ἀκριβεῖς φέρουσαν ἐκείνης τοὺς χαρακτῆρας τῷ κατὰ μηδὲν διαλλάττειν αὐτὴν ἐκείνης. Τοῦτ' ἔστιν οὐ ποιητὴν μόνον εἰπεῖν τῶν ὄντων, ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ τὸ πολλῇ ποιεῖν αὐτὰ περιουσίᾳ τῆς δυνάμεως ὡς ἂν ἐν τῇ φωνῇ αὐτοῦ πάντων ἐπηρτημένων. οὐδὲν γὰρ διαλλάττει τοῦτο τοῦ καλοῦντος τὰ μὴ ὄντα ὡς ὄντα, ἢ καὶ τῆς τοῦ μακαρίου Μωϋσέως διηγήσεως λέγοντος· καὶ εἶπεν· γενηθήτω φῶς, καὶ ἐγένετο φῶς· γενηθήτω στερέωμα, καὶ ἐγένετο στερέωμα. Τὸ μὲν τῆς ὑπηρεσίας τὴν ὀξύτητα σημαίνει, τὸ δὲ τῆς λειτουργίας τὸ δυνατόν. ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖθεν γεγενῆσθαι εἰπών, παρέστησεν ὡς ἐκεῖθεν καὶ τὸ δύνασθαι ταῦτα ἔχουσιν. διαστέλλεται δὲ πρὸς τὸ ὁ ποιῶν τὸ θεὸς καὶ θρόνος καὶ βασιλείας ῥάβδος, ἃ πάντα τῆς ἀνωτάτω τιμῆς τε καὶ ἀξίας σύμβολα· καὶ γὰρ τὸ θεὸς τὴν ἀνωτάτω σημαίνει φύσιν, καὶ ὁ θρόνος καὶ ἡ ῥάβδος ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων καὶ τὸ ταύτης βέβαιον παρίστησιν· εἶτα καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος· τὸ μὲν γὰρ ποιῶν ἀπὸ καιροῦ εἶναι τὸ ἦρχθαι δείκνυσι τοὺς γεγονότας, τοῦτο δὲ τὸ τῆς βασιλείας ἀΐδιον παρίστησιν.","english":"He well did not say \"of God\" but \"of glory,\" not permitting us to busy ourselves with the nature of that being because of the awe-inspiring character of the name, since it ought only to be glorified by us; he used the analogy of radiance for what he considered most necessary, and by the addition he dissolved the incongruity of the analogy. For it preserves, he says, the exact character of the nature, so that whatever you conceive that hypostasis to be, you conceive this also to be, bearing the exact characters of that one, since it differs from it in no respect. This is not only to call him maker of beings, but also to say that he makes them with great abundance of power, as if all things depend on his voice. For this differs in no way from calling non-existent things into existence, or from the account of the blessed Moses saying: \"And he said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light; 'Let there be a firmament,' and there was a firmament.\" The one indicates the swiftness of service, the other the power of the ministry. Having said that these things came into being from that source, he demonstrated that they also have their power from that source. He distinguishes between \"the one who makes\" and \"God,\" \"throne,\" and \"scepter of the kingdom,\" all of which are symbols of the highest honor and dignity; for \"God\" signifies the highest nature, and \"throne\" and \"scepter,\" from human things, represent its stability. Then also \"forever and ever\": for \"the one who makes\" shows that those who have come into being began from a certain time, while this phrase represents the eternity of the kingdom.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"τῆς δόξης","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus notes the author deliberately avoided saying 'of God' and instead used 'of glory' to prevent inquiry into the divine nature, emphasizing awe and doxology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"γενηθήτω φῶς, καὶ ἐγένετο φῶς· γενηθήτω στερέωμα, καὶ ἐγένετο στερέωμα","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus cites Moses' account of creation by divine command, echoing Genesis 1:3 and 1:6–8, to illustrate the power of God's word.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ὑπόστασις","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus uses 'hypostasis' to denote the individual reality of the divine being, consistent with his Antiochene Christology distinguishing nature and person.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"τῇ μὲν παραβολῇ τοῦ ἀπαυγάσματος","severity":"info","text":"The analogy of radiance (ἀπαύγασμα) is a common patristic image for the relation of Son to Father, used here to explain the preservation of exact nature.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"διαστέλλεται δὲ πρὸς τὸ ὁ ποιῶν","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus distinguishes between 'the one who makes' and titles like 'God,' 'throne,' and 'scepter,' showing a rhetorical move to separate temporal creation from eternal dignity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"τὸ μὲν γὰρ ποιῶν ἀπὸ καιροῦ εἶναι τὸ ἦρχθαι δείκνυσι τοὺς γεγονότας","severity":"caution","text":"Theodorus's interpretation that 'the one who makes' implies a temporal beginning for created beings may reflect his anti-Origenist stance, but the Greek syntax is compressed and the precise referent of 'τοὺς γεγονότας' is ambiguous.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'τὸ μὲν γὰρ ποιῶν ἀπὸ καιροῦ εἶναι τὸ ἦρχθαι δείκνυσι τοὺς γεγονότας' is syntactically ambiguous: it could mean that the act of making shows that the beings began from a certain time, or that the maker himself is from a certain time. Theodorus likely intends the former, but the text is not entirely clear."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"Ἐντεῦθεν συνιδεῖν ἐστιν ὅτι περὶ τῆς θείας φύσεως ὅταν ἡμῖν ἡ παλαιὰ διαθήκη διαλέγηται, οὐ περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀφωρισμένως λέγει μόνου, ὥσπερ οἴονται οἱ αἱρετικοί, τὸ ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ θεός, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν ἐμοῦ, καὶ ὅσα τοιαῦτα λαμβάνειν ἐπ' αὐτοῦ πειρώμενοι μόνου. τοὐναντίον δὲ ὅσα ἂν ὡς περὶ θεοῦ λέγῃ τὴν ἀνωτάτω φύσιν ἐξηγουμένη, οὕτω φησὶν ὡς ἂν καὶ πατρὶ καὶ υἱῷ διὰ τὴν τῆς φύσεως κοινωνίαν ὁμοίως ἁρμόττειν δυνάμενα. ἐπεὶ πῶς ὁ ἀπόστολος τὴν δευτέραν εἵλκυσεν ἐπ' αὐτοῦ μαρτυρίαν οὐδὲν ἔχουσαν ὃ τῆς ἰδιότητος τοῦ προσώπου σημαντικὸν εἶναι ἠδύνατο, ὡσπεροῦν καὶ τὴν ἀνωτέραν; ἢ οὐχὶ τὸ αὐτὸ καὶ ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους φαίνεται πεποιηκώς, ἔνθα φησίν· γέγραπται γάρ· ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει κύριος, ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ; οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐκείνην τὴν μαρτυρίαν εὕροι ἄν τις τοιοῦτό τι ἔχουσαν ὃ τούτων ἀφωρισμένως ἐδήλου. Τὸ μὲν λειτουργικὰ εἶναι πνεύματα ἀπὸ τῆς προκειμένης εἶχε μαρτυρίας, ἐπισυνῆψε δὲ λοιπὸν αὐτὸς τὸ τῆς διακονίας εἶδος, λέγων ὅτι τοῖς ὑπὲρ τῆς ἡμετέρας σωτηρίας διακονούμενοι ἅπαντα πράττουσιν· οὐ γὰρ μικρὸν εἰς προσθήκην εἰδέναι τῆς διακονίας τὴν χρείαν. Διὰ τοῦτο δεῖ περισσοτέρως προσέχειν ἡμᾶς τοῖς ἀκουσθεῖσιν, μή ποτε παραρυῶμεν. διὰ τοῦτο, φησί, δεῖ τοῖς παρ' αὐτοῦ λεχθεῖσιν νέμειν τὴν σπουδήν, φυλαττομένους μή ποτε παρατροπήν τινα ἀπὸ τῶν κρειττόνων δεξώμεθα. Ἔδειξε καὶ τοῖς πράγμασι τούτων πολὺ τὸ πρὸς ἐκεῖνα διάφορον, ἐκεῖ μὲν λόγον εἰπών, ἐνταῦθα δὲ σωτηρίαν·","english":"From this it is possible to see that when the Old Testament speaks to us about the divine nature, it does not speak of the Father alone in a restricted sense, as the heretics suppose, attempting to take \"I am God, and there is no other besides me\" and all such statements as applying to him alone. On the contrary, whatever it says about God, expounding the highest nature, it speaks in such a way that these things can equally apply to both Father and Son because of the community of nature. For how did the Apostle draw the second testimony concerning him, which had nothing that could be indicative of the particularity of the person, just as he did with the earlier one? Or does he not appear to have done the same thing in the Epistle to the Romans, where he says: \"For it is written: 'I live,' says the Lord, 'that every knee will bow to me'\"? For one would not find that testimony either to have anything that indicated these things in a restricted sense. The fact that the spirits are ministering he had from the testimony at hand, and he himself then added the kind of service, saying that they do everything while ministering for the sake of our salvation; for it is no small addition to know the need of the service. Therefore we must pay more careful attention to what has been heard, lest we ever slip away. For this reason, he says, we must devote our zeal to what has been said by him, guarding ourselves lest we ever receive some perversion from better things. He also showed by the facts themselves the great difference between these things and those: there he spoke of a word, here of salvation.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐντεῦθεν συνιδεῖν ἐστιν","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus argues that Old Testament statements about God apply to both Father and Son due to the community of nature, countering heretical interpretations that restrict them to the Father alone.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ θεός, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν ἐμοῦ","severity":"info","text":"This is a paraphrase of Exodus 20:2-3 (LXX), where God declares exclusivity. Theodorus cites it as an example misused by heretics to limit divine statements to the Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"ζῶ ἐγώ, λέγει κύριος, ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus references Romans 11:4, where Paul quotes a similar Old Testament testimony (cf. 1 Kings 19:18 LXX). He notes that this testimony also lacks specific personal indicators.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"οἱ αἱρετικοί","severity":"info","text":"The 'heretics' likely refer to Arian or Eunomian opponents who denied the full divinity of the Son, interpreting Old Testament theophanies as referring only to the Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"τὸ μὲν λειτουργικὰ εἶναι πνεύματα","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus distinguishes between the scriptural testimony that spirits are ministering and his own addition about the kind of service, showing a logical progression in the argument.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"παραρυῶμεν","severity":"caution","text":"The verb παραρυῶμεν (slip away) is a hapax in this context; its precise meaning is uncertain, but Theodorus uses it metaphorically for doctrinal deviation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of the 'heretics' is not specified; likely Arian or Eunomian. The phrase 'τὸ μὲν λειτουργικὰ εἶναι πνεύματα' may refer to a specific Old Testament passage not explicitly quoted."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἐκεῖνο μὲν νομίμων δόσις ἦν μόνον, ἐνταῦθα δὲ καὶ χάρις πνεύματος καὶ λύσις ἁμαρτημάτων καὶ βασιλείας οὐρανῶν ἐπαγγελία καὶ ἀθανασίας ὑπόσχεσις. ὅθεν καὶ δικαίως τηλικαύτης εἶπεν τῇ προσθήκῃ τὸ μέγεθος αὐτῆς δεικνύς, κἀκεῖ μὲν διὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων δοθείς, ἐνταῦθα δὲ διὰ τοῦ κυρίου. καὶ ἐπειδὴ θαύματα παρ' ἐκείνοις ἦν ὥστε μηδὲ κατὰ τοῦτο αὐτῶν ἠλαττῶσθαι δοκεῖν, καλῶς ἐπήγαγε τὸ συνεπιμαρτυροῦντος θεοῦ σημείοις καὶ τέρασι καὶ ποικίλαις δυνάμεσιν, κατ' αὔξησιν αὐτὸ εἰπὼν ὥστε κἀν τούτῳ φανῆναι τῆς χάριτος τὸ πλέον παρὰ τὸν νόμον· ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ πρὸς τὴν χρείαν ἐγίνετο μόνον, ἐνταῦθα δὲ καὶ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων πολλοὶ οἱ θεραπευόμενοι δι' ἡμῶν, κἂν ὁποιαδήποτε πάθη κατέχειν αὐτοὺς συμβαίνοι. τοσαύτη παρ' ἡμῖν ἡ τῶν θαυμάτων περιουσία. ἀνίστανται δὲ καὶ νεκροί, καὶ τιμωρούμεθα δέ τινας πολλάκις ἂν δέῃ, ἐπιτιμήσεσι μόναις τυφλοὺς ἐργαζόμενοι, θανάτους ἐπάγοντες τοῖς κακογνώμοσιν. ἀντιπαραθεὶς οὖν τὴν διαφορὰν καὶ δείξας τὴν ὑπεροχὴν τῷ ποικίλῳ καὶ πολυτρόπῳ, ἐπήγαγε τὸ μεῖζον ὃ οὐκέτι τοῖς ἐν νόμῳ προσῆν· καὶ πνεύματος ἁγίου μερισμοῖς· τὸ γὰρ πνεύματος ἕκαστον τῶν","english":"For that was only the giving of laws, but here there is also the grace of the Spirit, the remission of sins, the promise of the kingdom of heaven, and the pledge of immortality. Hence he rightly spoke of such a great addition, showing its magnitude, and that there it was given through angels, but here through the Lord. And since there were miracles among them, so that they might not seem to be inferior in this respect either, he well added \"with God bearing witness through signs and wonders and various powers,\" stating it in a progressive manner so that even in this the greater grace compared to the law might appear: for there it occurred only according to need, but here many even of those who are strangers are healed through us, whatever sufferings may happen to afflict them. Such is the abundance of miracles among us. The dead also rise, and we sometimes punish certain persons, if need be, by censures alone, making them blind, bringing deaths upon the ill-intentioned. Having thus set forth the difference and shown the superiority by the variety and manifold nature, he added the greater thing which was no longer present among those under the law: \"and by distributions of the Holy Spirit.\" For each of the","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἐκεῖνο μὲν νομίμων δόσις ἦν μόνον, ἐνταῦθα δὲ καὶ χάρις πνεύματος","severity":"info","text":"The passage contrasts the Old Law (ἐκεῖνο) with the New Covenant (ἐνταῦθα), a standard rhetorical antithesis in Theodore's exegesis of Hebrews.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"συνεπιμαρτυροῦντος θεοῦ σημείοις καὶ τέρασι καὶ ποικίλαις δυνάμεσιν","severity":"info","text":"The phrase echoes the language of divine witness through signs and wonders found in the Old Testament (e.g., Exodus 4:21 LXX) and is used here to argue for continuity between the testaments.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"τιμωρούμεθα δέ τινας πολλάκις ἂν δέῃ, ἐπιτιμήσεσι μόναις τυφλοὺς ἐργαζόμενοι, θανάτους ἐπάγοντες τοῖς κακογνώμοσιν","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus describes miraculous punishments (blindness, death) inflicted by Christians, reflecting late antique hagiographical and ascetic claims of charismatic authority, not canonical church discipline.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"πνεύματος ἁγίου μερισμοῖς","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'distributions of the Holy Spirit' (πνεύματος ἁγίου μερισμοῖς) is a technical term in Theodore's pneumatology, emphasizing the Spirit's gifts as apportioned to believers, distinct from the Spirit's essence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"parallel","kind":"parallel","basis":"text","lemma":"κἀκεῖ μὲν διὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων δοθείς, ἐνταῦθα δὲ διὰ τοῦ κυρίου","severity":"info","text":"The contrast between law given through angels (cf. Acts 7:38, Gal 3:19) and the new covenant through Christ is a common patristic topos, found also in Chrysostom's homilies on Hebrews.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀνίστανται δὲ καὶ νεκροί","severity":"caution","text":"The claim that 'the dead also rise' (ἀνίστανται δὲ καὶ νεκροί) may refer to miraculous resurrections by saints, but the text is ambiguous: it could also be a rhetorical hyperbole for spiritual renewal.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'ἀνίστανται δὲ καὶ νεκροί' could denote literal resurrection miracles or metaphorical spiritual revival; the context of charismatic healings suggests the former, but Theodore's exegetical style often uses hyperbole."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"πιστευόντων μετέχειν ἴδιον ἦν τῶν ἐν τῇ χάριτι. καὶ καλῶς ἐπὶ πᾶσιν ἐπήγαγε τὸ κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ θέλησιν, τοῦτ' ἔστι τοῦ θεοῦ βουληθέντος ἅπαξ καὶ δοκιμάσαντος πολλῇ χρήσασθαι περὶ ἡμᾶς τῇ φιλοτιμίᾳ, ὥστε καὶ ἀμετάθετον εἶναι τὴν περὶ ἡμᾶς χάριν αὐτοῦ, μηδεμίαν ἅπαξ τοῖς πρωτέροις ὁμοίως ὑφορωμένους τῶν ἅπαξ δοθέντων μεταβολήν.\n\n204 Γελοιότατον δή τι πάσχουσιν ἐνταῦθα τὸ χωρὶς θεοῦ ἐναλλάττοντες καὶ ποιοῦντες χάριτι θεοῦ, οὐ προσέχοντες τῇ ἀκολουθίᾳ τῆς γραφῆς, ἀλλ' ἀπὸ τοῦ μὴ συνιέναι ὅτι ποτὲ ἔφη τὸ χωρὶς θεοῦ, ἀδιαφόρως ἐξαλείφοντες μὲν ἐκεῖνο, τιθέντες δὲ τὸ δοκοῦν αὐτοῖς εὔκολον εἶναι πρὸς κατανόησιν. τί γὰρ ἐνταῦθα προέκειτο τῷ Παύλῳ, ἵνα ἐπαγάγῃ τὸ χάριτι θεοῦ; τίς δὲ αὐτὸν ἦγεν πρὸς τοῦτο ἀκολουθία; οὐ γὰρ ἔθος αὐτῷ χάριτι θεοῦ τιθέναι ἁπλῶς, ἀλλὰ πάντως ἀπό τινος ἀκολουθίας λόγου· ἢ γὰρ τὸ καθ' ἑαυτὸν λέγων προστίθησι τοῦτο, ὡς τὸ χάριτι θεοῦ εἰμι ὅ εἰμι, ἢ ὅταν πρόκειται αὐτῷ τὴν περὶ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους λέγειν τοῦ θεοῦ φιλανθρωπίαν, καὶ ὅτι ἅπαντα πεποίηκεν οὐχ ἡμῶν ὄντων τοῦ τυχεῖν ἀξίων, οἷόν ἐστι τὸ τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσωσμένοι, ᾧ ἐπάγει· καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν, θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον· οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων, ἵνα μή τις καυχήσηται, σαφῶς διὰ τούτων παριστῶν, ὅτι περὶ τῆς χάριτος διαλέγεται τοῦ θεοῦ, ἣν περὶ πάντας ἔτυχε τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἐπιδειξάμενος. ἐνταῦθα δὲ τὸ προκείμενον αὐτῷ δηλονότι περὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ διαλέγεται, οἷοστίς ἐστιν καὶ τίνα τὴν πρὸς τοὺς ἀγγέλους ἔχων διαφοράν, ἀφ' ὧν ἐξηνέχθη εἰς τὸ εἰπεῖν, κατὰ τί δὲ αὐτῶν ἠλαττῶσθαι δοκεῖ καὶ ὅτι διὰ τὸν θάνατον.","english":"It was proper for believers to partake of the things in the grace. And well did he add after all things the phrase \"according to his will,\" that is, of God having once willed and approved to use great munificence toward us, so that his grace toward us is also immutable, no change of the things once given being feared, as in the earlier cases.\n\nThey suffer something utterly ridiculous here, altering \"without God\" and making it \"by the grace of God,\" not attending to the sequence of the scripture, but from not understanding what he meant by \"without God,\" they indiscriminately erase that and put what seems to them easy for comprehension. For what was Paul's purpose here, that he should add \"by the grace of God\"? And what sequence led him to this? For it is not his custom to set down \"by the grace of God\" simply, but always from some sequence of argument: for either he says this when speaking of himself, as in \"by the grace of God I am what I am,\" or when it is his purpose to speak of God's philanthropy toward men, and that he has done everything not because we were worthy to obtain it, as in \"for by grace you are saved,\" to which he adds: \"and this not from yourselves, God's gift; not from works, lest anyone boast,\" clearly showing through these things that he is speaking about the grace of God, which he has displayed toward all men. But here, his subject is evidently about Christ, what sort he is and what difference he has with respect to the angels, from which he was led to say, in what respect he seems to be inferior to them and that because of death.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"χωρὶς θεοῦ","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'without God' (χωρὶς θεοῦ) is a textual variant that Theodore defends against scribes who replace it with 'by the grace of God' (χάριτι θεοῦ).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"χάριτι θεοῦ εἰμι ὅ εἰμι","severity":"info","text":"Theodore cites Paul's phrase 'by the grace of God I am what I am' (1 Cor 15:10, paraphrased) as an example of Paul's customary usage of 'by the grace of God' in autobiographical contexts.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσωσμένοι","severity":"info","text":"Theodore quotes 'for by grace you are saved' (cf. 1 Cor 15:10) and the following clause 'and this not from yourselves, God's gift; not from works' to illustrate Paul's discussion of divine grace.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Theodore argues that Paul's use of 'by the grace of God' always follows a logical sequence (ἀκολουθία), either autobiographical or when discussing God's philanthropy, and that the context here (Christ vs. angels) does not warrant such a phrase.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Theodore criticizes unnamed scribes or interpreters who alter the text from 'without God' to 'by the grace of God,' accusing them of misunderstanding the scriptural sequence and Paul's argument.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The Greek text at line 204 contains a lacuna or corruption: 'οἷοστίς ἐστιν' is likely a scribal error for 'ὅστις ἐστίν' or similar; the sense is that Paul's subject is Christ's nature and difference from angels.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'χωρὶς θεοῦ' (without God) is ambiguous: it may refer to a textual variant in Hebrews or to a theological point about Christ's independence from God; Theodore interprets it as original and defends it against emendation.","The clause 'οἷοστίς ἐστιν' is grammatically irregular; it may be a corruption of 'ὅστις ἐστίν' (who he is) or 'οἷός τίς ἐστιν' (what sort he is)."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"τί οὖν ἔδει ἐνταῦθα τοῦ χάριτι θεοῦ; οὐ γὰρ πρόκειται αὐτῷ τὴν περὶ ἡμᾶς ἀγαθότητα λέγειν αὐτοῦ. Τοῦτο δὲ μᾶλλον δείκνυσιν ἡ τῶν ἑξῆς ἀκολουθία· εἰπὼν γὰρ ὅτι χωρὶς θεοῦ ἐγεύσατο τοῦ θανάτου, οὐδὲν πρὸς τοῦτο παραβλαβείσης τῆς θεότητος, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀπὸ τῆς οἰκείας φύσεως τὴν κατὰ βραχὺ τοῦτο ἐλάττωσιν ἐδέξατο, ὥστε φαίνεσθαι ἐντεῦθεν αὐτὸν καὶ τῆς τιμῆς μετέχοντα διὰ τὴν πρὸς ἕτερον συνάφειαν. ἐπειδήπερ ἀκόλουθον ἦν τοὺς ταῦτα ἀκούοντας περιττὴν ἐν τῷ τοῦ πάθους καιρῷ νομίζειν εἶναι τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου τὴν ἐνοίκησιν, οὐδὲν τοῖς προκειμένοις συμβαλλομένην εἴπερ δὴ χωρὶς ἐκείνου τῆς πείρας ἐγεύσατο τοῦ θανάτου, ἐπάγει· ἔπρεπε γὰρ αὐτῷ, δι' ὃν τὰ πάντα καὶ δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα, πολλοὺς υἱοὺς εἰς δόξαν ἀγαγόντα τὸν ἀρχηγὸν τῆς σωτηρίας αὐτῶν διὰ παθημάτων τελειῶσαι. οὐκ ἀσυντελὴς δὲ ἦν οὐδὲ ἡ θεότης, φησίν· ἔπρεπε γὰρ τὰ οἰκεῖα καὶ ἅπερ ἦν αὐτῇ πρέποντα· τὸ γάρ τοι τοῦ πάθους οὐδαμῶς αὐτῇ πρέπον ἦν. τοῦτο τὸ ἔπρεπε σαφῶς τὸ χωρὶς θεοῦ συνέστησεν· ὡς γὰρ ἐκείνου οὐ πρέποντος τὸ πρέπον αὐτός φησιν, δεικνὺς ὁμοῦ καὶ ἅπερ ἔπραττε τότε, τίνα δὲ ταῦτα ἦν. ἔπρεπε γὰρ αὐτῷ, δι' ὃν τὰ πάντα καὶ δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα· δηλονότι τῷ θεῷ λόγῳ λέγων, ἐπειδήπερ πολλοῖς τῆς υἱότητος μετέδωκεν καὶ εἰς τὴν δόξαν ἤγαγεν ταύτην, τὸν τῆς ἁπάντων σωτηρίας ἀρχηγόν, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρα Ἰησοῦν τὸν Χριστόν, τὸν παρ' αὐτοῦ ληφθέντα ἄνθρωπον διὰ τῶν παθημάτων τέλειον ἀποφῆναι, ὥστε φαίνεσθαι καὶ τούτου τὴν φύσιν κἀκείνου τὴν χάριν.","english":"What then was the need here of the grace of God? For it is not his purpose to speak of his goodness toward us. But the sequence of what follows shows this rather: for having said that he tasted death without God, with the divinity in no way harmed by this, and because of this he received from his own nature this diminution little by little, so that from this he appears also to share in the honor through his connection with another. Since it was consistent that those hearing these things would consider the dwelling of the Word of God in him superfluous at the time of the passion, contributing nothing to the matters at hand if indeed he tasted death without that experience, he adds: For it was fitting for him, on account of whom are all things and through whom are all things, having led many sons to glory, to perfect the leader of their salvation through sufferings. Nor was the divinity ineffective, he says; for it was fitting for it to do its own things and those which were appropriate to it; for the matter of the passion was in no way appropriate to it. This \"it was fitting\" clearly established the \"without God\"; for as that was not fitting, he speaks of what is fitting, showing at once both what he was then doing and what these things were. For it was fitting for him, on account of whom are all things and through whom are all things—clearly speaking of the Word of God, since he imparted sonship to many and led them into this glory, to make perfect the leader of the salvation of all, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, the man taken from him, through sufferings, so that both the nature of this one and the grace of that one appear.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"χάριτι θεοῦ","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus questions the need to mention 'grace of God' here, arguing the context is about Christ's passion and the divine nature's non-participation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"χωρὶς θεοῦ","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'without God' (χωρὶς θεοῦ) is central: Theodorus interprets it as Christ's human nature experiencing death apart from the divine nature, which remains unharmed.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"ἔπρεπε γὰρ αὐτῷ","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus cites and glosses a passage from Hebrews (likely 2:10) about it being fitting for Christ to perfect the leader of salvation through sufferings.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"θεότητος","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus's distinction between Christ's divine nature (θεότης) and human nature reflects Antiochene Christology, emphasizing the divinity's impassibility during the passion.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐπάγει","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus uses 'he adds' (ἐπάγει) to mark the apostle's introduction of a new argument, showing the logical progression from questioning grace to affirming the fittingness of Christ's suffering.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"υἱότητος","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus's mention of imparting 'sonship' (υἱότης) to many reflects his broader soteriology, where Christ as archetype leads others to adoptive divine sonship.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text is fragmentary; the exact referent of 'him' in 'the man taken from him' is ambiguous—likely Christ's human nature assumed by the Word."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"Οὐδὲ γὰρ νῦν, φησί, συμβουλεύειν προσῆκεν ὑμῖν, ὅπως ἂν ἀποστάντες τῶν χειρόνων ἐπὶ τὸ κρεῖττον ῥέψητε διὰ τῆς ἐπὶ τὸν Χριστὸν πίστεως· πρὸς γὰρ ἤδη πεπιστευκότας ὁ λόγος μοι γίνεται. ὥστε τὰ αὐτὰ παραινεῖν ὑμῖν προσῆκεν, ὅπως ἂν ἐπιμείνητε τοῖς δόξασιν ἅπαξ. τοῦτο οὖν λέγει, ὅτι οἱ πιστεύσαντες καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος μετειληφότες μέτοχοι τῆς ὑποστάσεως τοῦ Χριστοῦ γεγόναμεν, ὥσπερ τινὰ φυσικὴν τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν κοινωνίαν δεξάμενοι. λείπει δὴ λοιπὸν τὸ τὴν ἀρχὴν ταύτην ἐν ἀκεραίῳ διαφυλάξαι γνώμῃ. Βούλεται\n\nδεῖξαι ὅτι πάντες οἱ διὰ Μωϋσέως ἐξελθόντες ἀπώλοντο δι' ἀπιστίαν, ὥστε ἐκ παραλλήλου μειζόνως φοβῆσαι τούτους πρὸς οὓς ἐποιεῖτο τὸν λόγον. οἱ δὲ τούτοις ἀντιλέγοντες προσεῖχον οὔτε τῇ ἀκολουθίᾳ τῶν ἑξῆς, τοῦ τίσιν δὲ προσώχθισεν; καὶ τίσιν δὲ ὤμοσεν; ἀναγινωσκομένων μὲν κατ' ἐρώτησιν, τὴν αὐτὴν δὲ ἀπαιτούντων ἀνταπόδοσιν· οὔτε ἐκείνῳ ὅτι τίνες δὲ ἀκούσαντες παρεπίκραναν; τότε λέγεσθαι κατ' αὐτὴν ἠδύναντο τὴν διάνοιαν, εἴπερ δὴ ὀλίγοι ἀπὸ πολλῶν τοῦτο ὑπομεμενηκότες ἦσαν. λέγομεν γὰρ ἐπὶ τῶν πραττομένων ὅτι τίνες ἐποίησαν; τὸ δὲ μέρος ἀπὸ πλήθους ἀποτεμνόμενοι, ὅταν ἐλάττονας εἶναι τοὺς πεποιηκότας συμβαίνῃ τῶν οὐ πεποιηκότων. ἐνταῦθα δὲ δύο μόνοι, Ἰησοῦς καὶ Χαλέβ· ὥστε οὐδὲ ἀκολουθίαν εἶχέν τινα τὸ λέγειν τίνας εἶναι τοὺς παραπικραίνοντας, δύο μόνων ἀπὸ τοσούτου πλήθους ὄντων. ** οὐδὲν λυμαίνεσθαι τῇ ἀποφάσει τῶν δύο νομίσας τὸν ἀριθμόν.","english":"Nor does it now, he says, befit me to advise you how, by withdrawing from the worse, you might incline toward the better through faith in Christ; for my discourse is addressed to those who already believe. So it was fitting to exhort you to the same things, namely, that you might persevere in what you once approved. Therefore he says this: that those who have believed and have partaken of the Spirit have become partakers of the hypostasis of Christ, as if having received a kind of natural communion with him. It remains, then, to preserve this beginning in an unimpaired disposition. He wishes\n\nto show that all those who went out through Moses perished because of unbelief, so that by comparison he might more greatly frighten those to whom he was speaking. But those who argue against this attended neither to the sequence of what follows—namely, with whom was he displeased, and to whom did he swear?—which, when read as a question, demands the same answer; nor to that point: who were those who, having heard, provoked? For that could be said in accordance with that meaning only if indeed few from among many had undergone this. For we say of actions, \"Who did them?\" cutting off a part from the multitude, when it happens that those who did it are fewer than those who did not. But here there are only two, Joshua and Caleb; so that it had no coherence to say who were the provokers, when only two from so great a multitude existed. He considered that the number did no harm to the statement of the two.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ὑποστάσεως","severity":"info","text":"The term hypostasis here denotes the underlying reality or substance of Christ, a key concept in Trinitarian theology. Theodore uses it to express the believer's participation in Christ's essence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἰησοῦς καὶ Χαλέβ","severity":"info","text":"Theodore references Joshua and Caleb as the only two faithful spies from Numbers 14, who did not provoke God. This illustrates his argument that only a few remained faithful among many.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"οἱ διὰ Μωϋσέως ἐξελθόντες","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'those who went out through Moses' refers to the Israelites who left Egypt under Moses' leadership. Theodore contrasts their fate with the audience to emphasize the consequences of unbelief.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐκ παραλλήλου","severity":"info","text":"Theodore uses a comparative argument (ἐκ παραλλήλου) to frighten his audience by drawing a parallel between the Israelites' unbelief and their own potential failure, reinforcing the exhortation to persevere.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"οἱ δὲ τούτοις ἀντιλέγοντες","severity":"info","text":"Theodore critiques opponents who misinterpret the passage by ignoring the sequence and the rhetorical questions. This reflects early Christian exegetical debates over the interpretation of Hebrews.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of 'those who argue against this' is not specified; they may be rival exegetes or heretical groups. The reading assumes they are critics of Theodore's interpretation."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"Προσῆκεν φοβεῖσθαι, φησίν, ὅπως ἂν μὴ αὐτοὶ τῆς εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσιν εἰσόδου τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν δεξάμενοι ὑστερήσωμεν μοχθηρίᾳ γνώμης· μηδὲ γάρ τις οἰέσθω ἀρκεῖν αὐτῷ τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τῶν μελλόντων, ὥσπερ οὐδὲ ἐκείνοις· οὐ γὰρ ἦσαν κατὰ τὴν πίστιν τοῖς ἐπαγγελθεῖσι συνημμένοι. ὅθεν οὕτως ἀναγνωστέον· μὴ συγκεκερασμένους τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκουσθεῖσιν, ἵνα εἴπῃ, ταῖς πρὸς αὐτοὺς γεγενημέναις ἐπαγγελίαις τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ Μωϋσέως. Ἀληθινῆς καταπαύσεως τοῦτο τὸ ἔργον, τὸ μὴ πάλιν ἐπὶ τὰ παλαιὰ ἀνατρέχειν μεταβολὴν ὑπομένοντας καὶ μετάθεσιν. ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ θεὸς λέγεται πεπαῦσθαι τοῦ ποιεῖν τὸν κόσμον, ἅπαξ αὐτοῦ τῇ κατασκευῇ τέλος δεδωκώς, οὕτω προσῆκεν καὶ τὸν εἰς κατάπαυσιν εἰσιόντα μὴ παλινδρομεῖν ἐπὶ τὰ παλαιά, πόνους ὑφορώμενον τοὺς τῆς ἀρετῆς ἐπὶ παράβασιν νομίμων· τούτοις γὰρ ἀκολουθεῖν ἀνάγκη τὴν μεταβολὴν καὶ τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς καταστάσεως μετάστασιν. Τὸ δὲ σήμερον, φησίν, οὔτε ἀόριστόν ἐστιν, οὔτε μὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ ἐκτὸς ἡμέρας διαστήματος λέγεσθαι δύναται ὡς ἂν ἐφ' ἑκάστης ἡμέρας τοῦ σήμερον ἁρμόττοντος. τοῦτο δὲ οὐ τῆς ἀποστολικῆς σαφηνείας ἕνεκεν μόνον ἐπισημήνασθαι δίκαιον ᾠήθην, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν βουλομένων ἐπὶ τῆς γεννήσεως τῆς τοῦ μονογενοῦς θεότητος λαμβάνειν τὸ ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε, οἳ τὸ σήμερον ἀόριστον εἶναι ἀποφαίνονται, οὐδὲ τοῦτο ἐννοοῦντες ὅτι τὸ σήμερον λέγεσθαι οὐκ ἂν δύναιτο μὴ οὔσης ἡμέρας. ὅτι γὰρ οὐδὲ ἀόριστον λέγοιτο ἂν τὸ σήμερον, σαφῶς ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐδήλωσεν εἰπών· πάλιν τινὰ ὁρίζει ἡμέραν ἐν Δαυὶδ λέγων, ἢ δὲ καὶ ἑτέρωθι·","english":"It was fitting to fear, he says, lest we, having received the promise of entry into the rest, should fall short through depravity of mind. For let no one think that the promise of future things suffices for him, any more than it did for them; for they were not united by faith to the things promised. Hence one must read thus: not being mingled by faith with what was heard, that is, with the promises made to them by God through Moses. This is the work of true rest: not to run back again to the old, undergoing change and transposition. For just as God is said to have rested from making the world, having once given completion to its construction, so it was fitting that one entering into rest should not run back to the old, dreading the labors of virtue as a transgression of laws; for change and removal from the state must necessarily follow these. The \"today,\" he says, is neither indefinite, nor can it be said of the external interval of a day, as if \"today\" were applicable to each day. I thought it right to note this not only for the sake of apostolic clarity, but also for those who wish to take the \"I have begotten you today\" of the generation of the Only-begotten's divinity, who declare that \"today\" is indefinite, not even considering that \"today\" could not be spoken if there were no day. For that \"today\" would not be indefinite, the apostle clearly indicated by saying: again he defines a certain day in David, saying, or also elsewhere.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"κατάπαυσις","severity":"info","text":"The term 'rest' (κατάπαυσις) is used here to denote the promised state of salvation, echoing its use in Hebrews and the LXX for the Sabbath or the Promised Land.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"συνημμένοι","severity":"info","text":"The verb 'united' (συνημμένοι) is a key term for Theodore, indicating the necessary personal commitment to faith, not mere intellectual assent.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'I have begotten you today' likely alludes to Psalm 2:7 (LXX) or a baptismal liturgy, used by opponents to argue for an indefinite 'today' in Christ's generation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"μονογενοῦς","severity":"info","text":"The reference to the 'Only-begotten's divinity' reflects Theodore's anti-Arian polemic, insisting on a literal temporal 'today' against those who allegorize it to deny Christ's eternal generation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀναγνωστέον","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'one must read thus' (ἀναγνωστέον) signals Theodore's exegetical intervention, correcting a misreading of Hebrews by re-punctuating or reinterpreting the clause.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"πάλιν τινὰ ὁρίζει ἡμέραν ἐν Δαυὶδ λέγων","severity":"caution","text":"The final sentence is fragmentary; the reference to David may be to a psalm, but the exact citation is lost, and the text breaks off, leaving the argument incomplete.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'ἢ δὲ καὶ ἑτέρωθι' is ambiguous: it may introduce another citation or be a textual corruption; the English draft treats it as part of the apostle's statement, but the Greek is unclear.","The identity of the opponents who take 'today' as indefinite is not specified; they may be Origenists or Arians, but Theodore does not name them."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"παρακαλεῖτε ἑαυτούς, ἔφη, καθ' ἑκάστην ἡμέραν ἄχρις οὗ τὸ σήμερον καλεῖται. πρῶτον μὲν ἔδειξεν ὅτι οὐκ ἔξω τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸ σήμερον λέγοιτο, τῷ εἰπεῖν καθ' ἑκάστην ἡμέραν, καὶ οὕτως ἐπαγαγεῖν τὸ ἄχρις οὗ τὸ σήμερον καλεῖται. ἔπειτα οὐδὲ οὕτω φαίνεται περὶ τοῦ σήμερον ὡς ἂν ἀορίστου διαλεγόμενος, καὶ δυναμένου μὲν τοῖς παρεληλυθόσιν, δυναμένου δὲ καὶ τοῖς μέλλουσιν ἁρμόττειν. τί γὰρ φησίν; καθ' ἑκάστην ἡμέραν τὸ σήμερον λέγεσθαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς νομίσαντες, οὕτως ἐπιμελεῖσθε τοῦ μένειν ἐπὶ τῆς πίστεως· ὡς γὰρ τοῦ σήμερον τὴν παροῦσαν σημαίνοντος ἡμέραν, οὕτως αὐτοῖς συνεβούλευσεν, καταχρησάμενος τῇ σημασίᾳ μᾶλλον πρὸς τὸ τῆς παραινέσεως ὠφέλιμον. Τὸ διὰ δύο ἀμεταθέτων, τῷ τε θεὸν εἶναι τὸν ἐπαγγειλάμενον οὐδαμῶς οἷόν τε ψεύσασθαι, καὶ τῷ μεθ' ὅρκου ποιήσασθαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν.\n\n207 Προσθεὶς ὅτι αἰώνιος ἡμῖν γέγονεν ἀρχιερεὺς ὁ Χριστὸς τῷ πάντας τοὺς καθ' ἑκάστην γενεὰν πιστεύοντας δι' ἑαυτοῦ προσάγειν τῷ θεῷ ἐπὶ τῇ τῆς ἀναστάσεως ἐλπίδι.","english":"Exhort yourselves, he said, each day until the present day is called. First he showed that the present day is not spoken of outside the days, by saying each day, and thus adding until the present day is called. Then not even thus does he appear to be speaking about the present day as if it were indefinite, and capable of fitting both the past and the future. For what does he say? Thinking that the present day is spoken to you each day, thus take care to remain in the faith; for as the present day signifies the current day, so he advised them, using the meaning rather for the benefit of the exhortation. The point through two unchangeable things: both that God is the one who promised, who can in no way lie, and that he made the promise with an oath.\n\n207 Adding that Christ has become a high priest for us eternally, by bringing all those who believe in each generation through himself to God in the hope of the resurrection.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"παρακαλεῖτε ἑαυτούς","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus interprets the exhortation as a daily self-reminder to remain in faith, linking the present day to the eschatological promise.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"σήμερον","severity":"info","text":"The term 'today' is used in a flexible sense, not strictly temporal but as a rhetorical device to urge constant vigilance in faith.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"πρῶτον μὲν ... ἔπειτα","severity":"info","text":"The passage is structured as a two-step argument: first showing 'today' is not outside days, then clarifying its indefinite application to past and future.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"μεθ' ὅρκου ποιήσασθαι τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν","severity":"info","text":"The reference to a promise made with an oath underscores the inviolability of God's covenant, a common theme in patristic exegesis of Hebrews.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"αἰώνιος ... ἀρχιερεὺς ὁ Χριστὸς","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus asserts Christ's eternal high priesthood, a distinctive Christological claim that aligns with Antiochene emphasis on Christ's continuous mediatorial role.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text at line 207 may be a later addition or marginal note; its connection to the preceding argument is not entirely clear."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"Διηγεῖτο ὕστερον ὅπως ὁ ναὸς κατεσκεύαστο, καὶ λέγει δύο εἶναι τὰς σκηνάς, ἀλλ' εἰς μὲν τὴν πρώτην διὰ παντὸς τοὺς ἱερεῖς εἰσιόντας τὰ νενομισμένα ἐπιτελεῖν, εἰς δὲ τὴν δευτέραν ἅπαξ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ τὸν ἀρχιερέα μόνον. καὶ δὴ τὸ ἀπὸ τούτων σημαινόμενον διδάσκειν βουλόμενος ἐπάγει· τοῦτο δηλοῦντος τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου, μήπω πεφανερῶσθαι τὴν τῶν ἁγίων ὁδόν. ὥσπερ τοίνυν οὐχ ἡ τοῦ τόπου φύσις ἦν ἄβατος, ἐφ' οὗ δὴ τὸν ἐνδότερον οἶκον κατεσκευάσθαι συνέβαινεν, ἀλλ' ἡ κατασκευὴ καὶ τὸ νόμιμον καὶ ἡ τοῦ τόπου ἀφιέρωσις ἄβατον ἐποίει τὸν τόπον, ὅμως σύμβολον ἔφη εἶναι τοῦτο τῶν οὐρανῶν, οὕτω κἀνταῦθα βουλόμενος τὸν Χριστὸν ἀρχιερέα δεῖξαι κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδέκ, λέγει τὰ κατ' ἐκεῖνον οὐ τὴν φύσιν ἐξηγούμενος, ἀλλὰ τὴν κατ' αὐτὸν διήγησιν ἀπὸ τῆς θείας τιθεὶς γραφῆς καὶ ἀπ' ἐκείνης ἐμφαίνων τὸ ὅμοιον. Ἀπάτορα τοίνυν καὶ ἀμήτορα καλεῖ, ὡς τῆς θείας γραφῆς γονέας αὐτοῦ μὴ διηγουμένης· ὅθεν ἐπήγαγε τὸ ἀγενεαλόγητος, δεικνὺς ὅτι οὐ φύσιν λέγει τοῦ ἀνδρὸς ἀλλὰ τῆς θείας γραφῆς διήγησιν. εἶτα ἐπισυνάπτει· μήτε ἀρχὴν ἡμερῶν, μήτε ζωῆς τέλος ἔχων, οὐκ ἐν τῇ φύσει, ἀλλ' ἐν τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ. καὶ ἐπειδὴ ταῦτα δυνατὸν ἦν καὶ ἐπ' ἄλλου λέγεσθαι ἐμνημόνευσε γὰρ ἡ θεία γραφὴ πολλῶν οὔτε τοὺς γονέας εἰποῦσα οὔτε τὴν γενεαλογίαν ἐκθεμένη, καὶ μάλιστα ὅσους ἔξω τοῦ Ἰσραηλιτικοῦ γένους γεγονότας μεμαθήκαμεν καλῶς ἐπήγαγε τὸ ἀφωμοιωμένος δὲ τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ, μένει ἱερεὺς εἰς τὸ διηνεκές· οὐκέτι γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο μετὰ τῶν λοιπῶν ἦν ἐπ' ἄλλου.","english":"He later recounted how the temple was constructed, and says that there were two sanctuaries, but that into the first the priests entered continually to perform the prescribed rites, while into the second only the high priest entered once a year. And indeed, wishing to teach the meaning signified by these things, he adds: the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way of the saints was not yet revealed. Just as, therefore, it was not the nature of the place that was inaccessible, upon which the inner house happened to be built, but the construction, the law, and the consecration of the place made the place inaccessible, yet he said this was a symbol of the heavens, so also here, wishing to show Christ as high priest according to the order of Melchizedek, he speaks of the things concerning him not by explaining his nature, but by setting forth the account concerning him from divine scripture and from that revealing the similarity. Therefore he calls him fatherless and motherless, since divine scripture does not recount his parents; whence he added \"without genealogy,\" showing that he speaks not of the man's nature but of the account of divine scripture. Then he adds: having neither beginning of days nor end of life, not in nature, but in divine scripture. And since it was possible for these things to be said also of another—for divine scripture mentioned many without stating their parents or setting forth their genealogy, especially those we have learned were born outside the Israelite race—he well added: but being likened to the Son of God, he remains priest forever; for this was no longer among the things that could be said of another.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"δύο εἶναι τὰς σκηνάς","severity":"info","text":"The two sanctuaries (σκηνάς) refer to the Temple's Holy Place and Holy of Holies, a standard typology in early Christian exegesis of Hebrews 9.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"τοῦτο δηλοῦντος τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου, μήπω πεφανερῶσθαι τὴν τῶν ἁγίων ὁδόν","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus paraphrases Hebrews 9:8, where the Holy Spirit indicates that the way of the saints was not yet revealed.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀπάτορα … ἀμήτορα … ἀγενεαλόγητος","severity":"info","text":"These terms (fatherless, motherless, without genealogy) are drawn from the description of Melchizedek in Hebrews 7:3, interpreted by Theodorus as a scriptural, not ontological, claim.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ὥσπερ … οὕτω κἀνταῦθα","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus uses a comparative structure (just as … so also here) to link the Temple typology to the Melchizedek typology, showing Christ as high priest.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀφωμοιωμένος δὲ τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus cites Hebrews 7:3 (likened to the Son of God) to argue that Melchizedek's unique priesthood is a type of Christ, not a natural category.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"μήτε ἀρχὴν ἡμερῶν, μήτε ζωῆς τέλος ἔχων","severity":"caution","text":"Theodorus insists this phrase refers to scriptural silence, not Melchizedek's nature, but the Greek could be read as a metaphysical claim; his interpretation is deliberately restrictive.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek phrase μήπω πεφανερῶσθαι (not yet revealed) could imply temporal concealment or eschatological unveiling; Theodorus reads it as a historical claim about the pre-Christian era.","The term ἀγενεαλόγητος (without genealogy) is ambiguous between 'not having a recorded genealogy' and 'not having a genealogy by nature'; Theodorus explicitly chooses the former."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":12,"ref":"p12","source":"ἐμφαίνει δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς κατὰ τὴν γραφὴν διηγήσεως, ὅπως αὐτῷ καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ προσῆν ἃν δὴ καὶ τοῦτο. καὶ γὰρ ὁ Χριστὸς ἦν μὲν ἀπάτωρ γεννήσει τῆς ἀνθρωπείας φύσεως, ἀμήτωρ δὲ τῇ γεννήσει τῆς θείας ὑπάρξεως, ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ ἀγενεαλόγητος· τίς γὰρ ἂν γενεαλογία τοῦ ἐκ πατρὸς ὄντος μόνον; ὅτι δὲ οὔτε ἀρχὴν ἡμερῶν ἔχει οὔτε ζωῆς τέλος, καὶ τοῦτο δῆλον, ἀλλ' ἐνταῦθα μὲν ἐπὶ τῶν πραγμάτων, ἐκεῖ δὲ ἐπὶ τῆς διηγήσεως. τὸ μὲν ἱερέα μένειν εἰς τὸ διηνεκὲς ἀπὸ τῆς θείας ἔλαβε γραφῆς τῷ εἰπεῖν· σὺ εἶ ἱερεὺς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδέκ, ὡς ἂν κἀκείνου διηνεκῶς ἱερατεύοντος. διηνεκῆ δὲ αὐτὸν ἱερέα ἐκάλεσεν ὡς ἂν οὐ παραπέμψαντα τὴν ἱερατείαν εἰς διαδόχους, ὅπερ ἐν νόμῳ συνέβαινε γίνεσθαι. ὅθεν καὶ εἶπεν· ἀφωμοιωμένος δὲ τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ, καίτοι γε τὸ ἀκόλουθον ἦν τοῦτον ἀφωμοιῶσθαι λέγειν ἐκείνῳοὐ γὰρ ὁ πρῶτος ἀφομοιοῦται τῷ δευτέρῳἀλλ' ἐπειδὴ παρὰ τούτῳ μέν ἐστιν ἡ ἀλήθεια τῶν πραγμάτων, ἐκείνῳ δὲ πρόσεστιν οὐδὲν τοιοῦτον, τῷ δὲ εἴδει τῆς διηγήσεως καλῶς ἀφωμοιῶσθαι ἐκεῖνον ἔφη, ὡς ἂν τῆς θείας γραφῆς ἐπὶ τῆς διηγήσεως ὁμοίωμα τοῦ ἐσομένου δεῖξαι βουληθείσης ἡμῖν. Δείκνυται, φησί, τούτου πρὸς ἐκεῖνον τὸ διάφορον ἀπὸ τοῦ μεθ' ὅρκου λαβεῖν τὴν ἱερατείαν· οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἄνευ ὅρκων ἐγίνοντο διὰ τὸ δεῖν αὐτοὺς καὶ παύεσθαί ποτε τῆς ἱερατείας, οὑτοσὶ δὲ μεθ' ὅρκων, ἐπειδὴ μένειν ἔμελλεν ἐπὶ τῆς ἀξίας. οὕτω μείζονα πολλῷ τῶν ἐν νόμῳ τὴν ἀξίαν ἐδέξατο, ἐπειδὴ μείζονα καὶ παρέχειν τοῖς προσιοῦσιν ἔμελλεν. τὸ γὰρ ἔγγυος οὕτως λέγει ὡς ἂν τῷ καταστῆναι ἐγγυωμένου ἡμῖν τὸ κέρδος, ἐπεὶ καὶ οὕτως ἔχει·","english":"He indicates from the narrative according to scripture how he also possessed the other attributes, including this one. For Christ was fatherless in the generation of human nature, and motherless in the generation of divine existence, but also without genealogy; for who could trace the genealogy of one who exists only from a father? That he has neither a beginning of days nor an end of life is also clear, but here in terms of realities, there in terms of the narrative. That he remains a priest perpetually he took from divine scripture by saying: \"You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek,\" as if that one also perpetually served as priest. And he called him a perpetual priest as if he did not transmit the priesthood to successors, which happened in the law. Hence he also said: \"And he is likened to the Son of God,\" although the logical order would have been to say that this one is likened to that one—for the first is not likened to the second—but because the truth of the realities is with this one, while that one has nothing of the sort, he said that that one is well likened in the form of the narrative, as if divine scripture in the narrative intended to show us a likeness of what was to come. The difference between this one and that one, he says, is shown by the fact that he received the priesthood with an oath; for the others were made without oaths because they had to cease from the priesthood at some point, but this one with oaths, since he was to remain in the office. Thus he received an office far greater than those in the law, since he was to provide greater benefits to those who approached. For he speaks of \"guarantor\" as if by his establishment he guarantees us the benefit, and indeed it is so.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀπάτωρ ... ἀμήτωρ","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus uses the paradoxical terms 'fatherless' and 'motherless' to distinguish Christ's human and divine natures, a Christological formulation typical of Antiochene theology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"σὺ εἶ ἱερεὺς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδέκ","severity":"info","text":"This quotation, not found verbatim in the canonical LXX or NT, likely adapts Psalm 110:4 (LXX 109:4) or a liturgical tradition linking Melchizedek to perpetual priesthood.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀφωμοιωμένος δὲ τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus argues that Melchizedek is 'likened to the Son of God' as a typological foreshadowing, reversing the expected order of comparison to emphasize the priority of the type over the antitype.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ἔγγυος","severity":"info","text":"The term 'guarantor' (ἔγγυος) is used to describe Christ's priesthood as securing benefits for believers, a legal metaphor common in early Christian soteriology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐνταῦθα μὲν ἐπὶ τῶν πραγμάτων, ἐκεῖ δὲ ἐπὶ τῆς διηγήσεως","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus distinguishes between 'realities' (πραγμάτων) and 'narrative' (διηγήσεως), a hermeneutical key in his typological exegesis, separating literal from spiritual sense.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀφωμοιωμένος ... τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ","severity":"caution","text":"The syntax of the comparison is ambiguous: Theodorus may be correcting a misreading where Melchizedek is said to be likened to Christ, rather than Christ to Melchizedek.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The exact source of the quotation 'You are a priest forever...' is unclear; it may be a conflation of Psalm 110:4 and Hebrews 7. The phrase 'likened to the Son of God' could be read as either Melchizedek or Christ being the subject of comparison."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":13,"ref":"p13","source":"τὸ γὰρ ἀναστῆναι πρῶτος, καθὰ καὶ ἀρχιερέα αὐτὸν καλεῖ, ἐγγυᾶται ἡμῖν τὴν τῆς ἀναστάσεως ὁμοιότητα.\n\nἌρχεται ἐντεῦθεν λέγειν, ὅπως τὰ ἐν νόμῳ σύμβολα καὶ τύποι τῶν ἐν τῇ χάριτι, καὶ ὅπως ἐν ἐκείνοις ταῦτα προθεωρούμενα διϊδεῖν δυνατόν, ὁμοῦ τῇ παραθέσει καὶ τὴν ὑπεροχὴν τούτων δεικνύς, ὅση τίς ἐστιν. ἐν ἀφηγήσει δὲ τῆς διδασκαλίας ποιεῖται τὴν καταρχήν. λέγει οὖν ὅτι καὶ ἡ πρώτη διαθήκη εἶχεν ὅρους καὶ προστάγματα λειτουργίας τῆς θεῷ ἀποδίδοσθαι ὀφειλούσης· δικαιώματα γὰρ λατρείας τὰ περὶ τούτων λέγει προστάγματα. Τό τε ἅγιον κοσμικόν. ἅγιον ἐνταῦθα καλεῖ τὸν ναὸν εἰκότως ἐν ᾧ τὴν λειτουργίαν ἀποδίδοσθαι τῷ θεῷ\n\nσυνέβαινεν, εἴτε καὶ τὴν σκηνήν, ἐπειδὴ ταύτην ἐν τάξει τοῦ ναοῦ πρότερον εἶχον· ὁμοίως γὰρ ἐκείνην τε ναὸν ἐκάλουν ὡς ἂν ἐν αὐτῇ τοῦ θεοῦ τυγχάνοντος, καὶ τὸν παρὰ τοῦ Σολομῶντος ὕστερον. καὶ τοῦτο μαθεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης τῶν Βασιλειῶν ἔνεστι σαφῶς λεγούσης· καὶ Σαμουὴλ ἐκάθευδεν ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ κυρίου οὗ ἦν ἡ κιβωτὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, μήπω τοῦ ναοῦ ὑπὸ Σολομῶντος οἰκοδομηθέντος. ὥσπερ δὲ σύμβολον τοῦ κόσμου κατασκευάσαι κατά τινα τύπον τὴν σκηνὴν τῷ Μωϋσεῖ κελεύων, ὁ θεὸς προσέταξεν αὐτῷ περίβολον ποιῆσαι ἀπὸ τῶν καταπετασμάτων μέσῳ διειλημμένον ἑτέρῳ· οὕτω δὲ καὶ ὁ ναὸς κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν ὕστερον ἐγένετο τύπον. Νῦν, φησίν, ὀφθείς, ὅτε τὴν ἁμαρτίαν κρατεῖν συνέβαινεν, ἀναγκαίως τὸν διὰ τὴν ἁμαρτίαν κρατοῦντα θάνατον ἐδέξατο, τότε δὲ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὡς εἰκὸς λελυμένης, ἀνάγκη καὶ αὐτὸν ἀπαθῶς ὀφθῆναι·","english":"For the fact that he was the first to rise, just as he also calls him high priest, guarantees for us the likeness of the resurrection.\n\nHe begins here to speak of how the symbols and types in the law correspond to those in grace, and how it is possible to discern these things prefigured in those, while at the same time showing by the juxtaposition the superiority of these, whatever it is. And he makes the beginning in a narrative of the teaching. He says, then, that the first covenant also had terms and ordinances of the service that was due to be rendered to God; for he calls the ordinances concerning these things \"ordinances of worship.\" And the holy place is cosmic. He here calls the temple \"holy\" fittingly, in which the service to God happened to be rendered, or also the tabernacle, since they had this earlier in the place of the temple; for they called that a temple as well, as if God were present in it, and likewise the one later built by Solomon. And this can be learned clearly from the first book of Kings, which says: \"And Samuel slept in the temple of the Lord, where the ark of God was,\" although the temple had not yet been built by Solomon. And just as God, commanding Moses to construct the tabernacle as a symbol of the world according to a certain type, ordered him to make an enclosure divided in the middle by another curtain, so also the temple was later made according to the same type. Now, he says, when he appeared, since sin happened to prevail, he necessarily received the death that prevailed because of sin; but then, when sin was, as is likely, dissolved, it is necessary that he also appear without suffering.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"τὸ γὰρ ἀναστῆναι πρῶτος","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus interprets Christ's being 'first to rise' as a guarantee of the likeness of resurrection for believers, linking it to the title 'high priest'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἄρχεται ἐντεῦθεν λέγειν","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus marks a new section where the author begins to explain how symbols and types in the law prefigure those in grace, showing the superiority of the latter.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"καὶ Σαμουὴλ ἐκάθευδεν ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ κυρίου","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus cites 1 Kings 3:3 (LXX) to argue that the term 'temple' was used for the tabernacle before Solomon's temple was built.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"τὴν σκηνὴν τῷ Μωϋσεῖ κελεύων","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus describes the tabernacle as a symbol of the world, constructed by divine command to Moses with an enclosure divided by a curtain, a type later followed by the temple.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ἅγιον κοσμικόν","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'holy place is cosmic' likely means the temple or tabernacle represents the cosmos, a common patristic typology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Νῦν, φησίν, ὀφθείς","severity":"caution","text":"The final sentence is ambiguous: it may refer to Christ's appearance and death due to sin, but the referent of 'he' and the logic of sin's dissolution are unclear.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The final sentence's subject ('he') is ambiguous—possibly Christ or a type—and the connection between sin prevailing, death, and sin's dissolution is not fully explained."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]},{"i":14,"ref":"p14","source":"τὸ γὰρ χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας τοῦτο λέγει ὅτι μὴ κρατούσης ἔτι τῆς ἁμαρτίας, οὕτω καὶ αὐτὸς ἔξω παντὸς ἀνθρωπίνου πάθους ὀφθήσεται τότε.\n\nΤαῦτα εἴρηται μὲν τοῖς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι πρὸς τὸν θεὸν βουλομένοις εἰπεῖν ὅτι θυσίας με οὐκ ἀπῄτησας ἀλλὰ μόνον τὸ ὑπακούειν σου καὶ τὸ θέλημά σου ποιεῖν· καὶ εὐθύ μοι τὰ τῆς ἐπανόδου λοιπὸν ἀναμφίβολα ἦν. μεταλλάξας οὖν αὐτὴν ὡς ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ Χριστοῦ ταύτῃ φησίν, ἀντὶ τοῦ ὠτία, σῶμα, εἰπών, κατηρτίσω μοι. Ἀνάγκη τοὺς ἐνταῦθα πρὸς τὰ χείρω μεταστάντας ἀπὸ τῶν κρειττόνων, ἀναστάντας τῇ κολάσει παραδοθῆναι λοιπόν, οὐκ ἐπιδεχομένους τότε μετάνοιαν. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐπὶ τοῦ παρόντος βίου τὴν μετάνοιαν ἀναιρεῖ, ἀλλὰ τῷ μὴ εἶναι τότε συγχώρησιν λαβεῖν τὸν ἐπὶ τῷ πταίειν ἐνταῦθα μεμενηκότα καὶ μηδεμίαν ἐπὶ τὸ πταίειν δεξάμενον αἴσθησιν, ἀλογίᾳ τινὶ μετὰ πολλῆς ἡδονῆς ἅπαν ἐπιτελοῦντα ἁμάρτημα.\n\n210 Τὸ περὶ τῆς πίστεως ζητούμενον παρὰ Ἰουδαίοις μάλιστα εἰδὼς ἀπό τινος ἀκολουθίας, πολλαῖς ταῖς περὶ αὐτοῦ κέχρηται ἀποδείξεσιν. ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ προεβάλοντο τὸν νόμον καὶ τὴν ἐκ τῶν ἔργων αὐτοῦ δικαίωσιν, οὗτοι δὲ τὴν πίστιν, τοῦτο λέγοντες ὅτι κἂν μυρίοις τις ἐνέχηται κακοῖς, πιστεύσας μόνον τῷ Χριστῷ σύντομον ἁπάντων δέχεται· τὴν ἀπαλλαγήν, τῆς παρ' αὐτοῦ δικαιώσεως ἀξιούμενος. ὅθεν ὁρισάμενος αὐτήν, ὁμοῦ μὲν ὥστε οἰκειῶσαι τοῖς προειρημένοις, ὁμοῦ δὲ ὥστε καὶ μᾶλλον αὐτὴν δυνηθῆναι δεῖξαι παρὰ πᾶσι φαινομένην τοῖς ἐναρέτοις καὶ παλαιοῖς ἀνδράσιν, ἐπάγει· ἐν ταύτῃ γὰρ ἐμαρτυρήθησαν οἱ πρεσβύτεροι. Ἀκολούθως ἔτυχε τῇ ἑαυτοῦ πίστει·","english":"For he says \"without sin\" meaning that sin was not yet prevailing, and thus he himself will then be seen as free from every human passion.\n\nThese things were said to those in Babylon who wished to speak to God, saying, \"You did not demand a sacrifice from me, but only that I obey you and do your will; and straightaway the circumstances of my return were no longer doubtful for me.\" Therefore, changing it as if from the person of Christ, he says to her, instead of \"ears,\" saying \"body,\" \"you prepared for me.\" It is necessary that those who have here passed from better to worse things, having risen, be then handed over to punishment, no longer admitting repentance. For he does not abolish repentance in the present life, but because there is then no forgiveness for one who has remained here in error and has received no perception of his error, completing every sin with some irrationality and great pleasure.\n\n210 Knowing that the matter concerning faith is especially sought among the Jews from some sequence, he has used many proofs about it. For they put forward the law and justification from its works, while these put forward faith, saying that even if someone is entangled in countless evils, by merely believing in Christ he receives a swift release from all, being deemed worthy of justification from him. Therefore, having defined it, both so as to make it familiar from what was previously said, and also so as to be able to show it more clearly appearing among all the virtuous and ancient men, he adds: \"For in this the elders were testified.\" Consequently, he obtained his own faith.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"τὸ γὰρ χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας τοῦτο λέγει","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus interprets 'without sin' as meaning sin was not yet dominant, linking it to Christ's future freedom from human passion.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"τοῖς ἐν Βαβυλῶνι","severity":"info","text":"The reference to 'those in Babylon' likely alludes to the Jewish exilic community, a common trope in early Christian exegesis for diaspora Jews.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"κατηρτίσω μοι","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'you prepared for me' echoes LXX language of preparation (e.g., Exod 15:17), but no direct citation is given; Theodorus adapts it to Christ's voice.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"210","severity":"info","text":"The numeral 210 marks a new section, where Theodorus shifts to discuss faith as a topic disputed among Jews, contrasting law-based justification with faith-based release.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐν ταύτῃ γὰρ ἐμαρτυρήθησαν οἱ πρεσβύτεροι","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus cites the phrase 'in this the elders were testified' to align faith with virtuous ancient figures, a common apologetic move in early Christian reception of Hebrews.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"μεταλλάξας οὖν αὐτὴν ὡς ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ Χριστοῦ","severity":"caution","text":"Theodorus says Christ speaks 'instead of ears, saying body,' but the referent of 'her' is unclear; the text may be corrupt or elliptical.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of 'her' in the phrase 'changing it as if from the person of Christ, he says to her' is ambiguous; it may refer to a female figure in the source text or be a grammatical remnant.","The transition from the discussion of sin to the Babylon passage is abrupt, possibly due to lacunae in the manuscript."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]},{"i":15,"ref":"p15","source":"τῇ γὰρ ἀναστάσει πιστεύσας διὰ συμβόλων τινῶν ἀποθανόντα αὐτὸν ἐκομίσατο. τὸ γὰρ ἐν πολλῇ τοῦ θανάτου προσδοκίᾳ γενόμενον μηδὲν παθεῖν, τοῦ ἀληθῶς ἀναστησομένου σύμβολον ἦν, ὅσον τοῦ θανάτου πρὸς βραχὺ γευσάμενος ἀνέστη μηδὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ θανάτου παθών. τὸ γοῦν ἐν παραβολῇ ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐν συμβόλοις. Οὐχ ἁπλῶς εἶπεν ὅτι εἷς πᾶσι τῆς ἀνταποδόσεως καιρόςοὐ γὰρ τοῦτο ἦν αὐτῷ προκείμενονἀλλ' ἵνα δείξῃ ὅτι καὶ τοσαῦτα μὲν πεποιηκότες, τοσαῦτα δὲ καὶ πεπονθότες διὰ πίστεως, ὅμως ἔτι περιμένουσι τῶν ἐπαγγελθέντων τὴν ἀπόδοσιν, οὐ δυσχεραίνοντες, εἴ γε μεθ' ἡμῶν κομιοῦνται τῶν ὑστέρων, ὅπερ τὴν ὑπομονὴν αὐτῶν ἐδείκνυ μείζονα, εἴπερ δὴ καὶ μετὰ θάνατον ἔτι περιμένουσι τοὺς ἀγωνίσασθαι ὁμοίως αὐτοῖς ὀφείλοντας ὥστε μετ' ἐκείνων τυχεῖν τῆς τῶν καλῶν ἀπολαύσεως. μαρτύρων δὲ ἐνταῦθα οὐ τῶν πεπονθότων λέγει, ἀλλὰ τῶν μαρτυρούντων πρὸς τὴν πίστιν.\n\nΠοῦ εἰσιν οἱ λέγοντες τὸν ἀπόστολον ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ ἐπιστολῇ ἀναιρεῖν τὴν μετάνοιαν διὰ τοῦ λέγειν· ἀδύνατον γὰρ τοὺς φωτισθέντας καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν εἰς μετάνοιαν; πῶς ἄρα ταῦτα νοοῦσιν; πῶς τὰς παρειμένας χεῖρας καὶ τὰ παραλελυμένα γόνατα ἀνορθωθῆναι κελεύει; χωλοῦ δὲ ἴασιν ποίαν βούλεται γενέσθαι ὁ μετάνοιαν τῶν ἡμαρτηκότων οὐ προσιέμενος; ὅτι γὰρ ταῦτα πιστοῖς γράφει, δῆλον ἐξ ὧν φησι πρὸς αὐτούς· ἀναμιμνήσκεσθε δὲ τὰς πρότερον ἡμέρας, ἐν αἷς φωτισθέντες πολλὴν ἄθλησιν ὑπεμείνατε παθημάτων.","english":"For, having believed in the resurrection through certain symbols, he conveyed him as one who had died. For the fact that one who was in great expectation of death suffered nothing was a symbol of the one who would truly rise, in that, having tasted death briefly, he rose, suffering nothing from death. So \"in a parable\" is used instead of \"in symbols.\" He did not simply say that there is one time of recompense for all—for that was not his purpose—but to show that, although they had done so much and suffered so much through faith, they still await the fulfillment of the promises, not being displeased, since they will receive it together with us who come later, which demonstrated their greater endurance, if indeed even after death they still wait for those who must contend similarly to them, so that they may enjoy the good things together with them. Here he speaks of \"witnesses\" not as those who have suffered, but as those who bear witness to the faith.\n\nWhere are those who say that the apostle in this epistle abolishes repentance by saying: \"For it is impossible for those who have been enlightened and so forth to be renewed again to repentance\"? How then do they understand these things? How does he command that slack hands and paralyzed knees be straightened? What healing of a lame man does he wish to occur, if he does not accept repentance from those who have sinned? For that he writes these things to the faithful is clear from what he says to them: \"Remember the former days, in which, having been enlightened, you endured much struggle of sufferings.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐν παραβολῇ","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus glosses 'in a parable' as equivalent to 'in symbols,' indicating a hermeneutical move to treat parabolic language as typological or symbolic rather than narrative.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀδύνατον γὰρ τοὺς φωτισθέντας ... πάλιν ἀνακαινίζειν εἰς μετάνοιαν","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus quotes a phrase from Hebrews (likely 10:29 or a related passage) that some interpreters used to deny the possibility of repentance after baptism; he refutes this reading.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Ποῦ εἰσιν οἱ λέγοντες","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus engages contemporary opponents who claimed Hebrews abolishes repentance, showing that the epistle was contested in early Christian interpretation on this point.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"μαρτύρων","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus distinguishes 'witnesses' (μάρτυρες) as those who bear witness to faith, not those who have suffered martyrdom, reflecting a technical exegetical distinction.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"τὸ γοῦν ἐν παραβολῇ ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐν συμβόλοις","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus explicitly notes a substitution of terms ('parable' for 'symbols'), marking a deliberate lexical choice in the source text.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"χωλοῦ δὲ ἴασιν","severity":"caution","text":"The reference to healing a lame man may be metaphorical or drawn from an unknown source; its precise referent is unclear without further context.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of the 'he' who 'conveyed him as one who had died' is ambiguous; likely a biblical figure (e.g., Abraham and Isaac) but not specified.","The phrase 'those who have been enlightened' may refer to baptized Christians, but the exact passage from Hebrews is not cited verbatim."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":16,"ref":"p16","source":"Οὐ τὴν μετάνοιαν ἀνελεῖν διὰ τούτων βούλεται, ἀλλὰ διδάξαι ὡς οὐκ ἔνεστιν ἐν καιρῷ τὴν προσήκουσαν διόρθωσιν μὴ ἐπιδειξαμένους ὕστερον αὐτὴν ἀνακτᾶσθαι, ὅταν ὁ τῆς ἀνταποδόσεως καιρὸς καταλλήλως ἐπάγεσθαι τῷ ἑκάστου τρόπῳ μέλλῃ· οὐ γὰρ ἐναντία λέγειν ἐσπούδακεν ἑαυτῷ, καὶ ταῦτα οὕτως ἐκ τοῦ σύνεγγυς. γνοίη δ' ἄν τις ἐκ τοῦ παραδείγματος ὅ φησιν. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ ἐμνημόνευσε τοῦ Ἠσαῦ, τότε μὲν ἀθυμήσαντος ὅτε τῆς εὐλογίας οὐκ ἔτυχεν, μείναντος δὲ ἐπὶ τῆς τοῦ τρόπου κακίας ὁμοίως καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο. ἔπειτα οὐχὶ συγχωρήσεως ἁμαρτημάτων μετανοήσας οὐκ ἔτυχεν ἐκεῖνος· οὐ γὰρ τοῦτο ᾔτει τότε, ἀλλ' εὐλογίαν ἣν κατὰ τὴν ἀξίαν τοῦ τρόπου τῷ ἀδελφῷ δοθεῖσαν ἀφαιρεθῆναι αὖθις οὐδαμῶς οἷόν τε ἦν καὶ δοθῆναι τούτῳ πάλιν. ἔστι μέντοι καὶ τοῦτο εὑρεῖν, ὡς οὐκ ἀνόνητα αὐτῷ πάντη τὰ δάκρυα ἐγένετο. ἀμέλει φαίνεται ὁ πατὴρ μετὰ τοῦτο παθὼν ἐπ' αὐτῷ, καί τινας εὐλογίας αὐτῷ δεδωκώς. οὕτως οὐ τὴν μετάνοιαν ἀνελεῖν διὰ τούτων βούλεται. Καλῶς ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ προφήτου φωνῆς τῶν τε νῦν τὴν μεταβολὴν καὶ τῶν ὑστέρων τὸ βέβαιον συνίστησιν· τὸ μὲν γὰρ σείειν ἐπαγγείλασθαι τὴν μετάθεσιν αὐτῶν δηλοῖ πάντως ὡς ἐσομένην, τῇ δὲ τοῦ ἅπαξ προσθήκῃ τῶν μετὰ τοῦτο δηλοῖ τὸ ἀμετάθετον. Ἡγουμένους τοὺς παρ' αὐτοῖς καταγγείλαντας τὸν λόγον τῆς εὐσεβείας καὶ τελειωθέντας ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων αὐτόθι. πολλοὶ δὲ ἦσαν, οὐ Στέφανος μόνον καὶ Ἰάκωβος ὁ μαχαίρᾳ ἀναιρεθείς, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ τοῦ κυρίου ἀδελφὸς Ἰάκωβος, ἕτεροι δὲ πλεῖστοι σιωπῇ παραδεδομένοι.","english":"He does not intend through these things to do away with repentance, but to teach that it is not possible for those who have not shown the appropriate correction at the proper time to recover it later, when the time of requital is about to be applied correspondingly to each person's character; for he has not been eager to contradict himself, and these things are so from the immediate context. One may understand this from the example he mentions. For first he recalled Esau, who was then disheartened when he did not obtain the blessing, but remained in the same wickedness of character also after that. Then, that man did not obtain forgiveness of sins by repenting; for he was not asking for that at the time, but for a blessing which, having been given to his brother according to the worthiness of his character, could by no means be taken away again and given to this one instead. Yet it is also possible to find that his tears were not entirely without benefit. At any rate, the father appears afterward to have been moved by him and to have given him some blessings. Thus he does not intend through these things to do away with repentance. Well does he establish, from the voice of the prophet, both the change of those now and the steadfastness of those later; for promising to shake them clearly indicates their transformation as something that will happen, while the addition of \"once\" indicates the immutability of what follows. The leaders among them who proclaimed the word of piety and were perfected by the Jews there. And there were many, not only Stephen and James who was slain by the sword, but also James the brother of the Lord, and very many others handed over to silence.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὐ τὴν μετάνοιαν ἀνελεῖν","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus clarifies that the author of Hebrews does not abolish repentance, but restricts its timing relative to judgment.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἠσαῦ","severity":"info","text":"Esau's failed request for a blessing (Gen 27) is used as an example of untimely correction; Theodorus notes Isaac later gave other blessings.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἡγουμένους","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus refers to early Christian leaders killed by Jews, naming Stephen, James the son of Zebedee (slain by sword), and James the brother of the Lord.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ἅπαξ","severity":"info","text":"The word 'once' (ἅπαξ) in the prophetic voice is interpreted by Theodorus as indicating the immutability of the later state after transformation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"πρῶτον μὲν ... ἔπειτα","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus structures his argument by first recounting Esau's case, then distinguishing it from repentance for sins, showing logical progression.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"σιωπῇ παραδεδομένοι","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus notes many early martyrs are 'handed over to silence,' indicating a tradition of forgotten or unrecorded figures.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of 'the prophet' whose voice is cited is not specified; possibly Malachi or another minor prophet.","The phrase 'the leaders among them' could refer to Jewish Christian leaders or to the apostles; Theodorus does not clarify."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":17,"ref":"p17","source":"Εὐποιΐαν εἶπεν εἰς ἔπαινον τοῦ γινομένου, κοινωνίαν δὲ διὰ τὸ περὶ ὁμοπίστους γίνεσθαι ὡς ἂν δέον κοινωνοὺς ἡγεῖσθαι τοὺς τοιούτους τῶν προσόντων ἡμῖν, οὕτω μετὰ σπουδῆς ταῖς χρείαις αὐτῶν ἀρκεῖν αἱρουμένους. Ἀντὶ τοῦ προσκαρτερήσατε τῇ ἀναγνώσει, ἐνέγκατε τῆς προσοχῆς τὸν πόνον.","english":"He called it \"beneficence\" in praise of the action, and \"communion\" because it occurs among fellow believers, so that we should consider such persons as partners in what belongs to us, thus choosing with eagerness to supply their needs. Instead of \"persevere in reading,\" he said \"bear the labor of attention.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"Εὐποιΐαν","severity":"info","text":"The term εὐποιΐα (beneficence) is rare in the New Testament, occurring only in Hebrews 11:35 in the variant reading. Theodorus contrasts it with κοινωνία (communion) to highlight the social dimension of charitable acts among fellow believers.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"κοινωνίαν","severity":"info","text":"Κοινωνία (communion) here denotes a shared participation in goods among fellow believers, reflecting early Christian communal ideals. Theodorus uses it to emphasize that charity is not merely individual but a bond of partnership (κοινωνούς).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The passage shifts from a lexical explanation of two terms (εὐποιΐα and κοινωνία) to a paraphrase of an exhortation. The phrase 'ἀντὶ τοῦ ...' signals that Theodorus is glossing a scriptural imperative, likely from Hebrews, replacing 'persevere in reading' with 'bear the labor of attention'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"προσκαρτερήσατε τῇ ἀναγνώσει","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'προσκαρτερήσατε τῇ ἀναγνώσει' (persevere in reading) echoes Hebrews 13:22? or a similar exhortation to sustained attention to Scripture. Theodorus rephrases it as 'bear the labor of attention' (ἐνέγκατε τῆς προσοχῆς τὸν πόνον), emphasizing effort.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Theodorus' distinction between εὐποιΐα and κοινωνία reflects a broader patristic concern to define Christian charity against pagan beneficence. The term κοινωνία also carries Eucharistic overtones, though here it is applied to material sharing among the faithful.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The exact scriptural verse being glossed is not identified; it may be a paraphrase of Hebrews 13:22 or a similar passage. The phrase 'προσκαρτερήσατε τῇ ἀναγνώσει' is not a direct quotation from the canonical Hebrews."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]}]}