# Acts of Archelaus (Latin version) - Author: [Hegemonius](https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/authors/hegemonius/) - Latin title: *Acta Archelai* - Date: early to mid 4th century (Greek original) (disputed) - Source: Charles Henry Beeson, ed., Hegemonius: Acta Archelai, GCS 16 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1906) - Translation: Claude, from the original text, unless a passage says otherwise; each passage below gives the translator - Work page: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/ - Passages: 58 ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 1 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-1 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Marcellus, a devout and generous citizen of Carchar, pays the ransom of 7,700 captives brought to Bishop Archelaus. ### Latin text ACTA ARCHELAI. Thesaurus verus sive disputatio habita in Carcharis civitate Mesopotamiae Archelai episcopi adversus Manen, iudicantibus Manippo et Aegialeo et Claudio et Cleobolo. In qua urbe erat quidam vir Marcellus nomine qui vita et studiis et genere, prudentia quoque et honestate valde clarus habebatur; facultatibus etiam copiosus et quod omnium maximum est, religiosissime deum timens, et his quae de Christo dicebantur semper cum timore auseultans, nec quiequam omnino boni erat quod illi viro deesset; unde et honore plurimo ab universa civitate colebatur plurimisque ipse civitatem suam frequenter largitionibus remunerabatur, pauperibus tribuens, adflictos relevans, tribulatis auxilium ferens. Sed ne infirmitate verborum virtutibus viri derogemus potius quam digna proferamus, haec dixisse sufficiat; ad opus quod propositum est veniam. Quodam in tempore cum Archelao episcopo captivorum multitudo fuisset oblata a militibus qui ibi castra servabant, Septem milia numero et septingenti, non mediocris eum sollicitudo constrinxerat, eo quod pro salute ipsorum aurum a militibus posceretur; quique cum dissimulare non posset, pro religione et timore dei vehementer aestuabat et, tandem ad Marcellum properans, rei gestae negotium exponit. Verum ut haec audivit piissimus Marcellus, nihil omnino moratus, ingreditur domum praeparans pretia captivorum quantacumque poposcissent qui deduxerant vinctos, et continuo, reseratis bonorum suorum thesauris, pietatis pretia militibus nec numero aliquo nec discretione ulla distinguit, ut magis dona quam pretia viderentur. At illi admirati et amplexi tam inmensam viri pietatem munificentiamque et facti stupore permoti exemplo misericordiae commoventur, ita ut plurimi ex ipsis adducerentur ad fidem domini nostri Iesu Christi, derelicto militiae cingulo; alii vero, vix quarta pretiorum portione suscepta, ad propria castra discederent; ceteri autem parum omnino aliquid quantum viatico sufficeret accipientes abirent. ### English translation (Claude) The Acts of Archelaus. The true treasure, or the disputation held in Carchar, a city of Mesopotamia, by Archelaus the bishop against Manes, with Manippus, Aegialeus, Claudius, and Cleobolus as judges. In that city there was a man named Marcellus, who was held in very high repute for his life, his pursuits, and his family, and also for his good sense and integrity. He was rich in means as well, and, what is greatest of all, he feared God most devoutly and always listened with fear to the things that were said about Christ; there was nothing good at all that this man lacked. For this reason he was held in the highest honour by the whole city, and he for his part often repaid his city with very many gifts, giving to the poor, relieving the afflicted, bringing help to the distressed. But lest by weakness of words we detract from the man's virtues rather than set out what is worthy of them, let it be enough to have said this; I will come to the work that has been proposed. At a certain time, when a multitude of captives had been brought before the bishop Archelaus by the soldiers who kept the camp there, seven thousand seven hundred in number, no small anxiety gripped him, because the soldiers were demanding gold for their release. Since he could not conceal it, he was greatly troubled for the sake of religion and the fear of God, and at last, hurrying to Marcellus, he set out the matter to him. As soon as the most pious Marcellus heard this, without any delay at all he went into his house, preparing the ransom for the captives, however much those who had brought the prisoners should demand; and at once, opening the treasuries of his goods, he dealt out the price of his piety to the soldiers without any count or any distinction, so that it seemed rather gifts than ransom. They were amazed, and they embraced so immense a piety and generosity in the man; struck with astonishment at the deed, they were moved by the example of mercy, so that very many of them were brought to the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ and laid aside the belt of military service. Others, having taken scarcely a quarter of the ransom, went back to their own camp; and the rest went away taking only as little as would be enough for the journey. ### Translation notes - The opening is the title of the work as Beeson prints it. The Latin is a version of a lost Greek original; chapters 5–13 survive in Greek (published separately as the Greek Acts of Archelaus). ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 1 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 2 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-2 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: The captive Cortynius tells Marcellus how his people were attacked by soldiers during their annual prayer for rain and driven cruelly to Carchar. ### Latin text His itaque gestis laetus erat valde Marcellus et, accito uno ex captivis Cortynio nomine, perquirebat ab eo causam belli vel quo casu ipsi inferiores extiterint ac vinculis captivitatis innexi sint At ille, - loquendi sibi potestate permissa, ita exorsus est: Nos, domine mi Marcelle, viventi deo credimus soli. Est autem nobis mos huiusmodi patrum nostrorum in nos traditione descendens quique a nobis observatus est usque ad hunc diem, per annos singulos extra urbem egressi una cum coniugibus ac liberis, supplicamus soli et invisibili deo, imbres ab eo satis nostris ac frugibus obsecrantes; quod cum tempore ac more solito celebraremus, inmorantes ieiunos vesper obtexit et gravabant nos duo omnium difficillima, ieiunium et vigiliae. Circa medium vero noctis invidus nobis et inportunus somnus obrepsit et, cervicibus degravatis ac laxis, demisso capite, frontem genibus inlidit. Hoc autem factum est, quoniam tempus aderat ut dei iudicio poenas pro meritis penderemus; forsitan enim peccantes ignorabamus aut etiam agnoscentes non desinebamus. In illa igitur hora subito militum nos multitudo circumdat, ut aestimo, putantes nos pro insidiis consedisse aut omnino usum vel studium habere proeliorum; et nulla conventus nostri causa penitus explorata, bellum nobis denuntiant, non sermone sed gladio, et homines, qui iniuriam facere cuiquam non didicimus, sine ulla misericordia missibilibus vulnerant, hastis confodiunt, mucronibus iugulant Et interfecerunt quidem ex nobis ad mille trecentos viros, vulneraverunt autem quingentos. Cum vero dies inclaruit, qui superfuerant ex nobis huc perduxerunt captivos, nec sie quidem aliquid nobis misericordiae concedentes; agebant enim nos ante equos, hastilium verberibus stimulatos et equorum frontibus inpulsos. Et perduravit quidem si cui vires fuerunt tolerandi, plurimi vero ante ora dominorum crudelium concidentes, animas exhalabant; pendentes uberibus parvulos suos matres, defatigatis ac demissis onere brachiis, humi decidere sinebant, agitatae insequentium minis; omnis vero senilis aetas victa laboribus ac resoluta per inediam corruebat in terram. Superbi vero milites hoc tam cruento conlabentium spectaculo tamquam voluptate aliqua fruebantur, cum alios deficientes sterni solo cernerent, in aliis sitis ardoribus fatigatis intuerentur etiam vocis meatum, arescente linguae glutino, praepediri; alios vero viderent, conversis post terga oculis, expirantium parvulorum suorum ingemiscentes exitiis, cum illi infelicissimas matres vagitibus inclamarent, illae vero praedonum acerbitatibus agitatae, quibus solis libere uti licebat, gemitibus responderent: quarum si quae tenerius propriis indulserunt visceribus, interitus sortem sponte sibi parem cum filiis praesumpserunt; si quae vero habere aliquid tolerantiae potuerunt, captivae huc usque perductae sunt. Triduo itaque exacto, cum ne noctibus quidem aliquam requiem cepissemus, ad locum hunc perducimur, in quo post haec iam quid gestum sit melius ipse tu nosti. ### English translation (Claude) When these things had been done, Marcellus was very glad, and, summoning one of the captives, named Cortynius, he asked him the cause of the war, and by what chance they had been overcome and bound in the chains of captivity. He, having been given leave to speak, began thus: "We, my lord Marcellus, believe in the living God alone. We have a custom of this kind, which came down to us by the tradition of our fathers and has been kept by us to this day: every year we go out of the city, together with our wives and children, and pray to the only and invisible God, asking him for rain for our crops and harvests. While we were celebrating this at the usual time and in the usual way, evening came upon us as we lingered, fasting, and the two hardest things of all weighed on us, fasting and keeping watch. About the middle of the night an envious and untimely sleep crept over us, and with our necks weighed down and slack, our heads drooping, it struck our foreheads against our knees. This happened because the time had come for us to pay the penalty for our deserts by the judgment of God; for perhaps we were sinning without knowing it, or even, knowing it, did not stop. "At that hour, then, a multitude of soldiers suddenly surrounded us, thinking, I suppose, that we had sat down there to lay an ambush, or that we were at all practised in or eager for battle. Without inquiring at all into the reason for our gathering, they declared war on us, not with words but with the sword; and men who had never learned to do wrong to anyone they wounded without any mercy with missiles, ran through with spears, and cut down with blades. They killed about one thousand three hundred men of us, and wounded five hundred. When day dawned, they brought here as captives those of us who had survived, and even so granted us no mercy; for they drove us before their horses, goaded by blows of their spear-shafts and pushed on by the horses' heads. Whoever had strength to endure held out; but very many fell before the faces of their cruel masters and breathed out their souls. Mothers, their arms exhausted and sinking under the burden, let the little ones hanging at their breasts fall to the ground, driven on by the threats of those who pursued them; and all the aged, overcome by toil and worn out by hunger, collapsed to the ground. But the arrogant soldiers enjoyed this bloody spectacle of people falling as if it were some pleasure: they saw some fainting and laid on the ground; in others, exhausted by burning thirst, they watched even the passage of the voice blocked as the moisture of the tongue dried up; others they saw with eyes turned back, groaning over the death of their little ones as they expired, while the children cried out with wailing to their most unhappy mothers, and the mothers, driven on by the brutality of the robbers, answered with groans, the only thing they were free to use. If any of them gave way too tenderly to love for their own children, they chose of their own accord to share their children's lot of death; but those who could bear anything were brought here as captives. So after three days had passed, in which we had not had any rest even by night, we were brought to this place; and what was done here after that you yourself know better." ### Translation notes - "Cortynius" is the name as printed; manuscripts vary. The words "Acta Archel. I–III" in the scan are Beeson's running head and have been removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 2 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/2). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 3 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-3 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Marcellus feeds and heals the captives, buries the dead, sends everyone home, and becomes famous throughout the region for his charity. ### Latin text His auditis piissimus Marcellus plurimum in lacrimas profusus est, miseratus tantos et tam varios casus; sed nihil moratus, cibos praeparat, fatigatis per semetipsum ministeria exhibens, imitatus patrem nostrum Abraham patriarcham, qui quondam angelis a se hospitio susceptis, non vernaculis inperavit vitulum deferre de gregibus; sed ipse senior inpositum humeris pertulit ac per semet praeparatos cibos propriis manibus angelis adposuit. Simili et Marcellus functus officio, denos praecepit per convivia reclinari, septingentisque omnibus extructis mensis, cum ingenti laetitia reficiebat universos, ita ut qui superesse potuerant oblivionem caperent laborum ac totius mali efficerentur inmemores. Cum autem quintus decimus transigeretur dies, Marcello cuncta adfatim ministrante captivis, placuit eis omnibus remeandi ad propria tribui facultatem, praeter eos quos vulnerum suorum cura retinebat, quibus conpetenti adhibita medela, ad sua ceteros abire praecepit. Sed his omnibus maiora addidit Marcellus pietatis officia; cum plurima namque suorum manu progressus est ad sepelienda corpora in itinere peremptorum et omnia quaecumque invenire potuit, ut dignum erat, tradidit sepulturae: quo munere inpleto, rursum ad Carcharam rediit atque exinde recuperata sanitate vulneratos ad patriam remeare permittit, largissimo ad iter viatico praeparato. At vero facti huius opinio ad reliqua Marcelli bene gesta inmensum cumulum contulit; per universam enim regionem illam ingens fama discurrit de pietate Marcelli, ita ut plurimi ex diversis urbibus videndi atque agnoscendi viri cupiditate flagrarent et maxime hi quibus ferre penuriam usus ante non fuerat, quibus omnibus vir egregius indulgentissime ministrabat, Marcelli veteris imitatus exempla, ita ut omnes dicerent hoc viro nullum pietate praestantiorem. Sed et viduae universae in domino credentes ad eum concurrebant; inbeccilli quoque auxilium sibi de eo certissimum praesumebant nec non et orphani omnes ab ipso nutriebantur. Et quid amplius dicam? Amator pauperum Marcellus cognominatus est domusque eius peregrinorum et pauperum hospitium dicebatur; super omnia vero fidei curam egregie ac singulariter retinebat, aedificans cor suum super inmobilem petram. ### English translation (Claude) When he heard this, the most pious Marcellus burst into many tears, pitying such great and varied misfortunes. But without delay he prepared food, serving the exhausted people himself, in imitation of our father the patriarch Abraham, who once, when he had received angels as guests, did not order his household servants to bring a calf from the herds, but, old as he was, carried it himself on his shoulders, and with his own hands set before the angels the food he had prepared himself. Marcellus performed the same service in like manner: he had them recline at table in tens, and with seven hundred tables set up for them all, he refreshed them all with great joy, so that those who had been able to survive forgot their toils and became unmindful of all their misery. When the fifteenth day was passing, Marcellus abundantly supplying everything to the captives, he resolved that all of them should be given the means of returning home, except those who were kept back by the care of their wounds; to these he gave suitable treatment, and ordered the rest to go home. But Marcellus added to all these duties of piety still greater ones: he went out with a great company of his own people to bury the bodies of those killed on the road, and all that he could find he gave burial, as was fitting. When this service was completed, he returned again to Carchar, and from there let the wounded, once their health was restored, return to their homeland, with a very generous provision prepared for the journey. The report of this deed added an immense heap to Marcellus's other good works; for a great fame of Marcellus's piety ran through all that region, so that very many people from various cities burned with the desire to see and get to know the man, especially those who had not been used to enduring want before. To all of them this excellent man ministered most kindly, imitating the example of Marcellus of old, so that all said that there was no one more outstanding in piety than this man. All the widows, too, who believed in the Lord ran to him; the weak also counted on most certain help from him; and all the orphans were fed by him. What more shall I say? Marcellus was called the lover of the poor, and his house was called the guest-house of strangers and the poor. Above all, he held to the care of the faith excellently and uniquely, building his heart upon the immovable rock. ### Scripture references - Gen 18:1–8: allusion, high confidence - Matt 7:24–25: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Abraham's hospitality: Gen 18:1–8 (the detail that he carried the calf on his shoulders is not in Genesis). "Marcellus of old" is not identified in the text; probably the Roman general M. Claudius Marcellus, proverbial for clemency (uncertain). The rock: cf. Matt 7:24–25. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 3 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/3). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 4 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-4 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes hears of Marcellus and sends Turbo, a disciple of Addas, with a letter; Turbo is turned away at every inn until he mentions Marcellus. ### Latin text Igitur cum diversis in locis de eo fama saepissime spargeretur, etiam Stranga fluvio superato, Persarum in regione eum pertulit admirandum in qua demorabatur Manes quidam, qui ad se huiuscemodi viri opinione perlata, plurimum ipse secum volvebat quemadmodum eum doctrinae suae posset laqueis inretire, sperans adsertorem dogmatis sui fieri posse Marcellum. Praesumebat enim universam se posse occupare provinciam, si prius talem virum sibimet subdere potuisset; in quo duplici cogitatione animus aestuabat utrumnam ipse ad eum pergeret an litteris eum primo temptaret adoriri; verebatur enim ne forte inproviso et subito ingressu malum sibi aliquod nasceretur: ad ultimum versutioribus consiliis parens, scribere decrevit, accitumque unum ex discipulis Adda Turbonem nomine, qui per Addam fuerat instructus, tradita epistula, abire iubet ac perferre Marcello; quique acceptam eam huic cui a Mane praeceptum fuerat pertulit, omni itinere diebus quinque transacto. Veloci etenim usus est cursu, in quo plurimum supradictus Turbo laboris et molestiae pertulit; si quando enim ad vesperam velut peregrinans ad hospitium pervenisset, quae quidem ipsa diversoria hospitalissimus Marcellus instruxerat, cum a servatoribus hospitiorum interrogaretur unde et quis vel a quo missus esset, aiebat: Sum quidem Mesopotamenus, de Persida autem venio, a Manichaeo magistro Christianorum missus. At illi ignotum sibi nomen non libenter amplexi, Turbonem etiam ipsis hospitiis detrudebant, ne aquae quidem ipsius ad bibendum facultate concessa; quae cum singula cotidie atque horum nequiora perferret ab his qui per singula loca mansionibus atque hospitiis praeerant, nisi ad ultimum Marcello se portare litteras indicasset, peregrinus Turbo mortis pertulisset exitia. ### English translation (Claude) So when his fame was very often spread abroad in various places, it crossed even the river Stranga and carried word of him, to be admired, into the region of the Persians, where a certain Manes was staying. When the report of such a man reached him, he turned over in his mind a great deal how he might ensnare him in the nooses of his teaching, hoping that Marcellus could become a champion of his doctrine. For he presumed that he could take hold of the whole province if he could first bring such a man under himself. His mind was torn between two thoughts, whether to go to him himself or first to try to approach him by letter; for he feared that if he came in unexpectedly and suddenly, some harm might arise for him. At last, following the craftier counsel, he decided to write. He summoned one of his disciples, named Turbo, who had been instructed by Addas, handed him the letter, and ordered him to go and deliver it to Marcellus; and he took it and delivered it to the man to whom Manes had ordered, having completed the whole journey in five days. For he travelled at speed, and in this the aforesaid Turbo endured a great deal of toil and hardship. Whenever, travelling as a stranger, he came in the evening to a lodging (and these inns the most hospitable Marcellus had himself furnished), and was asked by the keepers of the lodgings where he came from, who he was, and by whom he was sent, he would say: "I am a Mesopotamian, but I come from Persia, sent by Manichaeus, the teacher of the Christians." But they did not gladly welcome a name unknown to them, and even thrust Turbo out of the lodgings themselves, without granting him even the chance of water to drink. As he suffered these things one by one every day, and worse than these, from those who were in charge of the stopping-places and lodgings in each place, the stranger Turbo would have met his death had he not at last told them that he was carrying a letter to Marcellus. ### Translation notes - The Stranga is an unidentified river on the Persian frontier (uncertain). Manes is also called Manichaeus in the text; the name is kept as written. Turbo's description of Manes as "teacher of the Christians" is Turbo's claim, reported by the narrator. After "one of his disciples" the scan reads "Adda" (perhaps a stray anticipation of "Addam"); not translated. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 4 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/4). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 14 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-14 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes arrives at Carchar in strange Persian dress; Marcellus convenes a public debate between him and Archelaus before four pagan judges. ### Latin text Haec cum Turbo dixisset, vehementer accendebatur Archelaus; Marcellus vero non movebatur, deum expectans auxilio veritati suae futurum: Archelao autem erat cura pro populo, tamquam pastori pro ovibus, cum luporum parantur insidiae. Igitur Marcellus Turbonem muneribus plurimis donavit et in Archelai domum residere praecepit. Eadem autem ipsa die adventavit Manes, adducens secum iuvenes et virgines electos ad viginti duo simul; et primo omnium Turbonem requirit pro foribus Marcelli, quem cum non invenisset, ad Marcellum ingreditur salutandum. Quo ille viso, admiratus est primo habitus indumenta; habebat enim calciamenti genus, quod trisolium vulgo appellari solet; pallium autem varium, tamquam aerina specie; in manu vero validissimum baculum tenebat ex ligno ebelino; Babylonium vero librum portabat sub sinistra ala; crura etiam bracis obtexerat colore diverso, quarum una rufa, alia velut prasini coloris erat; vultus vero ut senis Persae artificis et bellorum ducis videbatur. Igitur Marcellus statim ad Archelaum mittit, qui cum verbo citius adfuisset, invehi in eum animo urgebatur ex ipso habitu ac specie eius, et maxime quidem quod et quae Turbone referente cognoverat, secretius factum apud semet ipsum retractaverat et diligenter praeparatus advenerat. At vero prudentissimus Marcellus, omni contentionum studio sublato, utrumque audire decernit, invitatis viris primariis civitatis; ex quibus iudices elegit, religione gentiles, quattuor numero, quorum haec sunt nomina: Manippus grammaticae artis et disciplinae rhetoricae peritissimus, Aegialeus archiater nobilissimus et litteris adprime eruditus, Claudius et Cleobolus duo fratres egregii rhetores. Fit ergo magnificus conventus, ita ut domus Marcelli, quae erat inmensa, repleretur ex his qui ad audiendum fuerant convocati; et cum in conspectu omnium constitissent ii qui adversum se dicere proponebant, tum illi electi iudices excelsiores omnibus consederunt atque Mane dicendi initium datum est. Silentio igitur facto plurimo, adgressus est hoc modo. ### English translation (Claude) When Turbo had said these things, Archelaus was violently inflamed; but Marcellus was not moved, waiting for God to come to the help of his truth. Archelaus, however, was anxious for the people, as a shepherd for his sheep when wolves are laying their snares. So Marcellus presented Turbo with very many gifts and told him to stay in Archelaus's house. On that very day Manes arrived, bringing with him chosen young men and virgins, twenty-two in all; and first of all he looked for Turbo at Marcellus's door, and, not finding him, he went in to greet Marcellus. When Marcellus saw him, he was first astonished at the clothes he wore. For he had a kind of shoe that is commonly called "triple-soled"; a cloak of many colours, of an airy hue, as it were; in his hand he held a very stout staff of ebony wood; he carried a Babylonian book under his left arm; and he had covered his legs with trousers of different colours, one of them red, the other of a leek-green colour; and his face looked like that of an old Persian artisan and war-leader. Marcellus at once sent for Archelaus, who came sooner than said, and was driven in his mind to attack him because of his very dress and appearance, and most of all because he had gone over privately in his own mind what he had learned from Turbo's report, and had come carefully prepared. But the most prudent Marcellus, setting aside all eagerness for quarrels, decided to hear both, inviting the leading men of the city. From these he chose judges, pagans by religion, four in number, whose names are these: Manippus, most expert in the art of grammar and the discipline of rhetoric; Aegialeus, a very distinguished chief physician, and outstandingly learned in letters; and Claudius and Cleobolus, two brothers, excellent rhetoricians. So a magnificent assembly was held, so that the house of Marcellus, which was immense, was filled with those who had been called together to listen. When those who proposed to speak against each other had taken their places in the sight of all, the chosen judges sat down higher than everyone, and Manes was given the first turn to speak. So when a great silence had fallen, he began in this way. ### Translation notes - The "Babylonian book" is not identified. The judges are chosen from pagans so that they may be impartial between the two Christian claimants. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 14 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/14). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 15 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-15 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes opens the debate: he claims to be the Paraclete promised by Jesus and argues that the law and the prophets come from Satan, not from the Father of Christ. ### Latin text Ego, viri fratres, Christi quidem sum discipulus, apostolus vero Iesu: pro nimia autem humanitate Marcelli adesse festinavi, ut qualiter oporteat observare modum divinae religionis eum edoceam; ne sicut muta animalia, quae intellectu carent nec quod agunt advertunt, ita etiam Marcellus, qui nunc se velut dediticium doctrinae Archelai subiugavit, ad ultimum damno animae feriatur, cum praeparandae divini cultus observantiae ultra non habuerit facultatem. Scio autem et certus sum quod, emendato Marcello, etiam vos omnes salvi esse poteritis; ipsius enim iudicio suspensa pendet urbs vestra: quod si ab unoquoque vestrum abiciatur vana praesumptio et ea quae dicentur a me veri amore audiantur, futuri saeculi hereditatem, caelorum regna, capietis. Sum quidem ego paracletus qui ab Iesu mitti praedictus sum, ad arguendum mundum de peccato et de iudicio et de iustum, sicut et qui ante me missus est Paulus ex parte scire et ex parte prophetare se dixit, mihi reservans quod perfectum est, ut hoc quod ex parte est destruam. Tertium ergo testimonium accipite, apostolum me esse Christi electum; et si vultis mea verba suscipere, invenietis salutem; nolentes autem vos aeternus ignis absumere habet Sicut enim Hymenaeus et Alexander traditi sunt Satanae, ut discerent non blasphemare. ita et vos omnes poenarum principi trademini, pro eo quod manus iniecistis in patrem Christi, cum eum dicitis causam esse omnium malorum et conditorem iniustitiae et totius iniquitatis creatorem, ex eodem fonte dulcem et amaram producentes aquam; quod fieri aut intellegi nulla ratione possibile est. Cui enim oportet credi? magistris vestris istis, qui carnibus vescuntur et afluentissimis deliciis perfruuntur, aut salvatori Iesu Christo dicenti, sicut scriptum est in euangeliorum libro: Non potest arbor bona malos fructus facere, neque arbor mala bonos fructus facere? Et alio in loco, patrem diaboli mendacem et homicidam ab initio esse confirmat; rursum desiderium fuisse tenebris ut insequerentur illud quod de luce initio fuerat prolatum verbum, et inimicum hominem, zizaniorum seminatorem et principem saeculi mundi huius deum, qui hominum mentes excaecat ut non euangelio Christi deserviant Bonus est iste deus, qui suos homines salvari non vult? Et, ut ne multa alia revolvam et spatium temporis obteram, verae doctrinae differens tempus, haec dixisse sufficiat et ad propositum redeam, ut conpetenter ostendam istorum absurdam esse doctrinam, nec quicquam deo et patri domini nostri salvatoris adscribendum, sed malorum nostrorum causam accipere Satanam: in ipsum etenim reiciendum est, quod omnia huiuscemodi mala ab ipso generentur. Sed et ea quae in prophetis et lege scripta sunt ipsi nihilominus adscribenda sunt; ipse est enim qui in prophetis tunc locutus est, plurimas eis de deo ignorantias suggerens et temptationes et concupiscentias. Sed et devoratorem eum sanguinis et carnis ostendunt; quae omnia ad ipsum pertinent Satanan et ad prophetas eius, quae transformare Voluit in patrem Christi et scribere pauca quaedam vera, ut per haec etiam cetera, quae sunt falsa, crederentur. Unde bonum vobis est ex omnibus quae usque ad Iohannem scripta sunt nihil omnino suscipere, a diebus vero eius euangelizatum regnum caelorum solum amplecti; semet ipsos enim inriserunt, ridicula et ludicra introducentes, exiguis quibusdam verbis in lege adumbratis, ignorantes quia malis, si admisceantur bona, malorum corruptione etiam quae bona sunt exterminantur. Et si quidem est quisquam, qui possit ostendere legem recti tenacem esse, debet custodiri; sin autem malam ostendero, interimenda est et abicienda, quippe quae mortis ministerium continet informatum, quae vultus Moysi gloriam contegens destruxit. Non est igitur sine periculo cuiquam vestrum pariter cum lege et prophetis novum adiungere testamentum, tamquam unius sint utraque doctoris, quippe cum renovetur de die in diem salvatoris nostri eruditio, illa vero veterascens et senescens prope exterminium fiet. Quod manifestum est his qui discretionem habere possunt; quia sicut arboris cum senuerint rami vel truncus fructum ultra non adfert, sed absciduntur, et membra corporum, cum corrupta fuerint, amputantur; corruptionis enim virus ex membris per omne corpus infunditur, et nisi artificis diligentia remedium morbus acceperit, corpus omne vitiatur; ita ergo et recipientes legem, nisi agnoveritis cuius sit, animas cum Salute perdetis. Lex enim et prophetae usque ad Iohannem Baptistam, a Iohanne vero lex veritatis, lex promissionum, lex caelorum, lex adnuntiatur humano generi nova. Et quidem donec non erat qui verissimam scientiam domini nostri Iesu Christi vobis ostenderet, peccatum non habebatis: nunc autem et videtis et auditis et in infitias ire vultis, ut legem quae destructa est et relicta, sicut Paulus, qui apud vos probatissimus habetur, ait in quadam epistula sua hoc modo: Si enim quae destruxi, haec iterum reaedifico, praevaricatorem me constituo. Hoc autem dicit, gentiles eos iudicans, propter quod sub elementis mundi essent, priusquam veniret plenitudo fidei, credentes in lege et prophetis. ### English translation (Claude) "I, brothers, am a disciple of Christ and an apostle of Jesus. Because of the great kindness of Marcellus I have hurried here to teach him how one ought to keep the way of divine religion, so that Marcellus, who has now subjected himself to the teaching of Archelaus like one who has surrendered, may not, like dumb animals that lack understanding and do not notice what they are doing, be struck in the end with the loss of his soul, when he no longer has the opportunity to prepare the observance of divine worship. I know and am sure that, once Marcellus has been corrected, all of you too will be able to be saved; for your city hangs suspended on his judgment. If empty presumption is cast off by each one of you, and what I say is heard with love of the truth, you will receive the inheritance of the age to come, the kingdom of heaven. I am the Paraclete who was foretold by Jesus to be sent, to convict the world of sin, of judgment, and of righteousness; just as Paul, who was sent before me, said that he knew in part and prophesied in part, reserving for me what is perfect, so that I might do away with what is in part. Accept, then, this third testimony, that I am an elect apostle of Christ; and if you are willing to receive my words, you will find salvation, but if you are unwilling, eternal fire will consume you. For as Hymenaeus and Alexander were handed over to Satan so that they might learn not to blaspheme, so you all will be handed over to the prince of punishments, because you have laid hands on the Father of Christ, when you say that he is the cause of all evils, the founder of injustice, and the creator of all wickedness, producing sweet and bitter water from the same spring, which cannot by any reasoning happen or be understood. "Whom ought one to believe? These teachers of yours, who eat meat and enjoy the most abundant luxuries, or the Saviour Jesus Christ, who says, as it is written in the book of the Gospels: 'A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit'? And in another place he affirms that the father of the devil is a liar and a murderer from the beginning; and again that the darkness had a desire to pursue the word that had been brought forth from the light at the beginning; and he speaks of the enemy, the sower of the tares, and of the prince of the age, the god of this world, who blinds the minds of men so that they do not serve the gospel of Christ. Is this a good god, who does not want his own people to be saved? And not to go over many other things and use up the time, delaying the true teaching, let it be enough to have said this, and let me return to my purpose, to show fittingly that the teaching of these men is absurd, and that nothing is to be ascribed to God, the Father of our Lord the Saviour, but that we should take Satan as the cause of our evils; for it must be thrown back on him, since all evils of this kind are produced by him. And the things written in the prophets and the law are likewise to be ascribed to him; for he is the one who then spoke in the prophets, suggesting to them many ignorant notions about God, and temptations and lusts. They also show him to be a devourer of blood and flesh. All these things belong to Satan himself and to his prophets; he wished to transform them into the Father of Christ and to write a few true things, so that through these the rest, which are false, might also be believed. "So it is good for you to receive nothing at all of everything written up to John, and to embrace only the kingdom of heaven proclaimed from his days. For they made fools of themselves, bringing in ridiculous and childish things, with a few words sketched in outline in the law, not knowing that if good things are mixed with evil ones, even what is good is destroyed by the corruption of the evil. If there is anyone who can show that the law holds to what is right, it ought to be kept; but if I show it to be evil, it must be done away with and cast off, since it contains a ministry of death, formed in letters, which, covering the glory of Moses' face, was destroyed. So it is not without danger for any of you to join the New Testament together with the law and the prophets, as if both belonged to one teacher; for the teaching of our Saviour is renewed from day to day, while the other, growing old and aged, will soon be destroyed. This is plain to those who are able to discern: as the branches or trunk of a tree, when they have grown old, bear no more fruit but are cut off, and the limbs of bodies, when they have become corrupt, are amputated (for the poison of corruption spreads from the limbs through the whole body, and unless the disease receives a remedy by a skilled physician's care, the whole body is infected), so too you who receive the law, unless you recognize whose it is, will lose your souls together with your salvation. For the law and the prophets were until John the Baptist; but from John the law of truth, the law of promises, the law of heaven, a new law, is proclaimed to the human race. And as long as there was no one to show you the truest knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, you had no sin; but now you both see and hear, and you wish to deny it, so that the law which has been destroyed and abandoned … as Paul, who is held most approved among you, says in one of his letters in this way: 'For if I build up again the things that I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.' He says this judging them to be Gentiles, because they were under the elements of the world before the fullness of faith came, believing in the law and the prophets." ### Scripture references - John 16:7–8: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 13:9–10: allusion, high confidence - 1 Tim 1:20: allusion, high confidence - Jas 3:11: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 7:18: quotation, high confidence - John 8:44: allusion, high confidence - Matt 13:25: allusion, medium confidence - 2 Cor 4:4: allusion, high confidence - Matt 11:13: allusion, high confidence - Luke 16:16: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 3:7: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 3:13: allusion, medium confidence - Heb 8:13: allusion, medium confidence - John 15:22: allusion, medium confidence - Gal 2:18: quotation, high confidence - Gal 4:3–4: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Manichaean teaching is reported as Manes states it in the debate; Archelaus answers it in the chapters that follow. Scripture: John 16:8 (the Paraclete); 1 Cor 13:9–10; 1 Tim 1:20; Jas 3:11; Matt 7:18; John 8:44; Matt 13:25, 28; 2 Cor 4:4; Matt 11:13 and Luke 16:16; 2 Cor 3:7, 13; Heb 8:13; John 15:22, 24; Gal 2:18; Gal 4:3–4. In the sentence beginning "so that the law which has been destroyed" a main verb seems to be missing (the sentence is incomplete as printed); it is translated as it stands. Beeson's running head ("Hegemonius") and a stray line number are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 15 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/15). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 16 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-16 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes sets out his doctrine of two natures and two places and argues from the variety of human faces that man was made by the rulers and matter, not by God. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Si quid adhuc manifestius habes, dic de doctrinae tuae modo et fidei titulo. Manes dixit: Ego duas naturas esse dico, unam bonam et alteram malam, et eam quidem quae bona est in quibusdam partibus habitare; malam vero esse tam mundum hunc quam omnia quae in eo sunt, quae quasi ergastula in parte maligni posita sunt, sicut ait Iohannes: Totus mundus in maligno est positus, et non in deo. Propterea duo loca esse diximus, unum bonum et alium malum, qui extra eum est, ut in his spatium habens posset in se suscipere creaturam mundi. Si enim dicimus monarchiam unius naturae et omnia deum replere et nullum esse extraneum locum, quis erit creaturae susceptor? ubi gehenna ignis? ubi tenebrae exteriores? ubi fletus? In ipso dicam? Absit; alioquin etiam ipse in his pariter cruciabitur. Non ista sentiatis quicumque salutis vestrae curam geritis? exemplum enim vobis dicam, ut plenius intellegatis. Unum vas est mundus; quod si dei substantia totum hoc vas replevit, quomodo iam potest in ipso vase aliquid amplius reponi? Si repletum est, quomodo suscipiet quod ponitur, nisi evacuetur de vase pars aliqua? Aut quo proficiet quod evacuabitur, cum locus non sit? Ubi terra? ubi caelum? ubi abyssus? ubi stellae? ubi sedes? ubi potestates? ubi principes? ubi tenebrae exteriores? quis est qui horum posuit fundamenta, et ubi? Non potest aliquis dicere, nisi forte blasphemet. Quomodo autem et condere potuit creaturas, non subsistente materia? Si enim de non extantibus, consequatur has visibiles creaturas meliores esse et omnibus virtutibus plenas. Quod si malitia est, et mors in eis et corruptio et si quid bono contrarium est, quomodo ex alia natura factas esse eas dicimus? Si vero consideretis quomodo generentur filii hominum, invenietis non esse deum hominis creatorem; sed alium, qui et ipse ingenitae est naturae, cuius conditor nuUus nec creator nee factor est, sed sola malitia sua talem eum protulit. Est igitur vobis hominibus commixtio cum uxoribus vestris de huiuscemodi occasione descendens: cum quis vestrum carnibus aliisque cibis fuerit satiatus, tunc ei concupiscentiae oboritur incitatio, et ita generandi filii fructus augetur, ut non ex virtute aliqua nec ex philosophia nec ex alio ullo intellectu, sed ex sola ciborum satietate et libidine et fornicatione. Et quomodo mihi quisquam dicet quia ad imaginem dei factus est pater noster Adam et ad similitudinem, et similis est ei qui fecit eum? Quomodo omnes qui ex eo generati sumus similes ei sumus? Immo vero e contrario plurimae nobis sunt formae, diversi Vultus ferentes effigiem. Quod quam verum sit demonstrabo vobis in parabolis. Intuemini mihi aliquem volentem thesaurum aut aliquid aliud signare, et accepta cera vel luto, velle vultus sui signaculum quod gerit, exprimere; quod si alius quoque vultus sui figuram similiter expresserit, numquid simile signaculum adparebit? Nequaquam, etiam si vos nolitis quod verum est confiteri. Quod si non sumus similes in signaculo, sed est in nobis differentia, quomodo non probatur principum nos et materiae esse facturam? Secundum enim ipsorum formam et similitudinem et imaginem etiam nos existimus formae diversae. Quod si eam quae ex initio facta commixtio est et qualiter facta sit vultis addiscere, edicam. ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "If you have anything still clearer, tell us about the manner of your teaching and the heading of your faith." Manes said: "I say that there are two natures, one good and the other evil; and that the one which is good dwells in certain regions, while the evil one is both this world and everything in it, which are placed like prison-houses in the portion of the evil one, as John says: 'The whole world lies in the evil one,' and not in God. Therefore we have said that there are two places, one good and the other evil, which is outside it, so that, having room in these, it could receive into itself the creation of the world. For if we speak of a monarchy of one nature, and say that God fills all things and that there is no place outside him, who will be the receiver of creation? Where will the Gehenna of fire be? Where the outer darkness? Where the weeping? Shall I say, in himself? Far from it; otherwise he too will be tormented in them alike. Do you not think this, all you who have a care for your salvation? I will give you an example, so that you may understand more fully. The world is one vessel. If the substance of God has filled this whole vessel, how can anything more now be placed in that vessel? If it is full, how will it receive what is put in, unless some part is emptied out of the vessel? Or where will what is emptied out go, since there is no place? Where is the earth? Where is heaven? Where is the abyss? Where are the stars? Where are the thrones? Where are the powers? Where are the rulers? Where is the outer darkness? Who is it that laid their foundations, and where? No one can say, unless perhaps he blasphemes. And how could he create creatures, if matter did not exist? For if they were made from things that did not exist, it would follow that these visible creatures are better and full of all virtues. But if there is wickedness in them, and death, and corruption, and whatever is contrary to the good, how can we say that they were made by another nature? "If you consider how the sons of men are begotten, you will find that God is not the creator of man, but another, who is himself also of an unbegotten nature, who has no founder, no creator, no maker, but his own wickedness alone brought him forth as he is. So the union of you men with your wives comes about from an occasion of this kind: when one of you has been filled with meat and other foods, then the stirring of desire arises in him, and so the fruit of begetting a son is increased, not from any virtue, nor from philosophy, nor from any other understanding, but from fullness of food alone, and lust, and sexual immorality. And how will anyone tell me that our father Adam was made in the image and likeness of God, and is like him who made him? How are all of us who have been begotten from him like him? On the contrary, we have very many forms, bearing the likeness of different faces. How true this is I will show you in parables. Picture to me someone who wants to seal a treasure or something else, and, taking wax or clay, wants to impress the seal that he bears of his own face. If another also impresses the figure of his own face in the same way, will a like seal appear? Not at all, even if you are unwilling to confess what is true. But if we are not alike in the seal, but there is a difference among us, how is it not proved that we are the making of the rulers and of matter? For we too exist with different forms according to their form, likeness, and image. And if you wish to learn what union was made from the beginning, and how it was made, I will tell you." ### Scripture references - 1 John 5:19: quotation, high confidence - Matt 8:12: allusion, medium confidence - Gen 1:26–27: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - Manichaean doctrine as Manes states it. Scripture: 1 John 5:19; Matt 8:12; Gen 1:26–27. A line of Beeson's Scripture apparatus ("Gal 4:3–9; 1 John 5:[19]") mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 16 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/16). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 17 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-17 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus begins his reply; when Manes seizes on the word "adversary," Archelaus argues that an adversary by choice can become a friend, and presses Manes on whether his two natures can change. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Non prius quaeritur quomodo facta sit prima commixtio, nisi prius detur ratio duo esse principia naturalia. Cum enim claruerit duo esse ingenita, tunc etiam reliqua fidem capient, etiam si pars aliqua non accommodaverit adsensum; iudicandi enim nobis potestate permissa, dicemus quod nostrae opinioni claruerit. Demus tamen et Archelao episcopo dicendi facultatem ad haec, ut quae ab utroque dicta fiierint conparantes, pro veritate possimus ferre sententiam. Archelaus dixit: Tametsi ingentis audaciae et blasphemiae plena est intentio adversarii. — Manes dixit: Audite, iudices, quid dixerit, 'adversarii'? Ergo duae res sunt. Archelaus dixit: Insaniae magis quam prudentiae videtur mihi plenus iste, qui mihi hodie controversiam movet, quia dixero 'adversarius'; sed ablata tibi est in modico sermone obiectio tua, si quidem ex hoc arbitratus es te adfirmaturum duas esse naturas. Ingentem doctrinam ferens ades; neutrum enim eorum quae adseris stat. Potest enim is qui non natura sed proposito adversarius est, amicus effectus, non esse adversarius, et ita cum alter e nobis alteri adquieverit, unum atque idem uterque adparebit; quae causa indicat creaturas rationabiles libero arbitrio esse permissas, unde et conversiones recipiunt et ideo ingenitae naturae esse non possunt. Quid ergo ais? duae istae naturae inconvertibiles sunt an convertibiles, aut una earum convertitur? At vero Manes remoratus est non inveniendo responsum; intuebatur enim quod ex utroque concluderetur, retractans: quia si dicam converti eas, respondebit mihi illud quod in euangelio scriptum est de arboribus; quod si negem esse convertibiles, permixtionis statum et causam necessario expetet. Interea aliquando respondit Manes: Inconvertibiles quidem sunt utraeque, quantum spectat ad contraria, convertibiles vero, quod spectat ad propria. Archelaus dixit: Videris mihi delirus esse et obliviscens propositionum tuarum, sed ne eorum quidem quae didicisti verborum virtutes vel qualitates agnoscere. Neque enim conversio quid sit agnoscis, neque quid sit ingenitum aut quid dualitas, non quid praeteritum vel quid praesens quidve futurum sit, sicut ex his quae a te nunc dicta sunt. adverti. Inconvertibilem enim esse adfirmasti utramque naturam, quantum ad contraria spectat; convertibilem vero, quantum ad propria. Ego vero dico, quia qui in propriis vertitur non excedit a se, sed est in eisdem quibus semper est inconvertibilis; qui vero recipit convertibilitatem, hic extra propria effectus, devenit in aliena. ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "The question how the first union came about is not to be asked until an account is first given of there being two natural principles. For when it is clear that there are two unbegotten things, then the rest too will win belief, even if some part of them does not win our assent; for since the power of judging has been granted to us, we will say what has become clear to our judgment. But let us give Bishop Archelaus also the opportunity to speak to these things, so that, comparing what has been said by both, we may give a verdict for the truth." Archelaus said: "Although the intent of my adversary is full of enormous audacity and blasphemy …" Manes said: "Listen, judges, to what he has said: 'adversary'! So there are two things." Archelaus said: "This man who is disputing with me today seems to me full of madness rather than good sense, because I said 'adversary.' But your objection has been taken from you in a short word, if indeed you thought from this that I would affirm two natures. You come bringing an enormous doctrine; yet neither of the things you assert stands. For one who is an adversary not by nature but by purpose can become a friend and no longer be an adversary; and so when one of us has come to agreement with the other, both will appear as one and the same. This shows that rational creatures have been given free choice, so that they also admit of change, and therefore cannot be of an unbegotten nature. What do you say, then? Are these two natures unchangeable, or changeable, or is one of them changed?" But Manes delayed, not finding an answer; for he saw what would be concluded from either side, reasoning: "If I say that they are changed, he will answer me with what is written in the Gospel about the trees; but if I deny that they are changeable, he will of necessity demand the state and cause of the mixture." Meanwhile, after a time, Manes answered: "Both are unchangeable as regards their contraries, but changeable as regards their own properties." Archelaus said: "You seem to me to be raving and forgetting your own propositions, and not even to recognize the force or the qualities of the words you have learned. For you do not know what change is, nor what the unbegotten is, nor what duality is, nor what is past, or present, or future, as I have noticed from what you have just said. For you affirmed that each nature is unchangeable as regards its contraries, but changeable as regards its own properties. But I say that one who is turned within his own properties does not depart from himself, but is in the same things in which he is always, unchangeable; while one who admits of changeability has come to be outside his own properties and passes into what belongs to another." ### Scripture references - Matt 7:18: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The trees: Matt 7:18 (cited by Manes in ch. 15). Archelaus's first sentence breaks off when Manes interrupts. Stray line numbers in the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 17 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/17). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 18 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-18 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: The judges define change; Archelaus argues that two unchangeable natures could not be told apart, while changeable ones imply a single unbegotten principle, and demands to know against whom evil acted before creation. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Convertibilitas illum, cui accidit. transfert in alium; ut si dicamus, Iudaeus, si velit fieri Christianus, aut si Christianus velit esse gentilis, haec species est convertibilitatis et causa. Neque vero si gentilis, cum in omnibus propriis suis maneat ac diis suis hostias offerat templisque ex more deserviat, donec perseverat in propriis ac proficit, numquid dici potest esse conversus? Quid igitur dicis? recipiunt conversibilitatem an non? Et inmorante Mane, Archelaus ait: Si quidem inconversibiles esse dicit utrasque naturas, quid est quod inpediat, uti ne unum atque idem eas esse opinemur? Si enim inconversibiles sunt, non est in his naturis, quae similiter inconversibiles sunt et similiter ingenitae, ulla discretio, neque altera ex his bona agnoscitur aut mala. Quod si conversibiles sunt, scilicet provenire potest et bonum effici malum et malum bonum. Si enim hoc provenire possibile est, quare non unum dicamus ingenitum, quod intellegere magis dignum est iuxta rationem veritatis? Intueri enim oportet, quomodo malus ille fuerit ab initio, aut in quos malitiam exercuerit ante mundi constitutionem. Cum caelum nondum extitisset et nondum terra subsisteret, non homo, non animal, in quos exercebat malitiam? quem opprimebat iniuste? quem spolians occidit? Quod si suis eum dicas extitisse malum, sine dubio ergo ostenditur illum bonae esse naturae. Si vero et illi omnes mali sunt, quomodo potest Satanas Satanan eicere? Sed conclusus sermonem convertis, ut dicas quia bonus vim passus est a malo. Sed nec hoc quidem est tibi sine periculo dicere, ut lucem victam esse confirmes; quod enim vincitur vicinum habet interitum. Quid enim ait sermo divinus? Quis enim potest introire in domum fortis et diripere vasa eius, nisi illo sit fortior? Quod si hominibus eum malum extitisse dixeris et ex eo malitiae suae indicia demonstrasse, ergo ante hoc bonus fuit et conversibilitatem recipit ex eo, quod creatio hominis causa invenitur extitisse malitiae. Sed postremo dicat quid est malum, ne forte nomen solum defendat aut adstruat. Quod si non nomen mali, sed substantia, fructus nobis malitiae et nequitiae huius exponat, quoniam non agnoscitur umquam arboris natura sine fructu. ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "Changeability carries the one to whom it happens over into something else; as if we were to say that a Jew wishes to become a Christian, or a Christian wishes to be a pagan: this is the kind and cause of changeability. But if a pagan remains in all his own ways, offering sacrifices to his gods and serving in the temples according to custom, so long as he persists in his own ways and makes progress in them, can he be said to have been changed? What do you say, then? Do they admit of change or not?" And while Manes delayed, Archelaus said: "If he says that both natures are unchangeable, what is there to prevent our thinking that they are one and the same? For if they are unchangeable, there is no distinction between these natures, which are alike unchangeable and alike unbegotten, and neither of them is recognized as good or evil. But if they are changeable, then plainly it can come about that the good becomes evil and the evil good. And if this can come about, why should we not say that there is one unbegotten, which is the more worthy thing to understand, according to the reason of truth? For we ought to consider how that evil one was evil from the beginning, or against whom he exercised his wickedness before the founding of the world. When heaven did not yet exist and the earth did not yet stand, when there was no man and no animal, against whom did he exercise wickedness? Whom did he oppress unjustly? Whom did he rob and kill? But if you say that he was evil to his own, then without doubt he is shown to be of a good nature. And if all of them too are evil, how can Satan cast out Satan? But, hemmed in, you turn your argument so as to say that the good suffered violence from the evil. Yet not even this can you say without danger, that you should affirm the light to have been conquered; for what is conquered is near to destruction. For what does the divine word say? 'Who can enter the house of a strong man and plunder his goods, unless he is stronger than he?' But if you say that he became evil to men, and showed the marks of his wickedness from that time, then before this he was good, and admits of changeability from the fact that the creation of man is found to have been the cause of wickedness. But finally let him say what evil is, so that he may not perhaps be defending or building up a mere name. And if it is not the name of evil but a substance, let him set out for us the fruits of this wickedness and malice, since the nature of a tree is never known without its fruit." ### Scripture references - Mark 3:23: quotation, high confidence - Mark 3:27: quotation, high confidence - Matt 12:33: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Mark 3:23 (Satan casting out Satan); Mark 3:27 (the strong man); Matt 7:16–20 and 12:33 (the tree known by its fruit). Stray numbers in the OCR are removed; "perseOM verat" is read as "perseverat". ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 18 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/18). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 19 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/1/#p-19 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus presses Manes on the fruits of the evil tree: if they are human sins, men would be the tree, and evil could cease when men stop sinning or perish. ### Latin text Manes dixit: Constet apud te prius, quia est radix alia malitiae, quam non plantavit deus, et tunc tibi dicam fructus eius. Abchelaus dixit: Non hoc veri expetit ratio; neque enim adsentiar tibi radicem esse malae arboris illius, de cuius fructibus numquam ullus gustaverit. Tamquam si velit aliquid quis emere, nisi prius gustando discat utrum arida sit species aut liquida, pecuniam non profert; ita neque ego tibi adsentiar esse arborem malam et pessimam, nisi prius qualitas fructuum eius fuerit manifestata; scriptum est enim quia de fructibus arbor cognoscitur. Dic ergo nobis, o Manes, arbor quae dicitur mala quem adferat fructum, aut cuius naturae sit, quam virtutem habeat, ut tibi credamus etiam radicem arboris ipsius esse talem. Manes dixit: Radix quidem mala, arbor autem pessima, incrementum vero non ex deo, fructus autem fomicationes, adulteria, homicidia, avaritia et omnes mali actus malae illius radicis. Archelaus dixit: Ut tibi credamus quia isti sunt fructus malae illius radicis, gustum nobis eorum profer; substantiam enim ingenitam esse pronuntiasti huius arboris, cuius fructus secundum sui similitudinem proferuntur. Manes dixit: Haec ipsa iniustitia quae in hominibus est testimonium reddit, et avaritia, de gustu malae illius radicis. Archelaus dixit: Ergo, ut dixisti, fructus sunt arboris huius iniquitates istae quae geruntur ab hominibus. Manes dixit: Ita plane. Archelaus dixit: Si fructus isti sunt, id est actus hominum mali, ipsi ergo homines radicis locum atque arboris obtinebunt; ipsos enim pronuntiasti fructum ferre huiuscemodi Manes dixit: Ita dico. Archelaus dixit: Male dicis, *ita dico*; non enim ita dicis, alioquin cum homines peccare cessaverint, arbor malitiae infructuosa adparebit. Makes dixit: Inpossibile est quod dicis; si enim unus cessaverit aut alius aut plures, alii tamen hoc agent. Archelaus dixit : Si omnino possibile est unum et alium et plures, sicut ais, non peccare, possibile est etiam hoc omnes agere; unius enim conditoris sunt et unius massae omnes homines, et ne te otiose per ineptias sequar, ea quae incondite protulisti certis praescriptionibus excludam. Ais fructus malae radicis atque malae arboris esse actus hominum, id est fornicationes, adulteria, periuria, homicidia et reliqua his similia? Manes dixit: Ita. Archelaus dixit: Ergo si humanum genus interire provenerit a facie terrae, ita ut ultra iam peccare non possint, periet et arboris huius substantia, fructum ultra non adferens. Manes dixit: Et quando quod dicis fiet? Archelaus dixit: Quoniam quod futurum est nescio, homo enim sum, non tamen sermonem istum indiscussum relinquam. Quid dicis de humano genere, ingenitum est aut factura? Manes dixit: Factura est. Archelaus dixit: Si factura est homo, quis est adulterii et fornicationis et reliquorum talium pater, cuius hic est fructus? Priusquam fieret homo, quis erat qui fornicaretur aut adulteraret aut homicidia perpetraret? Manes dixit: Sed homo a mala natura plasmatus manifestum est, quia ipse sit fructus, etiam si peccet, etiam si non peccet; unde semel absolute nomen hominum et genus tale est, etiam si iusta gesserit aut iniusta. Archelaus dixit: Sed et illius rei faciamus mentionem. Si ipse, ut ais, hominem fecit malignus, quare malitiam exercet adversus eum? ### English translation (Claude) Manes said: "Let it first be agreed by you that there is another root of wickedness, which God did not plant, and then I will tell you its fruits." Archelaus said: "The reason of truth does not require this; for I will not agree with you that there is a root of that evil tree, of whose fruits no one has ever tasted. Just as, if someone wishes to buy something, he does not pay the money unless he first learns by tasting whether the produce is dry or juicy, so I will not agree with you that there is an evil and very bad tree unless the quality of its fruits is first made plain; for it is written that a tree is known by its fruits. Tell us, then, Manes, what fruit the tree that is called evil bears, or of what nature it is, what power it has, so that we may believe you that the root of that tree is also such." Manes said: "The root is evil, and the tree very bad, and its growth is not from God; and its fruits are sexual immorality, adulteries, murders, greed, and all the evil deeds of that evil root." Archelaus said: "So that we may believe you that these are the fruits of that evil root, give us a taste of them; for you have declared that the substance of this tree, whose fruits are brought forth according to its likeness, is unbegotten." Manes said: "This very injustice that is in men, and greed, bear witness to the taste of that evil root." Archelaus said: "So, as you have said, the wicked deeds done by men are the fruits of this tree." Manes said: "Exactly so." Archelaus said: "If these are fruits, that is, the evil deeds of men, then men themselves will hold the place of the root and the tree; for you have declared that they bear fruit of this kind." Manes said: "So I say." Archelaus said: "You say badly 'so I say'; for you do not say so; otherwise, when men stop sinning, the tree of wickedness will appear fruitless." Manes said: "What you say is impossible; for if one stops, or another, or several, others will still do it." Archelaus said: "If it is at all possible for one, and another, and several, as you say, not to sin, it is possible for all to do this as well; for all men are of one maker and of one lump. And so as not to follow you idly through your absurdities, I will shut out by definite rulings what you have put forward in disorder. Do you say that the fruits of the evil root and the evil tree are the deeds of men, that is, sexual immorality, adulteries, perjuries, murders, and the rest like them?" Manes said: "Yes." Archelaus said: "Then if it should happen that the human race perishes from the face of the earth, so that they can no longer sin, the substance of this tree will also perish, bearing no more fruit." Manes said: "And when will what you say happen?" Archelaus said: "Since I do not know what is to come, for I am a man, I will still not leave this argument undiscussed. What do you say about the human race: is it unbegotten or made?" Manes said: "It is made." Archelaus said: "If man is made, who is the father of adultery and sexual immorality and the rest of such things, whose fruit this is? Before man was made, who was there to commit sexual immorality or adultery or murder?" Manes said: "But since man was formed by the evil nature, it is plain that he himself is the fruit, whether he sins or does not sin; so the name and race of men is once for all of this kind, whether he does just things or unjust." Archelaus said: "Let us mention this point too. If, as you say, the evil one made man, why does he exercise his wickedness against him?" ### Scripture references - Matt 7:16–20: allusion, high confidence - Matt 12:33: quotation, high confidence - Luke 6:43–44: allusion, high confidence - Rom 9:21: allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 7:16–20; 12:33; Luke 6:43–44 (the tree and its fruits); Rom 9:21 ("one lump"). Lines of Beeson's Scripture apparatus and running head mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 19 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/19). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 20 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-20 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes says the evil one was always evil; Archelaus argues that the serpent became evil only after man, that the law given to man is God's, and that man could not be the work of a witless evil principle. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Hoc volumus scire a te, Manichaee, quomodo illum adfirmasti malum esse? Ex eo quo homines facti sunt aut antea? Quia enim necesse est te malitiae eius opus ostendere ex eo tempore ex quo malum eum fuisse adseris, certus esto; quia neque agnoscitur vini qualitas, nisi prius gustaverit quis, sicut et ex fructu omnis arbor dinoscitur. Quid ergo dicis? ex quo tempore malus est hic? necessaria enim nobis videtur haec ratio. Manes dixit, Semper. Archelaus dixit: Ostendam etiam hoc apud vos, optimi viri et prudentissimi auditores, quoniam sermo eius omnino non constat; nam et ferrum non est semper malum, nisi ex quo homo est, et artificium eius in malo conversum, utendo ex eo perverse; et omne peccatum extitit ex quo homo est. Sed nee ille quidem ipse magnus serpens malus ante hominem fuit, sed post hominem, in quo malitiae suae ostendit fructum, quia ipse voluit. Si ergo nobis post hominem adparet secundum scripturas malitiae pater, quomodo ingenitus erit qui post hominem, qui factura est, malus effectus est? Sed et ex hominis tempore a se creati, cur malus ostendatur? Quid in eo concupivit, si omne corpus suae facturae erat, quid zelatus est? Qui enim zelatur aut concupiscit, meliora et aliena concupiscit. Si ergo ex quo homo est, ex eo mala natura demonstratur, quomodo suus fuit, sicut frequenter ostendi, homo? Si enim suus erat homo, malus erat etiam ipse tamquam talis arboris fructus; mala enim arbor, sicut ais, malos fructus facit. Cum omnes enim mali essent, quid desideravit aut unde initium malitiae ostendit, si ex tempore plasmati hominis malitiae eius homo causa est? Lege autem ac praecepto sibi dato, homo poterat nequaquam obtemperare serpenti et his quae ab eo dicebantur; cui si non obtemperasset homo, qua ex causa malus fuisset? Quod si ingenitum est malum, et quomodo interdum homo fortior illo invenitur? Obtemperans enim mandato dei frequenter vincit omnem malitiae radicem; et ridiculum est, si iste qui factura est fortior inveniatur ingenito. Cuius autem est lex et mandatum? illud dico quod homini datum est. Sine dubio confitebitur dei esse. Et quomodo potest dari lex alieno? aut inimico quis potest dare praeceptum? Aut ille qui accipit praeceptum, quomodo potest adversus diabolum, id est, adversus creatorem suum pugnare, tamquam si filius patri, cum beneficiorum debitor sit, inrogare velit iniurias? Ita in hac parte inutilitatem hominis designas, si per legem et mandatum adversum eum qui se plasmaverit, dimicet atque eum vincere conetur. In tantum enim stoliditatis progressum esse ipsum diabolum putabimus, quod adversum se hominem se fecisse non senserit, nec animadverterit quod futurum esset, nec providerit quod sequebatur; cum etiam in nobis, qui factura sumus, sit aliqua vel parva scientia, inest et aliquid providentiae et existimationis nonnumquam certae? Et quomodo ingenito ne exiguum quidem providentiae fuisse credimus neque existimationis aut intellectus? Sed brutissimus sensu et obtusissimi cordis et naturae pecoris invenitur secundum adsertionem, videlicet, tuam. Quod si ita est, quomodo homo, qui ingenio atque scientia non parum pollet, ab eo, qui ignarus omnium atque hebes sensu est, potuit accepisse substantiam? Quomodo huiuscemodi auctoris opus esse hominem audebit aliquis confiteri? ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "We want to know this from you, Manichaeus: from when do you affirm that he was evil? From the time men were made, or before? For be sure that you must show the work of his wickedness from the time from which you assert that he was evil; since the quality of wine is not known unless someone first tastes it, just as every tree is known by its fruit. What do you say, then? From what time is he evil? For this account seems necessary to us." Manes said: "Always." Archelaus said: "I will show this too before you, most excellent men and most prudent hearers, that his argument does not hold at all. For iron too is not always evil, but only from the time man exists and his craft is turned to evil by using it perversely; and every sin has existed from the time man has existed. Nor was that great serpent himself evil before man, but after man, in whom he showed the fruit of his wickedness because he himself willed it. If, then, according to the Scriptures, the father of wickedness appears to us after man, how will he be unbegotten who became evil after man, who is something made? And why should he be shown to be evil from the time of the man created by himself? What did he desire in him, if the whole body was his own making? Of what was he jealous? For one who is jealous or desires, desires better things that belong to another. If, then, his evil nature is shown from the time man has existed, how was man his own, as I have often shown? For if man was his own, he too was evil, as the fruit of such a tree; for an evil tree, as you say, makes evil fruits. For since all were evil, what did he desire, or from where did he show the beginning of wickedness, if from the time man was formed man is the cause of his wickedness? By the law and commandment given to him, man was able not to obey the serpent at all, or the things that were said by him; and if man had not obeyed him, for what cause would he have been evil? And if evil is unbegotten, how is man sometimes found stronger than it? For by obeying the commandment of God he often conquers every root of wickedness; and it is ridiculous if this one, who is something made, should be found stronger than the unbegotten. "Whose, then, are the law and commandment? I mean the one given to man. Without doubt he will confess that it is God's. And how can a law be given to a stranger? Or who can give a command to an enemy? Or how can the one who receives the command fight against the devil, that is, against his own creator, as if a son, though indebted to his father for his benefits, were to wish to heap injuries on him? So in this part you make man's position absurd, if by law and commandment he fights against the one who formed him and tries to conquer him. For shall we think the devil himself to have come to such a degree of stupidity that he did not perceive that he had made man against himself, nor noticed what would happen, nor foresaw what was to follow, when even in us, who are something made, there is some knowledge, however small, and there is also some foresight and judgment, sometimes sure? And how shall we believe that the unbegotten had not even a little foresight, or judgment, or understanding? According to your assertion, plainly, he is found most brutish in sense, of most obtuse heart, and of the nature of a beast. If that is so, how could man, who is strong in no small measure in wit and knowledge, have received his substance from one who is ignorant of everything and dull in sense? How will anyone dare to confess that man is the work of such an author?" ### Scripture references - Matt 12:33: allusion, high confidence - Matt 7:17–18: allusion, high confidence - Gen 3:1–6: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 7:17–18; 12:33 (the tree and its fruit); Gen 3 (the serpent and the commandment). ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 20 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 21 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-21 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus argues from the parables of the new wine and the new patch that soul and body are made by one God and work in harmony. ### Latin text Quod si homo anima est et corpus, et non solum corpus sine anima, quae sine se invicem subsistere non possunt, quare ea inimica sibimet dices et contraria? Videtur enim mihi dominus noster Iesus Christus de his dixisse per parabolas: Nemo potest vinum novum in utres veteres mittere, alioquin rumpentur utres et vinum effundetur, Sed vinum novum in utres novos mittendum est, quoniam quidem idem dominus est utris et vini; nam etsi diversa substantia sit, sed dominatione et observantia et usu ex his duabus una persona subsistit. Non enim animam dicimus substantiae unius esse cum corpore, sed habere unumquodque qualitatem suam; et tamquam ad unum genus atque unam speciem hominum uter ac vinum conparatur, ita ab uno deo, qui omnia tam in caelis quam etiam in terra creavit, hominem conditum ratio expetit veritatis; gaudet enim anima corpore et diligit et colit illud, nihilominus etiam corpus gaudet ab anima se vivificatum. Quod si maligni opus dicat esse quis corpus, cum sit et corruptibile ac vetustum atque deterrimum, non potest ferre spiritus virtutem nec animae commotionem et eius splendidissimam creaturam. Sicut enim adsumentum panni rudis adsuat quis vestimento veteri, maior scissura fit, ita etiam corpus, si praeclarissimo operi, animae, adsociatum fuerit, interiet. Similiter et si quis inferat lucernae lumen in locum tenebrosum, fugantur continuo tenebrae nec adparent; ita intellegendum est, anima corpori inserta, continuo tenebras effugatas et unam iam effectam esse naturam atque unum hominem in unam speciem constitutum; et ita conveniet consonanter vinum novum esse missum in utres novos et adsumentum panni rudis adsutum non esse veteri vestimento, sed novo. Sed et ex hoc ostendere possumus consonantiam esse virtutum in utraque, id est corporis atque animae, substantia, in qua ait scripturarum doctor maximus Paulus, deum in corpore, sicut voluit, unumquodque membrum posuisse, ### English translation (Claude) "And if man is soul and body, and not body alone without soul, and these cannot subsist without each other, why will you call them hostile and contrary to each other? For our Lord Jesus Christ seems to me to have spoken of these things in parables: 'No one can put new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the skins will burst and the wine be spilled; but new wine must be put into new skins,' since indeed the same lord is master of the skin and of the wine. For even though the substance is different, yet by rule, care, and use one person subsists from these two. For we do not say that the soul is of one substance with the body, but that each has its own quality; and as the skin and the wine are compared to one kind and one species of men, so the reason of truth demands that man was founded by the one God, who created all things both in heaven and on earth. For the soul rejoices in the body, and loves and tends it; and the body no less rejoices that it is given life by the soul. "But if anyone says that the body is the work of the evil one, since it is corruptible, old, and very bad, then it cannot bear the power of the spirit, nor the movement of the soul and its most splendid creation. For as, if someone sews a patch of new cloth on an old garment, a worse tear results, so too the body, if it were joined to that most glorious work, the soul, would perish. Likewise, if someone brings the light of a lamp into a dark place, the darkness is at once put to flight and does not appear; so we must understand that when the soul is put into the body, the darkness is at once driven away, and one nature is now made, and one man constituted in one species. And so it will agree harmoniously that new wine has been put into new skins, and that the patch of new cloth has been sewn not on an old garment but on a new one. And from this too we can show that there is a harmony of powers in both substances, that is, of the body and the soul, of which Paul, the greatest teacher of the Scriptures, says that God has set each member in the body as he willed." ### Scripture references - Matt 9:17: quotation, high confidence - Mark 2:22: quotation, medium confidence - Luke 5:37–38: quotation, medium confidence - Matt 9:16: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 12:18: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 9:16–17; Mark 2:21–22; Luke 5:36–38; 1 Cor 12:18. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 21 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/21). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 22 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-22 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus compares body and soul to a temple and its statue and to a ship and its rudder, to show that both have one maker. ### Latin text Quod si id tibi difficile videtur intellectu nec adquiescis his dictis, saltem exemplis tibi adfirmabo. Intuere hominem templum esse quoddam, sicut et scriptum est; spiritum autem qui in ipso est, refer ad eius formam qui inhabitat templum; neque ergo templum construi potest, non agnito prius habitatore templi, neque inhabitator conlocatur, si templum non sit extructum. Cum ergo utrumque una ac pariter dedicetur, quomodo in his inimicum aliquid aut contrarium inveniri potest, et non potius ab amicis atque idem volentibus utrumque videtur effectum? Et ut scias quoniam et amicitia et genere coniuncti sunt, qui scit et audit, Faciamus hominem et reliqua respondit. Hic enim qui templum extruit interrogat illum qui informat simulacrum, mensurasque etiam magnitudinis ac latitudinis vastitatisque perquirit, ut ita fundamentorum spatia describat; neque enim in vanum quis templum extruit, nisi mensuras conlocandi didicerit simulacri. Similiter igitur perquiritur modus corporis atque mensura, ut possit apte in eo anima conlocari ab artifice omnium deo. Quod si dicat quis inimicum esse eum, qui plasmaverit corpus, domini, qui creator est animae meae, quomodo non, dum alteri invidet, alterius operi inrogavit infamiam, ut aut ille qui templum extruit angustum faciat, ita ut capere non possit quod conlocatur; aut ille qui simulacrum fecit, quomodo non grave aliquid protulit et ponderosum, quo intromisso, templum continuo concideret? Secundum hoc, quod novimus esse inimicorum studia, contemplemur haec, si non ita se habent; sin autem oportet omnia isdem mensuris eadem aequitate disponi similique gloria efferri, quid adhuc de hoc dubitamus? Addimus tamen, si placet, etiam illud exemplum: similis videtur esse homo navi, quae instructa ab artifice atque in mare deducta est quamque navigare inpossibile est sine gubernaculis, quibus regi et flecti possit in quaecumque loca voluerit gubernator eius. Et quia eodem artifice indigeat corpus gubernaculorum quo et totius navis, nulli dubium est; sine gubernaculis enim otiosum erit omne navis opus, corpus illud inmensum. Ita ergo animam corporis gubernacula dicimus, reguntur autem utraque arbitrii atque animae libertate, quo velut gubernatore utimur; quae cum coniunctione unum effecta consonantiam officii sui continent ad omne opus, quodcumque ex semet ipsis efficiunt, uni auctori et conditori testimonium ferunt. ### English translation (Claude) "But if this seems difficult for you to understand, and you do not accept these words, I will at least confirm it to you by examples. Consider that man is a kind of temple, as it is also written; and the spirit that is in him, compare to the form of the one who dwells in the temple. A temple cannot be built unless the one who is to dwell in it is first known, nor is the dweller set in place unless the temple has been built. Since, then, both are dedicated together at the same time, how can anything hostile or contrary be found in them, and does it not rather seem that both were made by friends who wish the same thing? And so that you may know that they are joined both in friendship and in kind, the one who knows and hears answered, 'Let us make man,' and the rest. For the one who builds the temple asks the one who forms the statue, and inquires into the measurements of its height, breadth, and size, so as to lay out the extent of the foundations accordingly; for no one builds a temple in vain unless he has learned the measurements for placing the statue. In the same way, then, the manner and measure of the body are inquired into, so that the soul may be fittingly placed in it by God, the maker of all. "But if anyone says that the one who formed the body is an enemy of the Lord who is the creator of my soul, how, while envying the one, would he not have brought disgrace on the work of the other, so that either the one who builds the temple made it narrow, so that it could not hold what was placed in it; or the one who made the statue, how would he not have produced something heavy and weighty, so that when it was brought in, the temple would at once collapse? In accordance with what we know to be the ways of enemies, let us consider these things, whether they are not so. But if all things must be arranged with the same measures, with the same fairness, and brought out with like glory, why do we still doubt about this? "Let us add, if you please, this example too: man seems to be like a ship, which has been fitted out by a craftsman and launched into the sea, and which cannot sail without rudders, by which it may be steered and turned to whatever places its helmsman wishes. And no one doubts that the body of the ship needs the rudders from the same craftsman as the whole ship; for without rudders the whole work of the ship, that huge body, will be idle. So we say that the soul is the rudder of the body; and both are steered by the freedom of the will and of the soul, which we use as a helmsman. When these have been made one by their joining, they keep the harmony of their function for every work, and whatever they accomplish from themselves bears witness to one author and founder." ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 3:16: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 6:16: allusion, medium confidence - Gen 1:26: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 1 Cor 3:16 and 2 Cor 6:16 (man a temple); Gen 1:26 ("Let us make man"). Beeson's Scripture apparatus and running head mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 22 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/22). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 23 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-23 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: The judges rule that body and soul have one maker; Archelaus argues that the Lord's Prayer is addressed to the Father in heaven, not to the maker Manes posits. ### Latin text His auditis, turbae quae aderant vehementer gavisae sunt, ita ut paene manus inicerent in Manen, quos vix Archelaus cohibens et reprimens conquiescere fecit. Iudices dixerunt: Sufficienter ostendit Archelaus hominis et corpus et animam unius esse factoris, eo quod consonare in coniunctione non possit opus unius, si propositum artificis a se dissentiret alterius. Quod si dicatur unum explicare utrumque minime valuisse, infirmitatem ostendit artificis; quia et si dicat quis animam boni dei esse, otiosum opus invenitur hominis, nisi etiam corpus acceperit. Quod si rursum corpus mali dei dicatur esse figmentum, otiosum nihilominus erit, si animam non acceperit; quae utique nisi commixta atque sibi invicem fuerit inserta cum corpore, homo nec erit nee dicetur. Unde multis exemplis adprobavit Archelaus totius hominis unum atque eundem esse factorem. Archelaus dixit: Scire te non dubito, Manes, hoc, quod generantis aut creantis filius dicitur ille qui natus est (aut) creatus ; quod si malignus hominem finxit, pater eius esse debet secundum naturam. Et cui ergo dicebat dominus Iesus, docens orare homines: Sic dicite cum oratis, Pater noster, qui es in caelis? Et iterum: Orate patrem vestrum qui est in occulto? De Satana autem dixit vidisse se eum, sicut fulgur cadentem de caelo; uti ne quisquam audeat dicere quod ipsum nos docebat orare; neque enim descenderat Iesus, ut homines coniungeret et reconciliaret Satanae, quin potius conterendum eum sub pedibus fidelium suorum tradidit. Sed ego iam beatiores istos dicam esse gentiles qui multos quidem introducunt deos, unanimos tamen atque amicos eos confitentur; hic vero duos introducens, inimicitias inter eos discordemque sententiam non erubescit adstruere. Quod si multos sub huiuscemodi condicione introduceret deos, ludum iam gladiatorium inter eos erat videre, innumeras habentes naturas diversasque sententias. ### English translation (Claude) When they heard this, the crowds that were present rejoiced greatly, so that they almost laid hands on Manes; Archelaus, restraining and holding them back, could barely quiet them. The judges said: "Archelaus has sufficiently shown that both the body and the soul of man are of one maker, since the work of one could not agree in its joining if the purpose of the other craftsman disagreed with him. And if it is said that one was not able to complete both, that shows the weakness of the craftsman; for if one says that the soul is of the good God, the work of man is found idle unless it has also received a body. And again, if the body is said to be the fashioning of the evil god, it will be no less idle if it has not received a soul; and unless that soul is mixed and inserted into the body, there will be no man, nor will he be called one. So Archelaus has proved by many examples that the maker of the whole man is one and the same." Archelaus said: "I do not doubt, Manes, that you know this: that one who is born or created is called the son of the one who begets or creates. If, then, the evil one fashioned man, he must be his father by nature. And to whom, then, was the Lord Jesus speaking when, teaching men to pray, he said, 'When you pray, say thus: Our Father, who are in heaven'? And again: 'Pray to your Father who is in secret'? But of Satan he said that he had seen him falling like lightning from heaven, so that no one might dare to say that he was teaching us to pray to him; for Jesus had not come down to join men to Satan and reconcile them with him; rather, he handed him over to be crushed under the feet of his faithful. But I would now call those pagans more blessed, who bring in many gods yet confess them to be of one mind and friends; whereas this man, bringing in two, is not ashamed to set up enmities and discordant purpose between them. And if he brought in many gods on a condition of this kind, one would now see a gladiatorial show among them, having countless natures and different purposes." ### Scripture references - Matt 6:9: quotation, high confidence - Luke 11:2: quotation, medium confidence - Matt 6:6: quotation, high confidence - Luke 10:18: allusion, high confidence - Rom 16:20: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 6:9 and Luke 11:2 (the Lord's Prayer); Matt 6:6; Luke 10:18; Rom 16:20. The words "(aut)" are the editor's supplement and are translated. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 23 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/23). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 24 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-24 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus argues from Jesus' woe on the Pharisees that the maker of the outside also made the inside, and that God confined to a fixed place would be less than human rulers. ### Latin text Iam vero de interiori atque exteriori homine quid me necesse est dicere, cum salvatoris voce dicatur ad eos qui camelum glutiunt et deforis hypocritae sunt, blandimentis atque adulationibus circumdati; ad quod Iesus ait: Vae vobis scribae et Pharisaei hypocritae, quare quod deforis est catini et calicis lavatis; quod autem intus est inmunditia plenum est? Aut nescitis quin qui fecit quod foris est et quod de intus est fecit? Numquid de catino et de calice loquebatur? Numquid vitriarius erat, qui haec dicebat, aut figulus, ex luto fingens vasa? Nonne de corpore atque anima evidentissime loquebatur? Quoniam quidem Pharisaei aneti et cimini decimas expetentes quae erant graviora legis relinquebant et his quae extrinsecus erant adhibentes diligentiam contemnebant ea, quae ad salutem animae pertinebant; expetebant etiam salutationes in foro et primos discubitus in cenis; quod sciens dominus Jesus perditos esse dicebat eos, quia his solis rebus quae deforis erant adhiberent diligentiam et ea quae intrinsecus erant contemnerent velut aliena, ignorantes quoniam qui corpus fecerat, ipse fecit et animam. Et quis ita lapideus est et stolidus, ut non ad omnia ei iste sermo sufficiat? Cui sermoni consonans Paulus ait, interpretans. ea quae in lege scripta sunt hoc modo: Non infrenabis os bovi trituranti. Numquid de bubus cura est deo? Aut propter nos utique dicit? Sed quid inmoramur ulterius? adiciam tamen pauca de pluribus. Si duo sunt ingenita et his loca certa decernimus, dividitur deus; si intra certum locum est et non ubique diffunditur, et erit multo inferior loco, in quo est (maius enim quod continet semper eo quem continet) et efficitur deus eius magnitudinis cuius est locus in quo continetur, sicut homo, si sit in domo. Deinde ratio requirit quis est qui inter eos diviserit aut quis eis certos terminos statuerit, et invenitur iam uterque multo inferior virtutis humanae. Lysimachus enim et Alexander totius mundi inperium tenuerunt omnesque nationes barbaras atque omne genus hominum subicere potuerunt, ita ut non esset alius inperator per illud tempus praeter ipsos sub caelo. Et quomodo audebit quisquam dicere non ubique esse deum, qui est lumen verum indeficiens, cuius est regnum sanctum et sempiternum? Heu nequissimi istius inpietas, qui nec aequalem quidem cum hominibus potestatem omnipotenti deo tribuit! ### English translation (Claude) "And what need is there for me to speak of the inner and outer man, when it is said by the Saviour's voice to those who swallow a camel and are hypocrites outwardly, surrounded by flatteries and fawning? To them Jesus says: 'Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you wash what is outside the dish and the cup, but what is inside is full of uncleanness. Or do you not know that he who made what is outside also made what is inside?' Was he speaking of a dish and a cup? Was the one who said this a glassmaker, or a potter shaping vessels out of clay? Was he not speaking most evidently of the body and the soul? For the Pharisees, demanding tithes of dill and cumin, neglected the weightier matters of the law, and, giving their diligence to the things that were outward, despised the things that belonged to the salvation of the soul; they also sought greetings in the marketplace and the first places at dinners. Knowing this, the Lord Jesus said they were lost, because they gave diligence only to the things that were outside and despised the things that were inside as if they were someone else's, not knowing that he who had made the body himself made the soul too. And who is so stony and stupid that this word is not enough for him in everything? In harmony with this word Paul says, interpreting what is written in the law in this way: 'You shall not muzzle the mouth of the ox that is threshing.' Is it for oxen that God cares? Or does he not speak entirely for our sake? "But why do we delay further? I will add a few things out of many. If there are two unbegotten things, and we assign them fixed places, God is divided. If he is within a fixed place and not spread everywhere, he will be much inferior to the place in which he is (for what contains is always greater than what it contains), and God becomes of the size of the place in which he is contained, like a man who is in a house. Then reason asks who it is that divided between them, or who set fixed boundaries for them; and each of them is found to be much inferior to human power. For Lysimachus and Alexander held the rule of the whole world and were able to subdue all the barbarian nations and every race of men, so that at that time there was no other ruler under heaven besides them. And how will anyone dare to say that God is not everywhere, who is the true, unfailing light, whose kingdom is holy and everlasting? Alas for the impiety of this most wicked man, who does not grant almighty God even a power equal to that of men!" ### Scripture references - Matt 23:24: allusion, high confidence - Matt 23:25–26: quotation, high confidence - Luke 11:39–40: quotation, high confidence - Matt 23:23: allusion, high confidence - Matt 23:6–7: allusion, high confidence - Mark 12:38–39: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 9:9–10: quotation, high confidence - Deut 25:4: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 23:23–27; Luke 11:39–43; Matt 23:6–7; Mark 12:38–39; 1 Cor 9:9–10 (Deut 25:4). The comparison with Lysimachus and Alexander is Archelaus's own (historically, Lysimachus was one of Alexander's successors). In "for what contains is always greater" the scan's "malus" is read as "maius". Beeson's apparatus and running head mixed into the text are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 24 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/24). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 25 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-25 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: The judges argue that light fills the world; Archelaus explains darkness as the shadow cast by created bodies, chiefly the earth, so that it is not unbegotten. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Lumen in toto mundo lucere scimus et non in una aliqua parte; sicut et Jesus dicit quia nemo lucernam accendens ponit sub modio, sed super candelabrum ut luceat Omnibus qui in domo sunt, Si ergo lumen est, necesse est illud (si tamen Iesus creditur) mundo universo lucere et non per partes; a quo si Universum obtinet mundum, ubi iam ingenitae tenebrae, nisi forte accidentes intellegantur? Archelaus dixit: Quoniam quidem multo melius a vobis intelligitur sermo euangelicus quam ab isto, qui se paracletum esse profitetur, quem ego magis parasitum quam paracletum dixerim, dicam ego quomodo acciderint tenebrae. Cum lux esset ubique diffusa, mundum coepit deus condere initium a caelo et terra sumens, in quo ita ratio evenit, ut medietas, qui est terrae locus umbra obtectus, obiectu videlicet earum quae factae sunt creaturarum, inveniretur obscurus, ita ut res expeteret introduci lucem huic ipsi in medietate posito loco. Unde et in Genesi Moyses enarrans facturam mundi nequaquam facit tenebrarum mentionem, aut quasi factae sint aut non factae; sed ipse tacuit, his, qui possint advertere, derelinquens rationem huius intellectus; quae quidem nec satis est ardua atque difficilis. Cui enim non fiat manifestum, solem istum visibilem, cum ab Oriente fuerit exortus et tetenderit iter suum ad occidentem, cum sub terra ierit et interior effectus fuerit ea quae apud Graecos sphera vocatur, quod nunc obiectu corporum obumbratus non adpareat? Sed obtecto eo, obstante terrae corpore, superducitur umbra, quae ex se efficit tenebras, usquequo rursum, inferioris spatii cursu per noctem transacto, ad orientem revolutus atque in locis solitis obortus adpareat. Est ergo umbrae atque noctis causa corporis terrae soliditas, quod etiam ex sui ipsius umbra homo intellegere potest. Ante caelum enim et terram atque omnes istas corporeas creaturas indeficiens lux manebat, cum nullum corpus existeret quod umbram sui obiectione generaret; et ideo nusquam tenebras, nusquam noctem fuisse profitendum est. Nam si, verbi gratia, placeat ei cui potestas est omnium, plagam quae ad occasum est auferre de medio, non agente sole ad illam partem cursum, nusquam fiet vespera aut tenebrae; sed erit sol semper in cursu nee umquam occidet, et medium caeli axis paene semper tenebit nec aliquando desinat adparere; et per hoc erit universus orbis terrarum clarissimo lumine radiatus, ex quo nec uUa eius pars obumbrabitur, sed manebit ubique unius luminis aequalitas. Occidentali autem plaga statum suum servante et sole cursum suum tribus mundi partibus ministrante, hi quidem qui sub sole sunt clarius videntur inluminari; ita ut paene dixerim, dormientibus adhuc eis qui e diversa plaga consistunt, isti priores diei exordium sumant. Sicut autem ante eos qui in parte occidua iacent illis lumen exoritur, ita velocius obscuratur; et soli omnium qui in orbis medietate consistunt aequalitatem semper sentiant lucis. Cum enim medium sol tenuerit caelum, nullus est locus qui aut lucidior aut obscurior esse videatur, sed omnes mundi partes ex aequo et iusto solis fulgore luminantur. Si ergo, ut superius diximus, occiduae plagae pars auferatur e medio, ultra iam non obscurabitur pars quae ei adiacet. Et haec quidem mihi simplicius dicta sint, cum possim et zodiacum circulum describere; sed non in tuto nunc fieri ratus sum, propter quod de his silebo et ad illud caput recurram quod obiecit adversarius, adfirmans omni nisu tenebras esse ingenitas, quod et ipsum quantum valuimus iam confutatum est ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "We know that light shines in the whole world and not in some one part; as Jesus also says that no one lighting a lamp puts it under a bushel, but on a lampstand, so that it may give light to all who are in the house. If, then, it is light, it must (if Jesus is believed) shine on the whole world and not in parts. And if it holds the whole world, where then is unbegotten darkness, unless perhaps it is understood as something that befalls?" Archelaus said: "Since the word of the Gospel is understood much better by you than by this man who professes to be the Paraclete, whom I would rather call a parasite than a Paraclete, I will tell how darkness came about. When light was spread everywhere, God began to found the world, taking his beginning from heaven and earth. In this it came about by reason that the middle, which is the place of the earth, covered with shadow, that is, by the interposition of the creatures that had been made, was found dark, so that the situation required light to be brought into this very place set in the middle. That is why Moses, in Genesis, narrating the making of the world, makes no mention at all of darkness, either as made or as not made; but he was silent himself, leaving the reasoning of this understanding to those who can perceive it; and it is not very hard or difficult. For to whom is it not plain that this visible sun, when it has risen from the east and held its course toward the west, when it has gone under the earth and come to be inside what the Greeks call the sphere, does not appear because it is now shadowed by the interposition of bodies? When it is covered, with the body of the earth standing in the way, shadow is drawn over, which of itself produces darkness, until, having completed its course through the lower space during the night, it turns back to the east and appears, rising in its usual places. So the cause of shadow and night is the solidity of the body of the earth, as a man can understand even from his own shadow. For before heaven and earth and all these bodily creatures, unfailing light remained, since no body existed to produce a shadow by its interposition; and so it must be confessed that there was no darkness anywhere, no night anywhere. For if, for example, it should please him who has power over all things to remove from the midst the region that lies to the west, so that the sun did not run its course to that part, there would be no evening or darkness anywhere; but the sun would always be on its course and never set, and would nearly always hold the middle of the axis of heaven and never cease to appear; and by this the whole circle of the earth would be shone on with the clearest light, so that no part of it would be shaded, but one equal light would remain everywhere. "But as the western region keeps its position, and the sun serves its course to three parts of the world, those who are under the sun are seen to be more brightly lit; so that, I might almost say, while those who live in the opposite region are still asleep, these begin the day first. And as light rises for them before those who lie in the western part, so it is darkened more quickly for them; and only those who live in the middle of the world always feel an equality of light. For when the sun holds the middle of the heaven, there is no place that seems either brighter or darker, but all parts of the world are lit equally and fairly by the sun's brightness. If, then, as we said above, the part of the western region were removed from the midst, the part next to it would no longer be darkened. Let these things be said by me rather simply, though I could describe the circle of the zodiac too; but I thought it not safe to do so now, and therefore I will be silent about these things and return to the point that my adversary raised, when he affirmed with every effort that darkness is unbegotten, which itself has already been refuted as far as we were able." ### Scripture references - Matt 5:15: quotation, high confidence - Mark 4:21: allusion, medium confidence - Luke 8:16: allusion, medium confidence - Luke 11:33: allusion, medium confidence - Gen 1:1–5: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 5:15; Mark 4:21; Luke 8:16; 11:33 (the lamp); Gen 1. The pun "parasite rather than Paraclete" is in the Latin (parasitum … paracletum). Archelaus's account of day and night is his own cosmology and is translated as it stands. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 25 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/25). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 26 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-26 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: The judges award the point to Archelaus; he presses Manes to say who built the wall dividing the kingdoms of light and darkness, and what the other was doing meanwhile. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Si consideremus lucem fuisse ante conditionem creaturarum et nihil fuisse obiectum quod ex se umbram generaret, necesse est lucem ubique fuisse diffusam et omnia loca fulgore lucis inluminata, sicut ostensum est ex his quae a te nuper dicta sunt; in quibus veram esse rationem videntes damus palmam allegationibus Archelai. Si enim divisionem accipiat universus mundus, velut muro quodam per medium instructo, et ex una parte habitent tenebrae, ex alia vero lux, intellegitur nihilominus quia ex eo quod instructum est aedificium, umbra generata, acciderint tenebrae. Et rursum nobis quaerendum est quis aedificaverit murum in medio duorum, si tamen aedificatum fateris, o Manichaee. Si vero illa ratio consideretur, quasi murus non sit instructus, rursus sine aliqua exceptione unus esse universus intellegitur locus ac sub una potestate positus; unde ex omni parte tenebris ex accidentibus esse demonstratis ingenitam naturam habere non possunt. Archelaus dixit: Dicat mihi etiam hoc ad ea quae proposita sunt. Deo in regno suo posito et maligno similiter in suo regno, quis inter medium ipsorum construxerit murum? Non enim potest dividere quid duas substantias, nisi quod sit utroque maius, sicut dicit in Genesi libro quia divisit deus inter lucem et tenebras. Talem esse aliquem necesse est et muri istius instructorem, murus enim terminos uniuscuiusque demonstrat, sicut inter eos qui rura incolunt lapis solet portionem uniuscuiusque dividere; quae tamen res magis intellectum dat, quo huiuscemodi divisio fraternae potius hereditatis sit ratio. Verum nunc non est mihi de his dicendum, quamquam necessarium videatur, nam illud est quod petimus: quis est qui extruxerit murum ad designandum uniuscuiusque terminum regni? Non differat; nolo moretur hic perfidus, sed iam confiteatur dualitatis suae in unum refusam esse substantiam. Dic age quemquam qui medium extruxerit murum. Quid agebat alter, altero instruente? Dormiebat aut ignorabat aut resistere non valuit aut pretio concessit? Dic quid faciebat vel quis est omnino qui extruxit. Vos deprecor, iudices, quos deus plenissime repletos intellectu misit, vobis dicat quis ex duobus extruxerit et quid agebat unüs cum alter extruxerit. ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "If we consider that light existed before the founding of creatures, and that nothing had been set in the way to produce a shadow from itself, light must have been spread everywhere and all places lit with the brightness of light, as has been shown from what you said just now. Seeing that the reasoning in this is true, we give the palm to Archelaus's arguments. For if the whole world admitted of a division, as if by a wall built through the middle, and darkness dwelt on one side and light on the other, it is understood no less that darkness came about from the building that was put up, from the shadow it produced. And again we must ask who built the wall between the two, if indeed you confess that it was built, Manichaeus. But if the reasoning is considered as though no wall had been built, then the whole is again understood to be one place without any exception, set under one power; and so, since darkness has been shown on every side to come from what befalls, it cannot have an unbegotten nature." Archelaus said: "Let him tell me this too, in answer to what has been proposed. With God set in his kingdom, and the evil one likewise in his, who built a wall between them? For nothing can divide two substances unless it is greater than both, as he says in the book of Genesis that God divided between the light and the darkness. Such must also be the builder of this wall; for a wall shows the boundaries of each, as among those who till the fields a stone usually divides the portion of each. Yet this matter gives rather the understanding that such a division is the arrangement of a brothers' inheritance. But I need not speak of these things now, though it seems necessary; for this is what we ask: who is it that built the wall to mark the boundary of each kingdom? Let him not put it off; I do not want this faithless man to delay, but let him now confess that the substance of his duality has flowed back into one. Come, tell me anyone who built the wall in the middle. What was the one doing while the other was building? Was he asleep, or unaware, or unable to resist, or did he give way for a price? Tell what he was doing, or who at all it was that built it. I beg you, judges, whom God has sent filled most fully with understanding: let him tell you which of the two built it, and what the one was doing when the other built it." ### Scripture references - Gen 1:4: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Gen 1:4 (God divided the light from the darkness). ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 26 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/26). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 27 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-27 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes says the good God set the firmament as a wall; Archelaus argues that a walled God is weak, and that whoever threw the wall down, God or the evil one, Manes's system fails. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Dic nobis, o Manes, quis designaverit fines utriusque regni, quis murum fecerit medium? Pro magno enim Archelaus interrogationem haberi huius sermonis exposcit. Manes dixit: Bonus deus et nihil habens commune cum malo, firmamentum posuit in medio, quo alienum a se et separatum faceret malignum. Archelaus dixit: Usquequo dignitate nominis mentiris? Deum etenim solummodo nomine appellas et deitatem ipsius humanis infirmitatibus conparas. Aliquando ex non extantibus, aliquando ex subiecta materia quae quidem ante se fuerit, adseris extruxisse, ut homines solent extructores. Interdum etiam eum timidum, interdum et conversibilem dicis; dei est enim agere quae dei sunt, hominis vero quae humana sunt. Si ergo deus, ut ais, murum construxit, timidum se hic et nihil fortitudinis se habere designat. Scimus enim semper eos qui suspicantur ab extraneis sibi dolos intendi atque hostium verentur insidias ipsi solent urbes suas muris circumdare; in quo et ignorantiam habent pariter atque inbecillitatem sui ostendunt. Sed ne illud quidem a nobis reticendum est, quin potius in medium proferendum, ut ex multa adsertionum copia machinationum adversarii diversitas destruatur, auxilium nobis ferente veritate. Concedamus structuram factam esse muri, quae ad discretionem esset uniuscuiusque regni: inpossibile enim est sine hoc uno habere unumquemque proprium regnum; eodem vero modo inpossibile est et malignum egressum propriis finibus boni partes invadere, muri interdictione constante, nisi forte prius deiciatur, sicut audivimus ab hostibus fieri atque etiam oculis nostris nuper adspeximus. Cum rex aliquis obpugnat turrem valido muro circumdatam, adhibet primo ballistas et iacula, securibus deinde portas excidere atque arietibus muros conatur evertere; et cum obtinuerit, tum demum ingressus quae libuerit agit, sive captivos placet cives abducere sive cuncta subvertere aut etiam, si placuerit, rogatus indulget. Quid ergo dicit iste? Non substantia, id est proposito, adversarius quis deiecit, quod interiectum fuerat munimentum? in praecedentibus enim professus est quia supervenerint tenebrae ex propriis finibus in regnum dei boni. Quis prius deiecit munitionem? Inpossibile enim erat ingredi malum, munitione constante. Quid taces? Quid moraris tu, Manichaee? Etiam si tu differas, adgrediar mea sponte. Si enim dixeris quia deus destruxerit, requiram quid eum moverit ad destruendum hoc quod prius propter inportunitatem maligni et separationem ipse extruxerat. Quid iratus aut quid damni perpessus adversum se ipse pugnare contendit? Aut numquid de maligni facultatibus aliquid concupivit? Quod si horum nihil in causa est deo destruendi ea quae iamdudum ad alienandum a se et separandum malum ipse construxerat, illud nec mirum putandum est, quod societate eius deus et consortio fuerit delectatus; munitio enim quae missa fuerat propter hoc, ne eius molestiam pateretur, idcirco destructa videbitur, quoniam non iam molestus, sed amicus fore putabitur. Quod si a maligno murum dicas esse destructum, quomodo possunt boni dei opera a maligno superari? alioquin fortior deo invenietur maligna natura. Quomodo et ipse, cum sit omnino totus tenebrae, luci supervenit et conprehendit, euangelista testimonium ferente quia lux lucet in tenebris et tenebrae eam non conprehenderunt? Quomodo caecus armatur? Quomodo tenebrae adversus lucis regnum dimicant? Sicut enim inbeccilli oculi solis radios in se recipere non possunt, ita et hic ferre non valet regni lucis intuitum, sed manet semper extraneus et alienus. ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "Tell us, Manes, who marked out the boundaries of each kingdom, who made the wall in the middle? For Archelaus asks that this question be held to be of great weight." Manes said: "The good God, who has nothing in common with the evil one, set the firmament in the middle, to make the evil one alien to him and separated from him." Archelaus said: "How long will you lie about the dignity of the name? You call him God in name only, and compare his deity to human weaknesses. Sometimes you assert that he built out of things that did not exist, sometimes out of an underlying matter which existed before him, as human builders usually do. At times you even call him fearful, at times changeable. For it belongs to God to do the things of God, and to man the things of man. If, then, as you say, God built a wall, he shows himself fearful and having no strength. For we know that those who suspect that plots are being laid against them by strangers and fear the snares of enemies usually surround their cities with walls; and in this they show their ignorance and their weakness alike. But not even this must be kept silent by us; rather it must be brought into the open, so that by a great abundance of statements the various contrivances of the adversary may be overthrown, with the truth bringing us help. "Let us grant that the building of the wall was made to separate each kingdom; for it is impossible for each to have his own kingdom without this one thing. In the same way, it is impossible for the evil one to go out of his own boundaries and invade the regions of the good while the barrier of the wall stands, unless it is first thrown down, as we have heard is done by enemies and have lately seen with our own eyes. When a king attacks a tower surrounded by a strong wall, he first brings up ballistae and javelins, then tries to cut down the gates with axes and overturn the walls with rams; and when he has prevailed, then at last he goes in and does what he pleases, whether he chooses to lead the citizens away as captives, or to overturn everything, or even, if he pleases, being entreated, to show mercy. What, then, does this man say? Who threw down the barrier that had been set between them, being an adversary not in substance but, that is, in purpose? For in what went before he professed that the darkness came from its own boundaries upon the kingdom of the good God. Who first threw down the fortification? For it was impossible for evil to enter while the fortification stood. Why are you silent? Why do you delay, Manichaeus? Even if you put it off, I will go on of my own accord. "If you say that God destroyed it, I will ask what moved him to destroy what he himself had built before because of the troublesomeness of the evil one and for the sake of separation. What anger, or what loss suffered, drove him to fight against himself? Or did he covet something of the evil one's possessions? But if none of these is the reason for God to destroy what he himself had long ago built to keep evil apart and separate from himself, it must not be thought strange that God took pleasure in his fellowship and partnership; for the fortification which had been set up for this purpose, so that he should not suffer annoyance from him, will be seen to have been destroyed because he will now be thought not troublesome but a friend. But if you say that the wall was destroyed by the evil one, how can the works of the good God be overcome by the evil one? Otherwise the evil nature will be found stronger than God. And how did he, who is wholly darkness, come upon the light and seize it, when the evangelist bears witness that the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it? How is a blind man armed? How does darkness fight against the kingdom of light? For as weak eyes cannot receive into themselves the rays of the sun, so he cannot bear the sight of the kingdom of light, but remains always a stranger and alien." ### Scripture references - John 1:5: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: John 1:5. The sentence "being an adversary not in substance but, that is, in purpose" is awkward in the Latin (non substantia, id est proposito, adversarius) and is translated as it stands; it recalls Archelaus's distinction in ch. 17. "Lately seen with our own eyes" refers to a siege the speaker had witnessed (not identified). ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 27 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/27). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 28 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-28 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes tells a parable of a shepherd who traps a lion with a kid thrown into a pit; Archelaus argues that this makes God betray a soul and use tricks out of weakness. ### Latin text Manes dixit: Non omnes capiunt verbum dei, sed quibus datum est scire mysteria regni caelorum. Et iam quidem scio qui sint nostri; meae enim, inquit, oves vocem meam audiunt. Propter nostros ergo, quibus datus est veritatis intellectus, per similitudines dicam. Similis est malignus leoni, qui inrepere vult gregi boni pastoris; quod cum pastor viderit, fodit foveam ingentem et de grege tulit unum hedum et iactavit in foveam, quem leo invadere desiderans, cum ingenti indignatione voluit eum absorbere, et adcurrens ad foveam, decidit in eam, ascendendi inde sursum non habens vires; quem pastor adprehensum pro prudentia sua in caveam concludit, atque hedum qui cum ipso fuerit in fovea incolumem conservabit. Ex hoc ergo infirmatus est malignus, ultra iam leone non habente potestatem faciendi aliquid, et salvabitur omne animarum genus ac restituetur quod perierat proprio suo gregi. Archelaus dixit: Si leonem maligno conparas, deum vero pastori, oves atque hedum, dic, cuinam conparabimus? Manes dixit: Oves et hedus unius mihi videntur esse naturae; in similitudinem autem ponuntur animarum. Archelaus dixit: Animam ergo perditum dedit deus, obiciens eam leoni in foveam? Manes dixit: Nequaquam, absit hoc; sed adprehensus est hoc ingenio, in futurum vero salvabit eam. Archelaus dixit: Ridiculum iam istud est, o viri auditores, si agnum quem retinebat in sinibus, pastor extimescens leonis ingressum proiecit eum devorandum et dicitur quia in futurum salvabit eum. Quomodo non totum hoc ridiculo plenum est? Nam et in hoc etiam iudicium adimitur. Deus enim Satanae animam tradidit in perditionem, ab eo adsumendam. Quando enim pastor de ore leonis aut de ventre eius potest educere quod iam ille devoravit? Sed dices mihi: deus est et omnia potest. Audi ergo ad haec: cur igitur quod possit, non illud potius adseris, quod poterit propria virtute vincere leonem, si est pura dei potentia, et numquam machinis quibusdam et foveae hedo sive agno tradito? Dic mihi etiam illud: si pastori superveniat leo non habenti oves, quid fiet? Ingenitus enim est qui dicitur pastor, ingenitus quoque etiam leo. Cum ergo nondum esset homo, priusquam pastor haberet gregem, si supervenisset leo, quid fiebat, quia non erat leonis esca priusquam hedus esset? Manes dixit: Leo quidem nihil manducabat, exercebat tamen malitiam suam per quaecumque poterat invenire, discurrens per vertices montium; quod si aliquando ei etiam esca erat necessaria, capiebat ex bestiis quae erant sub regno suo. Archelaus dixit: Ergo unius substantiae sunt bestiae quae sunt in regno maligni et hedi qui sunt in regno boni dei. Manes dixit: Absit, nequaquam; nihil commune est neque ipsis ad invicem neque his quae sua sunt. Archelaus dixit: Unus atque idem est usus in esca leonis. Si enim ex propriis aliquando bestiis capiebat cibum, aliquando ex hedis boni dei, nulla est in his differentia, quantum ad escas pertinet, et ex hoc adparet unius eas esse substantiae. Sed alium alio longe differre ignorantiam pastori adscribimus, quia non aptam escam, quin potius alienam obtulit vel proiecit leoni. Aut forte rursus dissimulare volens dices mihi quia nihil leo ille comedebat? Illumne igitur qui comedere nesciebat ipse ad comedendum animam provocavit nec sola fovea ad decipiendum eum uti voluit? si tamen hoc dignum est facere deum et dolos exquirere. Et sicut rex aliquis, bello sibi inlato, nequaquam propria virtute confisus, sed inbeccillitatis suae timore perterritus, muris ipse urbis inclusus vallos aliaque munimenta circumdat ac praeparat, manu ac viribus nihil fidens; si vero vir fortis sit, etiam porro a suis finibus in occursum hosti procedit et agit omnia usquequo vincat et obtineat adversarium. ### English translation (Claude) Manes said: "Not all receive the word of God, but only those to whom it has been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven. And I already know who are ours; for 'My sheep,' he says, 'hear my voice.' For the sake of ours, then, to whom the understanding of the truth has been given, I will speak in similitudes. The evil one is like a lion who wants to creep into the flock of the good shepherd. When the shepherd saw this, he dug a huge pit, took one kid from the flock, and threw it into the pit. The lion, longing to attack it, wanted with great fury to swallow it, and, running to the pit, fell into it, having no strength to climb up out of it. The shepherd, in his prudence, caught him and shut him in a cage, and he will keep safe the kid that was with him in the pit. From this, then, the evil one has been weakened, the lion no longer having power to do anything, and the whole race of souls will be saved, and what had perished will be restored to his own flock." Archelaus said: "If you compare the lion to the evil one, and God to the shepherd, tell me, to what shall we compare the sheep and the kid?" Manes said: "The sheep and the kid seem to me to be of one nature; they are set as a likeness of souls." Archelaus said: "So God gave up a soul to perdition, throwing it to the lion in the pit?" Manes said: "Not at all, far from it; but the lion was caught by this device, and in the future he will save it." Archelaus said: "This is now ridiculous, my hearers: if the shepherd, fearing the lion's entry, threw out to be devoured the lamb he held in his bosom, and it is said that in the future he will save it. How is this not wholly full of absurdity? For in this the judgment too is taken away. For God handed the soul over to Satan for perdition, to be taken by him. For when can a shepherd bring out of the lion's mouth or belly what he has already devoured? But you will say to me: he is God, and can do all things. Hear, then, in answer: why, if he is able, do you not rather assert that he will be able to conquer the lion by his own power, if the power of God is pure, and never by certain devices and a pit, with a kid or lamb handed over? Tell me this too: if the lion had come upon the shepherd when he had no sheep, what would happen? For the one called shepherd is unbegotten, and the lion is unbegotten too. When, then, there was not yet man, before the shepherd had a flock, if the lion had come upon him, what would have happened, since there was no food for the lion before there was a kid?" Manes said: "The lion ate nothing; yet he exercised his wickedness through whatever he could find, running about over the tops of the mountains; and if at any time he needed food, he took it from the beasts that were under his kingdom." Archelaus said: "Then the beasts that are in the kingdom of the evil one and the kids that are in the kingdom of the good God are of one substance." Manes said: "Far from it, not at all; they have nothing in common, either with each other or with what is theirs." Archelaus said: "The use of them as the lion's food is one and the same. For if he took his food sometimes from his own beasts and sometimes from the kids of the good God, there is no difference between them as far as food is concerned; and from this it appears that they are of one substance. But that one differs greatly from the other, we attribute to the shepherd's ignorance, because he offered or threw to the lion food that was not suitable but rather foreign. Or perhaps, again wishing to evade, you will tell me that the lion ate nothing? Did he, then, himself provoke the one who did not know how to eat to eat a soul, and not wish to use the pit alone to deceive him? If indeed it is worthy of God to do this and to seek out tricks. It is like some king, when war is brought on him, who, not trusting in his own strength but terrified by fear of his own weakness, shuts himself inside the walls of the city and surrounds himself with ramparts and other fortifications and prepares them, trusting nothing to his hand and strength; whereas if he is a brave man, he even goes out far from his own borders to meet the enemy, and does everything until he conquers and overcomes his adversary." ### Scripture references - Matt 19:11: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 13:11: allusion, high confidence - John 10:27: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Manichaean parable as Manes tells it. Scripture: Matt 13:11 and 19:11; John 10:27. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 28 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/28). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 29 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/20/#p-29 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: The judges reject Manes's parable: a shepherd who hands his lamb to the lion could not justly punish it, and they award the point to Archelaus. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Si ais pastorem hedum sive agnum leoni proiecisse, cum ille inrueret adversum ingenitum, actum est. Quem enim potest iudicare pastor hedorum atque agnorum, cum ipse inveniatur eis causa in delictis? Traditus enim agnus per infirmitatem pastoris resistere non valuit leoni et consequens est ut quocumque fuerit leoni libitum gerat; tamquam si dominus unum e servis suis electum vel per metum tradat adversario suo, quem rursus recipere suis viribus non valeat. Si vero casu aliquo provenerit eum recipi, qua tandem ratione tormenta ei poterit inrogare, si ad omnia quae ei inperabat inimicus parebat, cum eum ipse tradiderit inimico, sicut leoni hedum? praenoscentem enim adseris esse pastorem. Verberatus enim agnus et interroganti se pastori cur in his leoni paruerit respondet: Tu me leoni tradidisti nec restitisti adversus eum, sciens et praevidens quae mihi gerenda forent, cum eius me necesse esset obtemperare praeceptis. Et ne multa dicamus, neque deus perfectus pastor ostenditur neque leo alienos cibos percepisse demonstratur; et ideo ipsa veritate edocente his quae ab Archelao dicta sunt palmam nos debere conferre. ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "If you say that the shepherd threw the kid or lamb to the lion when it was rushing against the unbegotten one, it is all over. For whom can the shepherd of the kids and lambs judge, when he himself is found to be the cause of their offences? For the lamb, handed over through the shepherd's weakness, could not resist the lion, and it follows that it does whatever the lion pleases; as if a master, out of fear, were to hand over one of his chosen servants to his adversary, whom he cannot recover again by his own strength. And if by some chance it should come about that he is recovered, by what reason, pray, will he be able to inflict torments on him, if he obeyed the enemy in everything he commanded, when he himself handed him over to the enemy, as the kid to the lion? For you assert that the shepherd foreknows. For the lamb, when it is beaten and the shepherd asks why it obeyed the lion in these things, answers: 'You handed me over to the lion and did not resist him, knowing and foreseeing what I would have to do, since I had to obey his commands.' Not to say much, neither is God shown to be a perfect shepherd, nor is the lion shown to have taken food foreign to him; and so, as truth itself teaches, we must award the palm to what has been said by Archelaus." ### Translation notes - The scan has "damit" before "his quae ab Archelao"; it is not Latin and is taken as a stray word of the apparatus (removed). ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 29 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/29). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 30 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30/#p-30 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus turns from the two natures to Manes's claim to be the Paraclete, and tells a parable of a man who comes to a sealed storehouse without keys or seals and is driven off as a thief. ### Latin text Archelaus dixit: Quoniam quidem de omnibus quibus disceptavimus prudentia iudicum plenissimum terminum posuit, tacendum est de reliquis et in tempus aliud reservandum. Sicut enim quis serpentis conterat caput, in nullum iam reliqua corporis eius membra deputanda sunt, ita dualitatis quaestione reiecta, sicut pro viribus ostendimus, reliqua quae per hanc adserebantur cum ipsa pariter explosa sunt. Sed in ipsum qui adest adsertor horum paucis dicam, ut omnibus innotescat quis et unde et qualis est; dixerat enim se esse paracletum illum quem Iesus proficiscens humano generi missurum se esse promiserat ad salutem fidelium animarum et non longe possit ei Paulus vas electionis et vocatus apostolus, unde et praedicans veram doctrinam aiebat: Aut documentum quaeritis eius qui in me loquitur Christus? Et quidem quod dico tali exemplo fiet clarius. Homo quidam conclusit in thesauro frumenti plurimum, ita ut refertus esset locus, quem locum clausum atque signatum sufficientibus signaculis custodiri praecepit; ipse dominus vero cessit; alius autem quidam post multum temporis advenit ad thesaurum, dicens se ab eo qui signaculis locum concluserat missum ad hoc, ut etiam ipse in eundem thesaurum triticum congregaret. Quem cum vidissent custodes, poscebant ab eo signaculi fidem, quo possent ei videlicet aperire thesaurum et parere ei tamquam ab illo qui signaverat misso; qui cum neque claves ostenderet neque signaculorum fidem deferret (neque enim habebat ius), a custodibus eiectus est et fugatus; fur enim potius et latro ab eis esse deprehenditur, convictus et confugatus etiam ex hoc, quod post multum tempus quam promissum fuerat, adesse desideret, neque claves neque signacula neque ullum omnino custodibus indicium deferens, non quantitatem frumenti reconditi sciens; quae omnia manifesta indicia sunt nequaquam eum ab illo esse transmissum, et ideo consequenter a custodibus refutatus est. ### English translation (Claude) Archelaus said: "Since the prudence of the judges has put a full end to all the matters we have disputed, the rest must be passed over in silence and kept for another time. For as, when someone crushes a serpent's head, the remaining members of its body are no longer to be counted for anything, so, when the question of duality has been thrown out, as we have shown to the best of our strength, the rest that was asserted through it has been driven off together with it. But I will say a few words against the man himself who is here as the champion of these things, so that all may know who he is, where he comes from, and what he is like. For he had said that he is that Paraclete whom Jesus, at his departure, promised that he would send to the human race for the salvation of faithful souls; and as though Paul, the vessel of election and called apostle, could not come near him, Paul who, preaching the true doctrine, said: 'Or do you seek proof of him who speaks in me, Christ?' "What I say will become clearer by an example of this kind. A certain man shut up a great quantity of grain in a storehouse, so that the place was full, and he ordered that place, closed and sealed with sufficient seals, to be guarded; and the master himself went away. After a long time another man came to the storehouse, saying that he had been sent by the one who had shut the place with seals, so that he too might gather wheat into the same storehouse. When the guards saw him, they asked him for the warrant of the seal, so that they might open the storehouse to him and obey him as one sent by the man who had sealed it. But since he neither showed the keys nor brought the warrant of the seals (for he did not have the right), he was thrown out by the guards and put to flight. For he was found by them to be rather a thief and a robber, proved and driven off also by the fact that he wanted to be present long after the time that had been promised, bringing the guards neither keys nor seals nor any sign at all, and not knowing the quantity of grain stored up. All these are plain signs that he had by no means been sent by that man, and so the guards rightly rejected him." ### Scripture references - John 16:7: allusion, high confidence - Acts 9:15: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 13:3: quotation, high confidence - Gen 3:15: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Gen 3:15 (the serpent's head, by allusion); John 14:16, 26; 16:7; Acts 9:15 (vessel of election); Rom 1:1; 2 Cor 13:3. In "as though Paul … could not come near him" the Latin of the scan is corrupt (non longe possit ei) and is translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 30 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 31 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30/#p-31 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus tells a parable of a rich man's steward and his will, and argues that a Paraclete who came three hundred years late, under Probus, would make Jesus a liar. ### Latin text Aliud etiam, si videtur, dicimus exemplum. Homo quidam paterfamilias dives plurimum, ad tempus peregre afuturus, filiis suis pollicitus est missurum se esse alium qui pro se distribueret eis ex aequo substantiam. Et quidem non multo post misit beatum virum quendam iustum et verum, qui cum venisset, suscepta universa substantia, primo omnium instruere eam ac regere studuit, laborans plurimum in itineribus, sedens ipse per se suis manibus opus faciens et ministrans. Deinde diem obiturus testamentum scribit, propinquis suis et proximis omnibus hereditatem derelinquens, et signacula dedit eis et nominatim singulos convocans praecepit eis servare hereditatem et custodire ac regere substantiam, sicut susceperant, et perfrui bonis et fructibus ipsi domini heredesque derelicti. Si qui verum ex agri huius fructibus percipere rogaret, indulgenter praeberent; sin autem coheredem se dicens exposceret, devitarent persequi (atque) alienum esse pronuntiarent; opus autem magis facere debere eum qui recipi velit. Quomodo ergo, his omnibus bene recteque dispositis et statutis ac plurimo tempore in eo statu perseverantibus, eum qui post trecentos ferme annos venerit et heredem esse se confirmet non abiciemus? Non iuste alienum pronuntiabimus qui nec de propinquis se esse ostendit, qui defuncto nostro non adfuerit aegrotanti, qui in exequias non ierit crucifixo, qui sepulchro non adstiterit, qui omnino nesciat quomodo aut qualiter defunctus est, qui denique thesaurum frumenti ingredi cupiat, nullo indicio delato ab eo qui obsignaverit? Nonne eum tamquam latronem et furem abiciemus ac modis omnibus expellemus? Haec igitur signa quae in praedictis conprehendimus exemplis iste non deferens adest, dicens se esse paracletum qui ab Iesu praesignatus est mitti, in quo mendacem ignorans fortasse adseret Iesum; qui enim dixerat se non multo post missurum esse paracletum invenitur post trecentos et eo amplius annos misisse hunc, sicut ipse sibi testimonium perhibet. Quid dicent Iesu in die iudicii illi qui iam vita excesserunt ex illo tempore usque nunc? Nonne haec apud eum allegabunt: Noli nos cruciare si opera tua non fecimus? Cur enim, cum promiseris sub Tiberio Caesare missurum te esse paracletum, qui argueret nos de peccato et de iudicio et de iustitia, sub Probo demum Romano inperatore misisti? (Cur) orphanos dereliquisti, cum ipse dixeris, non derelinquam vos orphanos, cum ipse dixeris te, mox ires, missurum esse paracletum? Quid poteramus orphani facere, non habentes tutorem? Nihil nos deliquimus, tu nos fefellisti. Sed absit hoc a domino nostro Iesu Christo salvatore omnis animae. Non enim moratus est in promissionibus suis, sed cum dixisset, vado ad patrem meum et mitto vobis paracletum, statim misit, dividens dona discipulis suis, abundantius vero conferens Paulo. ### English translation (Claude) "Let us also tell another example, if you please. A certain householder, very rich, being about to go abroad for a time, promised his sons that he would send another to distribute the property to them fairly in his place. And not long after, he sent a certain blessed man, just and true, who, when he had come and taken over the whole property, first of all set himself to put it in order and manage it, labouring a great deal on journeys, sitting down himself and doing work with his own hands and serving. Then, when he was about to die, he wrote a will, leaving the inheritance to all his relatives and kin; and he gave them seals, and, calling each of them by name, commanded them to keep the inheritance and to guard and manage the property as they had received it, and themselves to enjoy the goods and fruits, being left as masters and heirs. If anyone asked to receive some of the fruits of this field, they were to give it kindly; but if he demanded it calling himself a co-heir, they were to shun him, and declare him a stranger; rather, one who wished to be received ought to do work. "How then, when all these things have been well and rightly arranged and settled and have continued in that state for a very long time, shall we not reject the one who comes after about three hundred years and claims to be an heir? Shall we not justly declare a stranger one who does not show himself to be one of the relatives, who did not stand by our departed one in his sickness, who did not go to the funeral of the crucified one, who did not stand by the tomb, who does not know at all how or in what way he died, who, in short, wants to enter the storehouse of grain without bringing any sign from the one who sealed it? Shall we not reject him as a robber and a thief and drive him out by every means? This man, then, is here without bringing these signs that we have included in the examples above, saying that he is the Paraclete who was foretold by Jesus to be sent; in this, perhaps unknowingly, he will declare Jesus a liar. For the one who had said that he would send the Paraclete not long after is found to have sent this man after three hundred years and more, as he bears witness to himself. "What will those who have departed this life from that time until now say to Jesus on the day of judgment? Will they not plead this before him: 'Do not torment us if we did not do your works. For why, when you promised under Tiberius Caesar that you would send the Paraclete, who would convict us of sin, of judgment, and of righteousness, did you send him only under Probus, the Roman emperor? Why did you leave us orphans, when you yourself said, "I will not leave you orphans," when you yourself said that, as soon as you went, you would send the Paraclete? What could we orphans do, having no guardian? We did no wrong; you deceived us.' But far be this from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour of every soul. For he did not delay in his promises; but when he had said, 'I go to my Father, and I send you the Paraclete,' he at once sent him, distributing gifts to his disciples, but conferring them more abundantly on Paul." ### Scripture references - John 14:18: quotation, high confidence - John 16:8: allusion, high confidence - John 16:7: quotation, high confidence - John 16:28: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 12:11: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - The steward stands for the Holy Spirit given to the apostles; the "crucified one" in the parable is Christ. Probus was Roman emperor AD 276–282. Scripture: John 14:16–18, 26; 16:7–8, 28. "(atque)" and "(Cur)" are the editor's supplements and are translated. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 31 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/31). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 32 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30/#p-32 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes retorts that the same complaint would hold for all who lived before Christ; Archelaus answers that the righteous before Moses kept the law written in their hearts, and that the written law was given in mercy. ### Latin text Manes dixit: Tuomet ipsius indicio conprehensus es, haec enim adversum te locutus ignoras quia dum (in) me vis probra conicere, maiori culpae ipse succumbis. Dic age mihi istud, si omnes qui a Tiberio usque ad Probum defuncti sunt dicent ad Iesum: Nolito nos iudicare quia opera tua non fecimus, non enim misisti nobis paracletum, cum dixeris te, mox ires, missurum esse, non multo magis illi haec dicent, qui a Moyse usque ad adventum ipsius Iesu Christi vitam excesserunt, et eo rectius dicent: Noli nos tradere tormentis, quoniam agnitionem tui non accepimus? Et non solum ii qui ante ipsius adventum decesserunt iure haec allegare videbuntur, verum etiam illi qui ab Adam usque ad adventum Iesu obierunt; neque paracleti enim scientiam consecuti sunt neque Iesu doctrina eruditi sunt. Sed hoc solum ultimum genus hominum, ut ais, quod a Tiberio est salvabitur; ipse enim eos Christus de maledicto legis redemit, sicut Paulus testimonium dedit: Quia littera occidit nee quemquam vivificat et Quod lex ministerium mortis est virtusque peccati. Archelaus dixit: Erras nesciens scripturas neque virtutem dei; multi enim etiam post adventum Christi usque nunc perierunt et pereunt, ii scilicet, qui operibus iustitiae deservire noluerunt; illi vero soli qui susceperunt eum et suscipiunt potestatem acceperunt filii dei fieri, Non enim omnes dixit, sed neque tempus terminavit, quicumque enim, inquit, acceperunt eum. Adest autem semper iustis viris a creatura mundi nec cessat inquirere sanguinem ipsorum ex sanguine Abel iusti usque ad sanguinem Zachariae. Unde ergo Abel iustus et illi omnes reliqui per ordinem inter iustos enumerantur, cum lex non esset Moysi, cum prophetae oborti non essent nec prophetiae munus inplessent? Nonne iusti eflfecti sunt ex eo quod legem inplebant, ostendens unusquisque eorum opus legis scriptum, in cordibus suis, testimonium reddente eis conscientia sua? Cum enim quis legem non habens naturaliter quae legis sunt facit, hic legem non habens ipse sibi est lex. Et intuere multitudinem legum per singulos iustos, qui bene agebant vitam suam, nunc ex semet ipsis proferentes in cordibus suis insitam dei legem, nunc a propriis parentibus inquirentes, aliquando etiam ab antiquioribus et senioribus addiscentes. Verum quia pauci per hunc modum poterant ad iustitiae culmen ascendere, id est per parentum traditiones, nulla in litteris lege conscripta, miseratus est deus humanum genus et scriptam legem per Moysen voluit hominibus dare, quoniam quidem non adprime in cordibus eorum naturalis legis aequitas retinebatur. Consona igitur primae creationis humanae fit in litteris legislatio, quae per Moysen datur salutis causa plurimorum. Si enim aestimamus hominem sine operibus legis iustificari et Abraham reputatus est iustus, quanto magis ii, qui adinpleverint legem continentem ea quae hominibus expediunt, iustitiam consequentur? Et quoniam trium solummodo sermonum mentionem fecisti, de quibus apostolus dixit, ministerium mortis esse legem et Christum redemisse nos de maledicto legis, et quoniam virtus peccati est lex, adde adhuc, et dic quantacumque tibi videntur adversum legem esse conscripta. ### English translation (Claude) Manes said: "You are caught by your own evidence; for you do not know that you have spoken these things against yourself, since, while you want to throw reproaches at me, you yourself fall under a greater fault. Come, tell me this: if all who died from Tiberius to Probus will say to Jesus, 'Do not judge us because we did not do your works, for you did not send us the Paraclete, though you said that you would send him as soon as you went,' will not those who departed this life from Moses until the coming of Jesus Christ himself say this much more, and with better right: 'Do not hand us over to torments, since we did not receive knowledge of you'? And not only will those who died before his coming seem to plead this rightly, but also those who died from Adam until the coming of Jesus; for they neither attained knowledge of the Paraclete nor were taught by Jesus' teaching. But only this last race of men, as you say, the one from Tiberius on, will be saved; for Christ himself redeemed them from the curse of the law, as Paul bore witness: 'The letter kills' and gives life to no one, and 'The law is the ministry of death' and 'the power of sin.'" Archelaus said: "You are wrong, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For many even after the coming of Christ have perished up to now and are perishing, namely those who did not wish to serve the works of righteousness; but only those who received him and receive him have received power to become sons of God. For he did not say 'all,' nor did he set a limit of time: 'as many,' he says, 'as received him.' And he is always present to just men from the creation of the world, and does not cease to require their blood, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah. How, then, are righteous Abel and all those others in order counted among the righteous, when there was not yet the law of Moses, when the prophets had not yet arisen or fulfilled the office of prophecy? Were they not made righteous because they fulfilled the law, each of them showing the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them? For when someone who does not have the law does by nature the things of the law, he, not having the law, is a law to himself. And consider the multitude of laws through each of the righteous who led their lives well: sometimes bringing forth from themselves the law of God implanted in their hearts, sometimes seeking it from their own parents, sometimes also learning it from those older and elder. But because few could climb to the height of righteousness in this way, that is, through the traditions of parents, with no law written in letters, God had pity on the human race and willed to give men a written law through Moses, since the equity of the natural law was not firmly kept in their hearts. So the legislation in letters, which is given through Moses for the salvation of very many, is in harmony with the first creation of man. For if we hold that a man is justified without the works of the law, and Abraham was reckoned righteous, how much more will those who have fulfilled the law, which contains what is profitable for men, attain righteousness? And since you mentioned only three sayings, of which the apostle said that the law is the ministry of death, and that Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, and that the power of sin is the law, add more still, and tell me all that seem to you to be written against the law." ### Scripture references - Gal 3:13: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 3:6: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 3:7: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:56: quotation, high confidence - Matt 22:29: quotation, high confidence - John 1:12: quotation, high confidence - Matt 23:35: allusion, high confidence - Luke 11:51: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 2:14–15: quotation, high confidence - Rom 3:28: allusion, medium confidence - Gen 15:6: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Gal 3:13; 2 Cor 3:6–7; 1 Cor 15:56; Matt 22:29; John 1:12; Matt 23:35 and Luke 11:51; Rom 2:14–15; Rom 3:28; Gen 15:6 and Rom 4:3. "(in)" is the editor's supplement. Archelaus's view of the law here is his own argument against Manes, translated as it stands. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 32 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/32). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 33 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30/#p-33 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes cites John 8:44 and "death reigned from Adam to Moses" for his two principles; Archelaus answers that a death that began in time and will be swallowed up is not unbegotten. ### Latin text Manes dixit: An non idem est, quod Iesus ad discipulos aiebat incredulos eos esse demonstrans: Vos ex patre diabolo estis et desideria patris vestri facere vultis? Hoc utique dicit, quia quanta Voluerit malignus princeps huius mundi et quanta desideraverit, per Moysen scripserit et dederit hominibus facienda. Hic enim homicida est ab initio et in veritate non stetit, quoniam veritas in eo non est; cum loquitur mendacium, de suis propriis loquitur, quoniam mendax est sicut et pater eius. Archelaus dixit: Sufficientia tibi haec sunt, an habes et alia quae dicas? Manes dixit: Habeo quidem multa et horum maiora; sed his contentus ero. Archelaus dixit: Exemplum scilicet accipiamus ex his eorum quae habere te dicis, ut cum haec recte posita fuerint inventa, etiam reliqua cum his adnumerentur; sin minus, ero ego obnoxius sententiae iudicum, id est victi ignominiam feram. Ais ergo ministerium mortis esse legem, et principem huius mundi mortem regnare ab Adam usque ad Moysen, scriptum est enim: Regnavit mors ab Adam usque ad Moysen in eos qui non peccaverunt, Manes dixit: Ergo mors regnavit sine dubio, quia dualitas est, nec aliter, nisi esset ingenita. Archelaus dixit: Et quomodo ingenita mors certo ex tempore regni sumpsit exordium? ab Adam enim, inquit, et non dixit ante Adam. Manes dixit: Quomodo vero et iustorum et peccatorum obtinuerit regnum dicito. Archelaus dixit: Cum prius confessus fueris quia ex tempore et non ex aeternitate regnavit, tum dicam. Manes dixit: Scriptum est hoc, quia ab Adam usque ad Moysen regnavit Archelaus dixit: Ergo et finem habet quod coepit ex tempore et verum est illud quod dictum est, quia absorta est mors in victoria. Etiam ingenita non erit quae et initium habere monstratur et finem. Manes dixit: Deus ergo eam fecit. Archelaus dixit: Nequaquam, absit; deus enim mortem non fecit, nee laetatur in perditione vivorum. Manes dixit: Deus eam non fecit, facta tamen est, ut ais; a quo acceperit inperium vel a quo creata sit dicito. Archelaus dixit: Si hoc plenissime ostendero, quod substantiam ingenitae naturae mors habere non possit, nonne confiteberis unum deum esse et hunc ingenitum? Manes dixit: Loquere, subtiliter enim vis discernere. Abchelaüs dixit: Quia tu verba illa ita protulisti, tamquam tibi proficerent ad ostensionem ingenitae radicis; sufficiunt tamen nobis ea quae supra tractata sunt, in quibus plenissime ostendimus inpossibile esse duarum naturarum ingenitarum existere posse substantias. ### English translation (Claude) Manes said: "Is it not the same thing that Jesus said to the disciples, showing them to be unbelieving: 'You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father'? He says this, of course, because whatever the evil prince of this world willed and whatever he desired, he wrote through Moses and gave to men to do. 'For he was a murderer from the beginning, and did not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him; when he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own, because he is a liar, as is his father also.'" Archelaus said: "Are these enough for you, or do you have other things to say?" Manes said: "I have many, and greater than these; but I will be content with these." Archelaus said: "Let us take, then, an example from those you say you have, so that if these are found to be rightly put, the rest may also be counted with them; but if not, I will be liable to the judges' sentence, that is, I will bear the disgrace of the defeated. You say, then, that the law is the ministry of death, and that death, the prince of this world, reigned from Adam to Moses; for it is written: 'Death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin.'" Manes said: "So death reigned, without doubt, because there is a duality, and in no other way unless it were unbegotten." Archelaus said: "And how did an unbegotten death take the beginning of its reign from a fixed point in time? For it says 'from Adam,' and did not say 'before Adam.'" Manes said: "Tell me, then, how it held its reign over both the righteous and sinners." Archelaus said: "When you have first confessed that it reigned from a point in time and not from eternity, then I will tell you." Manes said: "This is written: that it reigned from Adam to Moses." Archelaus said: "Then what began in time also has an end, and what was said is true, that death has been swallowed up in victory. And it will not be unbegotten, since it is shown to have both a beginning and an end." Manes said: "Then God made it." Archelaus said: "Not at all, far from it; for God did not make death, nor does he delight in the destruction of the living." Manes said: "God did not make it, yet it was made, as you say; tell me from whom it received its rule, or by whom it was created." Archelaus said: "If I show most fully that death cannot have the substance of an unbegotten nature, will you not confess that there is one God, and that he is unbegotten?" Manes said: "Speak; for you want to make fine distinctions." Archelaus said: "Because you put forward those words as though they would help you to show an unbegotten root. Yet what was treated above is enough for us, in which we showed most fully that it is impossible for the substances of two unbegotten natures to exist." ### Scripture references - John 8:44: quotation, high confidence - Rom 5:14: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:54: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 3:7: allusion, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Wis 1:13 (Wisdom of Solomon): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: John 8:44; Rom 5:14; 1 Cor 15:54; 2 Cor 3:7. "God did not make death, nor does he delight in the destruction of the living" is Wisdom 1:13. A German note of Beeson's apparatus ("it seems Archelaus is thinking of Rom 3:28ff.") mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 33 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/33). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 34 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30/#p-34 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus explains why the law is called a ministry of death: it limited death's reign to transgressors, and Christ came to avenge Moses and the righteous when death broke that covenant. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Dic ad ea quae nuper proposuit, o Archelae. Archelaus dixit: Principem mundi et malignum et tenebras et mortem unum eundemque esse dicit legemque ab eo datam, propter hoc quod scriptum est, ministerium mortis, et reliqua quae obiecit. Quoniam inique, sicut superius diximus, maiorum memoriae lex non diligenter haerebat, scripta naturaliter in cordibus eorum, neque apud seniores erat satis firma traditio, cum eos inimica semper memoriae inrepsisset oblivio, et aliter quis eruditur a magistro, aliter a semet ipso, proveniebat facile legis naturaliter scriptae transgressio et ex praevaricatione mandatorum regnum mors in hominibus obtinebat; huiuscemodi est enim genus hominum quod virga ferrea regi indigeat a deo. Exultabat ergo mors et cum omni potestate regnabat usque ad Moysen, etiam in eos qui non peccaverant, hoc modo quo diximus; super peccatores quidem velut proprios sibique subiectos, sicut fuit Cain et Iudas; super iustos vero propter hoc, quod non consentirent ei, quin potius resisterent, abscidentes a se libidinum vitia et concupiscentias, velut ii qui fuerant ab Abel et usque ad Zachariam; in Cain ergo positus malignus interemit Abel iustum et usque ad Zachariam transferens (se) semper usque ad tempus in similes illius. Cum vero adfuisset Moyses et legem dedisset filiis Istrahel et revocasset eis in memoriam omnes iustificationes legis quaecumque observare oportebat et facere, eos vero solos qui praevaricarentur legem morti traderet, intercisa est mors ne super omnes regnaret; regnabat enim super peccatores solos, dicente sibi lege ne contigeris hos qui mea praecepta custodiunt. Huius ergo verbi ministerium Moyses detulit morti, reliquos omnes praevaricatores legis interitui tradens; non enim pro eo, ut omnino mors nulla ex parte regnaret, Moyses advenit, cum utique plurimi etiam post Moysen sub mortis dicione tenerentur. Ex hoc ministerium mortis appellatum est, quoniam soli transgressores legis puniebantur, non etiam conservatores, sicut Abel faciens ea quae legis sunt et custodiens, quem Cain, vas maligni effectus, interemit. Verum etiam post haec voluit mors pactum quod fuerat per Moysen positum rescindere, et regnare denuo super iustos; et inruit quidem in prophetas, interficiens et lapidans eos qui missi erant a deo usque ad Zachariam. Dominus autem meus Jesus, iustitiam Moysi legis custodiens, indignatus adversus mortem pro praevaricatione pacti et totius illius ministerii, advenire dignatus est in hominis corpore, vindicaturus non semet ipsum, sed Moysen et eos qui ex ordine post ipsum fuerant violentia mortis oppressi. Malignus vero ignorans huiuscemodi dispensationem ingressus est Iudam ut per ipsum interficeret eum, sicut antea Abel interfecerat iustum. Sed cum intrasset in Iudam, poenitentia ductus se ipse suspendit; propter quod ait sermo divinus: Ubi est mors victoria tua, ubi est mors aculeus tuus? Et absorta est mors in victoria. Hac ergo ex causa ministerium mortis appellata est lex, quia peccantes et praevaricantes morti tradebat, servantes autem se defendebat a morte et constituebat in gloria, ope atque auxilio domini nostri Iesu Christi ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "Speak to what he proposed just now, Archelaus." Archelaus said: "He says that the prince of the world, the evil one, darkness, and death are one and the same, and that the law was given by him, because it is written 'ministry of death,' and the other things he objected. Since, as we said above, the law, written by nature in the hearts of those of old, did not cling carefully to their memory, and the tradition among the elders was not firm enough, since forgetfulness, always the enemy of memory, had crept upon them (and a man is taught one way by a master and another way by himself), transgression of the law written by nature came about easily, and from the breaking of the commandments death held its reign among men; for the human race is of such a kind that it needs to be ruled by God with a rod of iron. So death exulted and reigned with all power until Moses, even over those who had not sinned, in the way we have said: over sinners as its own and subject to it, as Cain and Judas were; over the righteous because they did not consent to it, but rather resisted, cutting off from themselves the vices of lusts and desires, like those from Abel to Zechariah. So the evil one, settled in Cain, killed righteous Abel, and kept passing (himself) on, right up to the time of Zechariah, into those like Cain. "But when Moses came and gave the law to the sons of Israel, and recalled to their memory all the ordinances of the law that they had to keep and do, and handed over to death only those who transgressed the law, death was cut short so that it should not reign over all; for it reigned over sinners alone, the law saying to it: 'Do not touch those who keep my commandments.' So Moses delivered the ministry of this word to death, handing over to destruction all the rest, the transgressors of the law. For Moses did not come so that death should not reign in any part at all, since very many even after Moses were held under the dominion of death. For this reason it was called the ministry of death, since only the transgressors of the law were punished, not also those who kept it, like Abel, who did and kept the things of the law, whom Cain, having become the vessel of the evil one, killed. "But even after this death wanted to break the covenant that had been set through Moses and to reign again over the righteous; and it fell upon the prophets, killing and stoning those who had been sent by God, up to Zechariah. But my Lord Jesus, guarding the justice of the law of Moses, indignant against death for its breach of the covenant and of that whole ministry, deigned to come in a human body, to avenge not himself but Moses and those who in order after him had been overwhelmed by the violence of death. The evil one, not knowing a dispensation of this kind, entered Judas, so as to kill him through him, as he had killed righteous Abel before. But when he had entered Judas, Judas, led by repentance, hanged himself. Because of this the divine word says: 'Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?' And: 'Death has been swallowed up in victory.' For this reason, then, the law was called the ministry of death, because it handed over to death those who sinned and transgressed, but defended from death those who kept it and set them in glory, by the help and aid of our Lord Jesus Christ." ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 3:7: quotation, high confidence - Rom 2:15: allusion, medium confidence - Ps 2:9: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 5:14: quotation, high confidence - Matt 23:35: allusion, high confidence - Matt 27:5: allusion, high confidence - Luke 22:3: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 15:55: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:54: quotation, high confidence - Ps 105:15 (104:15 LXX): echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 2 Cor 3:7; Rom 2:15; Ps 2:9 (rod of iron); Rom 5:14; Matt 23:35; Matt 27:5; 1 Cor 15:54–55; Luke 22:3. The words "Do not touch those who keep my commandments" are not a quotation of a known text (they may echo Ps 105:15). "(se)" is the editor's supplement and is translated. Beeson's apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. The scan reads "Quoniam inique" ("since unjustly"), probably a misreading (perhaps of "igitur"); "inique" is not translated. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 34 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/34). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 35 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30/#p-35 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus explains "the curse of the law" by the sabbath and the law's strict penalties, which Christ relieved by forgiveness, and "the power of sin" by the golden calf. ### Latin text Audi etiam et de eo quod dictum est: Qui redemit nos de maledicto legis Christus. Hoc in loco pervideo magnificum dei famulum Moysen imaginariam legem his qui recte velint videre tradidisse et legem veram. Sicut enim deus, cum fecisset mundum et omnia quae in eo sunt in sex diebus, requievit in die septima ab omnibus operibus suis — non dico quia requieverit fatigatus, sed quoniam ad perfectum adduxerat omnem quam facere disposuerat creaturam — denique ait: Pater meus usque modo operatur et ego operor. Numquidnam caelum facit aut solem aut bominem aut animalia aut virgulta aut tale aliquid? Sed his quidem visibilibus perfectis, a tali opere conquievit; invisibilia autem et intrinsecus usque modo operans salvat. Ita ergo etiam unumquemque nostrum, sicut ipse deus est, indesinenter huic operi legislator vult esse devinctum et a saecularibus iubet protinus conquiescere et omnino nullum opus gerere mundanum, et hoc appellatur sabbatum. Addidit etiam hoc in lege, nihil absurdum fieri debere, sed observare nos et dirigere vitam nostram ex aequo et iusto. Et inminebat haec lex, acerrime maledictum inferens his qui eam fuissent transgressi; sed quoniam homines erant et illi et, sicut etiam nobis frequenter accidit, controversiae oriebantur et inrogabantur iniuriae et lex statim districtissimam ultionem peccati retorquebat, ita ut si qui pauperum voluisset in sabbato fascem ligni colligere, sub maledicto legis effectus morti continuo subiceretur. Artabantur ergo cohercitione legis homines qui cum Aegyptiis fuerant educati nec poterat poenas legis et maledicta tolerare. Rursum autem ille, qui semper salvator est, Iesus dominus noster adveniens liberavit eos ex huiuscemodi cruciatibus legis atque maledictis, donans eis iniurias. Nee sicut Moyses severitate usus est legis nuUi indulgendo iniuriam, sed hic dixit, si quis passus fuerit a proximo suo iniuriam, indulgeat non semel tantum, sed et nec secundo nee tertio nee solum septies, sed septuagies septies; quod si post haec in iniuriam permanserit inrogando, tunc demum legi eum debere succumbere Moysi nec ultra veniam dari ei qui in iniuriis perseverat, cum sibi septuagies septies fuerit indultum. Non solum autem huic, sed etiam si quis filio hominis intulisset iniuriam, veniam dedit. Si vero spiritui sancto, duobus eum subdidit maledictis, id est Moysi legis et suae; Moysi quidem in praesenti, suae vero in iudicii tempore, ait enim ita: Neque in hoc saeculo neque in futuro remittetur ei. Moysi ergo lex est quae in praesenti saeculo nulli veniam tribuit, Christi vero est quae vindicat in futuro. Ex hoc intuere quemadmodum confirmat legem, non solum non solvens eam, sed inplens. Redimet ergo eos ab eo quod in praesenti positum erat maledicto legis, ex quo maledictum legis appellatum est. Haec omnis huius sermonis est ratio. Cur autem virtus peccati dicta sit lex, pro viribus nostris breviter exponimus. Scriptum est enim: Quia iusto lex non est posita, sed iniustis et non subditis, inpiis et scelestis. Non ergo erat tunc lex litterae posita delinquentibus ante Moysen, unde et Pharao ignorans virtutem peccati delinquebat adfligens iniustis oneribus filios Istrahel, divinitate neglecta; non solum ipse, sed et omnes qui cum eo erant. Verum ne utar longiori circuitu, brevius dicam. Erant quidam Aegyptiorum admixti cum populo Moysi, cum ab eo regeretur populus in deserto; et cum Moyses positus esset in monte pro eo ut acciperet legem, inpatiens populus, non ille qui vere erat Istrahelita, sed qui ex Aegyptiis fuerat admixtus, vitulum sibi constituit deum secundum pristinum morem, quo coluerat simulacra, in quo nec scelerum poenas aliquando rependeret; et ideo virtutem peccati sui penitus ignorabant; quae cum regressus agnovisset Moyses, praecepit eos gladio trucidari, ex quo initium factum est sentire eos virtutem peccati per legem Moysi et propterea virtus peccati appelata est lex. ### English translation (Claude) "Hear also about what was said: 'Christ, who redeemed us from the curse of the law.' In this place I perceive that the magnificent servant of God, Moses, handed down a figurative law to those who wish to see rightly, and also the true law. For as God, when he had made the world and everything in it in six days, rested on the seventh day from all his works (I do not say that he rested because he was tired, but because he had brought to completion all the creation he had planned to make), he then says: 'My Father is working until now, and I am working.' Does he make heaven, or the sun, or man, or animals, or shrubs, or anything of the kind? No; when these visible things had been completed, he rested from such work; but working until now, he saves things invisible and within. So the lawgiver also wants each of us, as God himself is, to be bound unceasingly to this work, and commands us to rest from worldly things at once and to do no worldly work at all; and this is called the sabbath. He added this too in the law, that nothing out of order should be done, but that we should keep and direct our life according to what is fair and just. And this law pressed hard, bringing a curse most sharply on those who had transgressed it. But since they too were men, and, as often happens to us also, quarrels arose and wrongs were done, and the law at once turned back the strictest punishment of sin, so that if one of the poor wanted to gather a bundle of wood on the sabbath, he came under the curse of the law and was at once put to death. So the men who had been brought up with the Egyptians were hard pressed by the constraint of the law, and could not bear the penalties and curses of the law. "But again, he who is always Saviour, Jesus our Lord, came and freed them from such torments and curses of the law, forgiving them their wrongs. He did not, like Moses, use the severity of the law, pardoning no one a wrong; but he said that if anyone suffered a wrong from his neighbour, he should forgive not once only, nor a second or third time, nor only seven times, but seventy times seven; but if after this he persisted in doing wrong, then at last he must submit to the law of Moses, and no further pardon should be given to one who persists in wrongs, when he has been forgiven seventy times seven. And not only to this man, but also if anyone had done wrong to the Son of Man, he gave pardon. But if to the Holy Spirit, he subjected him to two curses, that is, of the law of Moses and of his own: Moses' in the present, his own at the time of judgment. For he says this: 'It will not be forgiven him either in this age or in the age to come.' So the law of Moses is the one that gives pardon to no one in the present age, while the law of Christ is the one that punishes in the age to come. From this see how he confirms the law, not only not abolishing it but fulfilling it. So he will redeem them from the curse of the law that was set in the present, from which it is called the curse of the law. This is the whole reasoning of this saying. "Why the law was called the power of sin, we will briefly explain to the best of our strength. For it is written: 'The law is not laid down for the righteous, but for the unrighteous and disobedient, the ungodly and wicked.' So before Moses no law of the letter had then been laid down for offenders; and so Pharaoh too, not knowing the power of sin, offended, oppressing the sons of Israel with unjust burdens, neglecting the deity; and not only he but also all who were with him. But not to use too long a circuit, I will say it more briefly. Some of the Egyptians were mixed with the people of Moses when the people was being led by him in the desert; and when Moses was on the mountain to receive the law, the impatient people (not those who were truly Israelites, but those who had been mixed in from the Egyptians) set up a calf as god for themselves, according to their old custom by which they had worshipped images, in which they would never pay the penalties of their crimes; and so they did not know at all the power of their sin. When Moses returned and learned this, he ordered them to be slaughtered by the sword; and from this a beginning was made of their feeling the power of sin through the law of Moses, and for this reason the law was called the power of sin." ### Scripture references - Gal 3:13: quotation, high confidence - Gen 2:2: allusion, high confidence - John 5:17: quotation, high confidence - Num 15:32–36: allusion, high confidence - Matt 18:21–22: allusion, high confidence - Matt 12:32: quotation, high confidence - Matt 5:17: allusion, high confidence - 1 Tim 1:9: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:56: allusion, high confidence - Exod 1:11–14: allusion, medium confidence - Exod 32:1–28: allusion, high confidence - Exod 12:38: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Gal 3:13; Gen 2:2; John 5:17; Num 15:32–36; Matt 18:21–22; Matt 12:31–32; Matt 5:17; 1 Tim 1:9; 1 Cor 15:56; Exod 1:11–14; Exod 32. The claim that the calf was made by Egyptians mixed with Israel is Archelaus's (cf. Exod 12:38). Beeson's apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 35 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/35). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 36 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30/#p-36 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus explains the devil as a fallen angel who chose evil, argues that every creature has free choice, and turns Manes's own belief in judgment against his view of the soul as part of God. ### Latin text De eo vero quod in euangelio scriptum est, vos de patre diabolo estis et reliqua, breviter dicimus quia est diabolus inoperans in nobis, qui sui arbitrii potestate tales esse voluit Deus enim omnia quae fecit bona valde fecit, liberi arbitrii sensum unicuique dedit, qua ratione etiam legem iudicii posuit, ex eo quod in nostro sit arbitrio constitutum peccare vel non peccare, sicut etiam tu sine dubio nosti, o Manes, si tamen congregas in unum discipulos tuos et commones ne delinquant, ne aliquid iniuste gerant, iudicii legem unusquisque eorum possit evadere. Et certe qui voluerint observant mandata; qui vero contempserint et in perversum declinaverint sine dubio legem iudicii ferent. Ex hoc etiam angelorum quidam mandato dei non subditi voluntati eius restiterunt et aliquis quidem de caelo, tamquam fulgur ignis, cecidit super terram; alii vero in felicitate miserabili, hominum filiabus admixti, a dracone adflicti, ignis aeterni poenam suscipere meruerunt. Ille igitur in terram decidens nec ultra caeli regionibus admissus inter homines volutatur, decipiens eos atque persuadens sibi similes effici transgressores; et usque in hodiernum adversarius est mandatis dei. Sed non omnes lapsum ruinae eius sequentur pro eo quod unicuique libertas arbitrii est; ex hoc enim et appellatus est diabolus, eo quod transitum fecerit de caelestibus et quod in terris mandato dei obtrectator existeret. Quia autem deus sit qui prius mandatum dedit, ipse dominus Iesus ait ad diabolum: Vade post me, Satana. Et sine dubio ire post deum servi est. Et iterum quod ait ad eum: Dominum deum tuum adorabis et ipsi soli servies. Quoniam ergo obtemperabant quidam hominum voluntatibus ipsius, audierunt a salvatore: Vos ex patre diabolo estis et desideria patris vestri facere vultis. Denique, cum faciunt voluntates eius, audiunt: Generatio viperarum, quis vobis ostendit fugere ab ira ventura? Facite ergo fructum dignum poenitentiae. Ex hoc ergo pervide quanta vis sit hominem liberi esse arbitrii. Dicat tamen etiam ipse si est iudicium piorum et inpiorum. Manes dixit: Est iudicium. Archelaus dixit: Puto quae a nobis de diabolo dicta sunt non parum rationis et pietatis obtineant. Habet enim et unaquaeque creatura ordinem suum et alius quidem ordo est humani generis et alius animalium est atque alius angelorum; una vero et sola inconversibilis est divina substantia, aeterna, invisibilis, sicut et Omnibus notum est secundum illud quod scriptum est: Deum nemo vidit umquam nisi unigenitus filius qui est in sinu patris, Reliquae ergo omnes creaturae visibiles sint necesse est, caelum, terra, mare, homines, angeli, archangeli; deus vero, cum a nullo umquam visus sit, quid ei potest ex istis creaturis esse homousion ? Unde et singula quaeque secundum ordinem suum propriam dicimus habere substantiam. Tu vero ex uno omne animal quod movetur factum dicis et substantiam a deo accepisse dicis similem et posse eam peccare atque ad iudicium venire; et cum non vis recipere sermonem dicentem diabolum angelum fuisse et in praevaricationem decidisse et non esse eiusdem cum deo substantiae; interimere debes iudicii rationem, ut qui nostrum fallat adpareat. Si enim non potest qui a deo creatus est angelus in transgressionem decidere, quomodo potest pars dei anima peccare? Si vero iudicium esse dicis peccantium animarum et unius eas cum deo dicis esse substantiae et tamen, cum de divina eas adseras esse natura, dicis nihilominus dei (non) servare mandata, etiam sic plurimum meus sermo praecedit, dicens primo diabolum eo quod mandatum non servaverit decidisse, non enim erat ex dei substantia; decidit non tam ut laederet humanum genus, sed ut ab eo potius inluderetur; dedit enim nobis potestatem calcandi super serpentes et scorpiones et omnem virtutem inimici, ### English translation (Claude) "As to what is written in the Gospel, 'You are of your father the devil,' and the rest, we say briefly that it is the devil working in us, who by the power of his own choice willed to be such. For God made all things that he made very good, and gave each one a sense of free choice; for which reason he also set a law of judgment, because it is placed in our choice to sin or not to sin. As you too, Manes, doubtless know, if indeed you gather your disciples together and warn them not to offend and not to do anything unjust, so that each of them may escape the law of judgment. And certainly those who wish keep the commandments; but those who despise them and turn aside to perversity will without doubt bear the law of judgment. From this cause too some of the angels, not submitting to the command of God, resisted his will; and one fell from heaven upon the earth like a flash of fire; while others, in a wretched happiness, having mingled with the daughters of men, afflicted by the dragon, deserved to undergo the punishment of eternal fire. So that one, falling to earth and no longer admitted to the regions of heaven, roams among men, deceiving them and persuading them to become transgressors like himself; and to this day he is an adversary to the commandments of God. But not all will follow his fall and ruin, because each has freedom of choice. For this reason he was also called devil, because he made a crossing over from heavenly things, and because on earth he became a detractor of the command of God. "And that it is God who first gave the command, the Lord Jesus himself says to the devil: 'Get behind me, Satan.' And without doubt to go behind God is the part of a servant. And again what he says to him: 'You shall worship the Lord your God and serve him only.' Since, then, some men obeyed his wishes, they heard from the Saviour: 'You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father.' And again, when they do his wishes, they hear: 'Brood of vipers, who showed you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear, then, fruit worthy of repentance.' From this, then, see how great a force it is that man has free choice. Yet let him say himself whether there is a judgment of the godly and the ungodly." Manes said: "There is a judgment." Archelaus said: "I think that what we have said about the devil contains no little reason and piety. For each creature has its own order: one is the order of the human race, another that of animals, another that of angels. But the divine substance alone is one and unchangeable, eternal, invisible, as is known to all according to what is written: 'No one has ever seen God, except the only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father.' All the other creatures, then, must be visible: heaven, earth, sea, men, angels, archangels. But God, since he has never been seen by anyone, what among these creatures can be homoousios with him? Therefore we say that each thing according to its order has its own substance. But you say that every living creature that moves was made from one, and that it received from God a like substance, and that it can sin and come to judgment; and since you do not want to accept the word that says that the devil was an angel and fell into transgression and is not of the same substance as God, you must do away with the reasoning of judgment, so that it may appear which of us is deceived. For if an angel created by God cannot fall into transgression, how can the soul, a part of God, sin? But if you say that there is a judgment of sinning souls, and say that they are of one substance with God, and yet, while you assert that they are of the divine nature, you nonetheless say that they do (not) keep God's commandments: even so my argument goes far ahead, saying first that the devil fell because he did not keep the commandment, for he was not of the substance of God; and he fell not so much to harm the human race, but rather to be mocked by it; for he has given us power to tread upon serpents and scorpions and every power of the enemy." ### Scripture references - John 8:44: quotation, high confidence - Gen 1:31: allusion, high confidence - Luke 10:18: allusion, high confidence - Gen 6:2: allusion, high confidence - Matt 16:23: quotation, high confidence - Matt 4:10: quotation, high confidence - Matt 3:7–8: quotation, high confidence - John 1:18: quotation, high confidence - Luke 10:19: quotation, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - 1 En. 6-10 (1 Enoch): echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: John 8:44; Gen 1:31; Luke 10:18; Gen 6:1–4; Matt 16:23 and Mark 8:33; Matt 4:10; Matt 3:7–8; John 1:18; Luke 10:19. The angels who mingled with the daughters of men: Gen 6:2, read (as by many early writers) of angels; cf. 1 Enoch 6–10. The etymology of "devil" from a "crossing over" is Archelaus's (as if from διαβαίνω). "homoousios" is in Greek letters transliterated in the Latin (homousion). "(non)" is the editor's supplement and is translated. Beeson's apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 36 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/36). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 37 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/30/#p-37 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus explains who is "the father of the devil" in John 8:44: those who conceive and bring forth his wickedness, first the serpent, then Cain, and later Judas. ### Latin text Iudices dixerunt: Sufficienter ostendit de origine diaboli. Cum enim utraque pars confiteretur futurum esse iudicium, necessario liberi arbitrii unusquisque monstratur; quo evidenter ostenso, nulli dubium est (quia sit) unusquisque in quamcumque elegerit partem propria usus arbitrii potestate. Manes dixit: Si a deo diabolus ut ais, mendacem esse dixisti Iesum. Archelaus dixit: Confitere primo quia vera sit ratio eorum quae nunc adstruximus, et tunc ostendam tibi patrem eius. Manes dixit: Si mihi ostenderis patrem eius mendacem et deo horum nihil adscripseris, tunc tibi de omnibus accommodabitur fides. Archelaus dixit: Omni ratione de diabolo diligenter exposita ac dispensatione prolata, si cui hominum viget sensus, etiam apud se ipsum potest diligenter advertere quis iste sit qui diaboli appellatus est pater. Sed cum te tu paracletum esse dicas, plurimum tibi etiam ab humana deest prudentia. Quoniam ergo prodidisti ignorantiam tuam, dicam ego quis ille sit pater diaboli. Manes dixit: Dic, et adiecit: Omnis qui conditor est vel creator aliquorum pater eorum quae condiderit appellatur. Archelaus dixit: Miror quomodo saltem hoc recta ratione responderis nec celaveris sermonis huius intellegentiam vel naturam. Audi iam ex hoc qui sit pater eius. Cum ex caelorum regno decidisset, erat super terras intendens et inquirens cui se possit adiungere, quem ex consortio sui participem quoque nequitiae suae valeret efficere. Et quidem donec homo non erat, neque ille appellabatur homicida neque cum patre mendax; post haec vero, cum factus esset homo ac mendacio eius fuisset et circumventione deceptus, cum sese inseruisset corpori serpentis sapientioris omnium bestiarum, tunc appellatus est mendax una cum patre suo et eflfectum est non solum super ipsum mendacii maledictum, sed et super patrem eius. Cum ergo serpens recepisset eum in sese et recepisset Universum, tamquam praegnans effectus est, ingentis malitiae fascem portans, et erat sicut puerpera quae partu urgetur, volens evomere malignae suggestionis eius cogitata. Primi enim hominis gloriam graviter ferens serpens ingressus paradisum et conceptis in se doloribus, mendaces coepit generare sermones et mortem parere hominibus, qui a deo fuerant figurati et acceperant vitam. Verum non potuit totum se manifestum facere per serpentem; sed reservavit perfectionem suam, quam demonstraret in Cain, a quo generatus est totus. Et per serpentem quidem hypocrises et fallacias ad Evam demonstravit; per Cain vero homicidii exordium dedit, inserens se in primitias frugum, quas ille male distribuit. Ex hoc homicida appellatus est ab initio, mendax vero quoniam fefellit dicens: Eritis tamquam dii, eiecti sunt enim postea de paradiso illi quos deos futuros esse fallebat. Efficitur ergo prior pater eius qui eum in utero concepit et genuit atque in lucem edidit serpens, secundus vero Cain, qui iniquitates conceptas, dolores et parricidium peperit; interfecto etenim fratre, iniquitatem, iniustitiam atque inpietatem pariter perpetravit. Sed et quicumque eum suscipiunt et faciunt eius desideria fratres eius efficiuntur. Pater eius perfectus est Pharao; pater eius efficiuntur unusquisque inpiorum; pater eius effectus est Judas, quia concepit quidem eum, sed aborsus est; non enim perfectus edidit partum, quia maiorem personam adgressus est per Iudam et ideo abortum factum esse dico, quia, tamquam si mulier semen viri concipiat atque in sese cotidianos accipiat profectus, ita et Iudas cotidie proficiebat in peius, occasionibus sibi a maligno quasi seminibus datis. Et primum quidem fuit ei semen pecuniae cupiditas, incrementum vero furtum, furabatur enim ea quae mittebantur in loculum; dolores vero partus fuerunt ei conlocutio cum Pharisaeis et pretii scelerata conventio: aborsus est vero, non partus, laqueus mortis informis. Sed et tu, si malignum ex te protuleris et facias eius concupiscentias, genuisti eum et pater eius esse diceris; si vero poenitentiam gesseris, et abieceris pondus velut parturiens. Ut enim in ludis scolaribus, si accipiens quis a magistro materiam, reliquum corpus orationis ex semet ipso generet ac procreet, eorum quae genuerit conditor ipse dicitur, ita et qui ex summa malitia parum quid fermenti acceperit, pater et genitor dicatur necesse est illius qui ab initio restitit veritati. Quod simili modo provenire potest etiam his qui virtuti student, nam audivi fortissimos viros dicere ad deum: Propter timorem tuum, domine, in utero concepimus et doluimus et peperimus spiritum salutis; ita et quicumque de timore maligni concipiunt et pariunt spiritum iniquitatis ipsi patres eius dicantur necesse est; filii enim dicuntur, dum adhuc ministerio eius parent, patres vero, qui ad perfectionem malitiae pervenerunt. Ita namque et dominus noster ait ad Pharisaeos, vos de patre diabolo estis, filios eos faciens illius, donec adhuc conturbari videbantur et cogitabant in cordibus suis mala pro bonis adversum iustos; illis ergo apud se talia cogitantibus, translatis in se malignis eorum cogitationibus, ludas, malorum Caput et ad perfectum perducens iniqua consilia effectus est sceleris pater, inmanitatis suae praemio ab eis triginta argenteis honoratus; totus enim in eum post buccellam panis ingressus est diabolus. Sed, ut diximus, postea quam uterus intumuit et dolorum tempus advenit, aborsum fascem iniquae conceptionis effudit et ideo nec perfecte pater appellabatur, nisi eo tantum tempore quo conceptum gerebat in utero; postea vero quam confugit ad laqueum, non integrum videtur edidisse partum, quia poenitentia subsecuta est. ### English translation (Claude) The judges said: "He has sufficiently shown the origin of the devil. For since both sides confess that there will be a judgment, each one is necessarily shown to have free choice; and when this has been clearly shown, no one doubts (that) each one is on whatever side he has chosen, using the power of his own choice." Manes said: "If the devil is from God, as you say, you have said that Jesus is a liar." Archelaus said: "First confess that the reasoning of what we have now set out is true, and then I will show you his father." Manes said: "If you show me that his father is a liar and ascribe none of these things to God, then you will be given credence in everything." Archelaus said: "Now that the whole account of the devil has been carefully set out and the dispensation brought forward, anyone of men whose sense is vigorous can also carefully notice for himself who it is that is called the father of the devil. But though you say that you are the Paraclete, you are greatly lacking even in human prudence. Since, then, you have betrayed your ignorance, I will tell who that father of the devil is." Manes said: "Tell me." And he added: "Everyone who is the founder or creator of anything is called the father of what he has founded." Archelaus said: "I wonder how you answered at least this with right reason, and did not hide the meaning or nature of this word. Hear now from this who his father is. When he had fallen from the kingdom of heaven, he was on the earth, watching and searching for someone to whom he could join himself, whom by fellowship with himself he could make a sharer in his wickedness too. And as long as man did not exist, he was neither called a murderer nor a liar with his father. But afterwards, when man had been made and had been deceived by his lie and his trickery, when he had put himself into the body of the serpent, the wisest of all the beasts, then he was called a liar together with his father, and the curse of the lie came not only upon him but also upon his father. So when the serpent had received him into itself, and received him whole, it became as it were pregnant, carrying a bundle of enormous wickedness, and was like a woman in labour pressed by the birth, wanting to vomit out the thoughts of his evil suggestion. For the serpent, taking hard the glory of the first man, entered paradise, and, having conceived the pains within itself, began to beget lying words and to bring forth death for men, who had been formed by God and had received life. But he could not make himself wholly manifest through the serpent; he kept back his completion, to show it in Cain, by whom he was begotten whole. Through the serpent he showed hypocrisy and deceit to Eve; but through Cain he gave the beginning of murder, putting himself into the first-fruits of the crops, which Cain divided wrongly. From this he was called a murderer from the beginning, and a liar because he deceived, saying, 'You will be like gods'; for those whom he deceived into thinking they would be gods were afterwards cast out of paradise. "So the first to become his father, who conceived him in the womb, begot him, and brought him to light, is the serpent; the second is Cain, who brought forth the iniquities he had conceived, the pains and the murder of kin; for by killing his brother he committed iniquity, injustice, and impiety together. And whoever receive him and do his desires become his brothers. Pharaoh is his perfect father; each of the ungodly becomes his father; Judas became his father, because he conceived him but miscarried; for he did not bring forth a full-term birth, because he attacked a greater person through Judas. And I say that a miscarriage took place, because, as a woman conceives a man's seed and receives daily growth within herself, so Judas too advanced daily for the worse, occasions being given to him by the evil one like seeds. And the first seed in him was the love of money, and its growth was theft, for he stole what was put into the purse; the pains of birth were his talks with the Pharisees and the wicked bargain for the price; and he miscarried, not giving birth: the shapeless noose of death. And you too, if you bring forth the evil one from yourself and do his desires, have begotten him and will be called his father; but if you repent, you will also throw off the burden like a woman in labour. For as in the exercises of the schools, if someone, receiving a subject from the master, begets and produces from himself the rest of the body of the speech, he himself is called the author of what he has begotten, so too one who has received a little leaven from the height of wickedness must be called father and begetter of him who from the beginning resisted the truth. This can happen in the same way to those who strive after virtue; for I have heard the bravest men say to God: 'Because of fear of you, O Lord, we have conceived in the womb and been in pain and have brought forth the spirit of salvation.' So too whoever conceive from fear of the evil one and bring forth the spirit of iniquity must be called his fathers; for they are called sons while they still obey his service, but fathers when they have come to the completion of wickedness. "For so too our Lord says to the Pharisees, 'You are of your father the devil,' making them his sons, while they still seemed to be troubled and were thinking evil things in their hearts in return for good against the righteous. So while they were thinking such things among themselves, Judas, their evil thoughts being transferred into him, the head of evils and bringing wicked counsels to completion, became the father of the crime, honoured by them with thirty pieces of silver as the reward of his savagery; for after the morsel of bread the devil entered into him whole. But, as we said, after the womb had swollen and the time of the pains had come, he poured out the miscarried burden of his wicked conception; and so he was not fully called a father except only during the time he carried what he had conceived in the womb; after he fled to the noose, he does not seem to have brought forth a full-term birth, because repentance followed." ### Scripture references - John 8:44: quotation, high confidence - Gen 3:1: allusion, high confidence - Gen 3:5: quotation, high confidence - Gen 4:3–8: allusion, high confidence - John 12:6: allusion, high confidence - Matt 26:14–16: allusion, high confidence - Matt 27:5: allusion, high confidence - John 13:27: allusion, high confidence - Isa 26:18: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Archelaus reads John 8:44 as speaking of the devil's "father" in the sense of whoever brings his wickedness to birth. Scripture: John 8:44; Gen 3:1–5; Gen 4:3–8; John 12:6; Matt 26:14–16; Matt 27:3–5; John 13:27; Isa 26:18 (LXX wording, "we have conceived … the spirit of salvation"). "(quia sit)" is the editor's supplement. Beeson's apparatus and running head mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 37 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/37). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 38 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38/#p-38 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus distinguishes senses of "father," argues that Christ did not delay in sending the Paraclete but sent him at once to the apostles and above all to Paul, and cites Paul's letters as his testament. ### Latin text Ignorare autem vos non arbitror quoniam pater unum quidem sit nomen, diversos tamen habet intellectus: alius enim pater dicitur eorum quos naturaliter genuerit filiorum, alius vero eorum quos tantummodo enutrierit, nonnulli vero temporis atque aetatis privilegio; unde et dominus meus Iesus plurimos patres habere dicitur, nam et David pater eius appellatus est et loseph pater eius putatus est, cum nullus horum pater eius fuerit veritate naturae. Nam David pater eius dicitur aetatis ac temporis privilegio, Ioseph vero lege nutriendi, solus autem deus pater eius natura est, qui omnia per verbum suum velociter nobis manifestare dignatus est. Nec in aliquo remoratus dominus meus Iesus, intra unius anni spatium languentium multitudines reddidit sanitati, mortuos luci, qui verbi sui potestate universa conplexus est. In quo tandem remoratus est, ut in paracleto mittendo tamdiu eum remoratum credamus? Quin potius adfuit statim sicut superius dictum est, plurimum diffusus in Paulum, cuius etiam testimonio credidimus dicenti: Mihi autem soli data est gratia haec, Qui prius quidem blasphemus fuit et persecutor ecclesiae dei, sed rursum manifestatus est Omnibus quia esset fidelis paracleti minister; per quem universis innotuit singularis eius clementia, quod et usque ad nos, qui aliquando sine spe eramus, donorum eius largitio pervenit. Quis enim nostrum sperare poterat persecutorem Paulum et inimicum ecclesiae defensorem eius ac tutorem futurum? et non solum hoc, verum etiam et magistrum, ecclesiarum conditorem et architectorem. Post hunc ergo et post eos qui cum ipso fuerant, id est post discipulos, nullum alium venire secundum scripturas sperandum est; ait enim dominus noster Iesus de paracleto, quia et de meo accipiet. Vas ergo probabile elegit hunc virum quem misit ad nos Paulum in cuius spiritu influxit Spiritus sanctus; et sicut non super omnes homines Spiritus habitare poterat, nisi super eum qui de Maria dei genitrice natus est, ita et in nullum alium spiritus paracletus venire poterat, nisi super apostolos et super beatum Paulum. Vas enim electionis inquit, mihi est, ut portet nomen meum in conspectu regum et gentium. Ipse quoque in prima epistula sua posuit dicens: Secundum gratiam quae data est mihi a deo, ut sim minister Christi in gentibus, consecrans euangelium dei, Veritatem dico in Christo, non mentior, testimonium mihi perhibente conscientia mea in spiritu sancto. Et rursum ait: Non enim audeo quicquam loqui eorum, quae per me non efficit Christus verbo et factis. Ego enim sum minimus omnium apostolorum, qui non sum dignus vocari apostolus. Gratia autem dei sum id quod sum. Et eos qui experimentum quaerebant eins qui in eo loquebatur Christus vult pro certo habere, quia esset in ipso paracletus, cuius muneris gratiam consecutus et magnifico honore ditatus ait: Pro quo ter dominum rogavi, ut discederet a me; et dixit mihi: Sufficit tibi gratia mea, nam virtus in infirmitate perficitur. Rursum, quia vere ipse sit paracletus qui erat in Paulo, ait dominus noster Iesus Christus in euangelio: Si diligitis me, mandata mea servate. Et ego rogabo patrem meum, et alium paracletum dabit vobis. In quo ostendit etiam se ipsum esse paracletum, cum dicit alium. Unde credentes Paulo audivimus eum dicentem: Aut experimentum quaeritis eius qui in me loquitur Christus? et horum similia, de quibus superius diximus; unde et tamquam fidelibus nobis heredibus suis consignat testamentum sua ad Corinthios epistula velut pater, dicens: Tradidi enim vobis in primis, quod et accepi, quia Christus mortuus est pro peccatis nostris secundum scripturas et quia sepultus est et quia resurrexit tertia die secundum scripturas et quia adparuit Cephae, deinde undecim apostolis, postea amplius quam quingentis fratribus de semel, ex quibus plurimi adhuc manent usque nunc; quidam autem et dormierunt. Postea autem visus est Iacobo, deinde Omnibus apostolis; novissime autem omnium tamquam abortivo visus est et mihi, ego enim sum novissimus omnium apostolorum, Sive ergo ego sive illi ita adnuntiavimus. Et rursum tradens heredibus eam quam ipse hereditatem promeruit dicit: Timeo autem ne forte, sicut serpens seduxit Evam astutia sua, ita corrumpantur sensus vestri a simplicitate et castitate quae in Christo est. Si enim is qui venit alium Iesum praedicat quem non praedicavimus, aut spiritum alium acceperitis quem non accepistis, aut aliud euangelium quod non accepistis, bene pateremini, Puto enim quia nihil minus feci vobis a ceteris apostolis. ### English translation (Claude) "I do not think you are unaware that 'father' is one name but has different meanings. For one is called father of the sons he has begotten by nature, another of those he has only brought up, and some by the privilege of time and age. So my Lord Jesus too is said to have very many fathers: David was called his father, and Joseph was thought to be his father, though neither of them was his father by the truth of nature. For David is called his father by the privilege of age and time, Joseph by the law of nurture; but God alone is his Father by nature, who has deigned to make all things plain to us swiftly through his Word. Nor did my Lord Jesus delay in anything: within the space of a single year he restored multitudes of the sick to health and the dead to light, he who embraced all things by the power of his word. In what, then, did he delay, that we should believe him to have delayed so long in sending the Paraclete? Rather, he was present at once, as was said above, poured out abundantly into Paul, whose testimony we have believed when he says: 'To me alone this grace has been given.' He who before was a blasphemer and a persecutor of the church of God was again made manifest to all as a faithful minister of the Paraclete, through whom His singular mercy became known to all, so that the bounty of his gifts has reached even us, who were once without hope. For which of us could hope that Paul the persecutor and enemy of the church would become its defender and guardian? And not only this, but also its teacher, the founder and architect of churches. "After him, then, and after those who were with him, that is, after the disciples, no one else is to be expected to come according to the Scriptures; for our Lord Jesus says of the Paraclete, 'He will receive of mine.' So he chose this man as a proven vessel, whom he sent to us, Paul, into whose spirit the Holy Spirit flowed; and as the Spirit could not dwell upon all men, but upon him who was born of Mary the mother of God, so too the Spirit, the Paraclete, could come upon no one else except upon the apostles and upon the blessed Paul. 'For he is a vessel of election to me,' he says, 'to carry my name before kings and nations.' He himself also set it down in his first letter, saying: 'According to the grace that was given to me by God, that I should be a minister of Christ among the Gentiles, sanctifying the gospel of God.' 'I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit.' And again he says: 'For I will not dare to speak of any of the things that Christ has not worked through me, by word and deed.' 'For I am the least of all the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle. But by the grace of God I am what I am.' And he wants those who sought proof of Christ who spoke in him to hold for certain that the Paraclete was in him; having obtained the grace of this gift and been enriched with magnificent honour, he says: 'For this I asked the Lord three times that it should depart from me; and he said to me, My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.' "Again, that it was indeed the Paraclete himself who was in Paul, our Lord Jesus Christ says in the Gospel: 'If you love me, keep my commandments. And I will ask my Father, and he will give you another Paraclete.' In this he shows that he himself is also a Paraclete, when he says 'another.' So, believing Paul, we have heard him say: 'Or do you seek proof of him who speaks in me, Christ?' and things like these, of which we spoke above. And so, as to faithful heirs, he seals his will to us like a father in his letter to the Corinthians, saying: 'For I delivered to you first of all what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he rose on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the eleven apostles; after that to more than five hundred brothers at once, of whom most remain until now, though some have fallen asleep. After that he was seen by James, then by all the apostles; last of all, as to one untimely born, he was seen by me also; for I am the least of all the apostles. Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaimed.' And again, handing on to his heirs the inheritance he himself had earned, he says: 'But I fear lest, as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity and chastity that is in Christ. For if one who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive another spirit that you have not received, or another gospel that you have not received, you would bear it well. For I think that I have done nothing less for you than the other apostles.'" ### Scripture references - Luke 3:23: allusion, medium confidence - Eph 3:8: quotation, medium confidence - 1 Tim 1:13: allusion, high confidence - Eph 2:12: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:14: quotation, high confidence - Acts 9:15: quotation, high confidence - Rom 15:15–16: quotation, high confidence - Rom 9:1: quotation, high confidence - Rom 15:18: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:9–10: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 12:8–9: quotation, high confidence - John 14:15–16: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 13:3: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:3–11: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 11:3–5: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Luke 3:23; Matt 1:1; 1 Tim 1:13; Eph 2:12; Eph 3:8; John 16:14; Acts 9:15; Rom 15:15–16; Rom 9:1; Rom 15:18; 1 Cor 15:9–10; 2 Cor 13:3; 2 Cor 12:8–9; John 14:15–16; 1 Cor 15:3–11 (the Latin reads "eleven apostles" where the Greek has "the twelve"); 2 Cor 11:3–5. "Mary the mother of God" renders dei genitrice. "To me alone" reads the scan's "sott" as "soli". The last quotation follows the Latin as printed ("you would bear it well," "nothing less … than the other apostles"). Beeson's apparatus and running heads mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 38 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 39 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38/#p-39 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus cites Paul and Jesus' warnings against false apostles and false Christs to show that Manes, coming centuries later without any sign or link to the apostles, is one of them. ### Latin text Haec autem dixit, ostendens omnes reliquos qui venerint falsos apostolos, dolosos operarios, transfigurantes se in apostolos Christi. Et non mirum, ipse enim Satanas transfigurat se velut angelum lucis. Quid ergo magnum, si et ministri eius transfigurentur in ministros iustitiae? quorum finis erit secundum opera eorum. Indicat autem quales essent ii a quibus circumveniebantur. Volentibus autem Galatis ab euangelio transferri dicit: Miror quod sic tam cito transferimini ab eo qui vocavit vos in aliud euangelium, quod non est aliud; nisi sunt qui vos conturbant et volunt avertere vos ab euangelio Christi. Sed etiam si nos ipsi aut angelus de caelo vobis adnuntiaverit praeterquam quod traditum est vobis, anathema sit. Et rursum ait: Mihi infimo omnium apostolorum data est gratia haec. Quae enim deerant tribulationum Christi in carne mea adinpleo. Et in alio rursum loco profitetur, quia super ceteros Christi minister sit, tamquam si postea omnino non sit alius expectandus; iubet enim neque angelum de caelo suscipi. Et quomodo de Persida venientem Manen et dicentem se esse paracletum nos esse credamus? Ita enim agnosco ex hoc, quod unus iste sit ex illis qui transformantur, de quibus manifeste indicavit nobis vas electionis apostolus Paulus dicens: Quia in novissimis temporibus recedent quidam a fide, adtendentes spiritibus seductoribus et doctrinis daemoniorum, in hypocrisi mendacia loquentes, cauteriatam habentes conscientiam, prohibentium nubere, abstinere se a cibis, quos deus creavit ad percipiendum cum gratiarum actione fidelibus et his qui cognoverunt veritatem; quoniam omnis creatura dei bona est et nihil abiciendum quod cum gratiarum actione percipitur. Sed et sanctus euangelista Matheus diligenter significavit domini nostri Iesu Christi sermonem: Videte ne quis vos seducat; multi enim venient in nomine meo dicentes: Ego sum Christus; et multos seducent. Quod si etiam aliquis vobis dixerit, Ecce hic est Christus, aut ecce ibi, nolite credere. Exurgent enim falsi Christi et falsi apostoli et falsi prophetae, et dabunt signa magna et prodigia, ita ut in errorem inducant, si potest fieri, etiam electos. Ecce praedixi vobis. Si dixerint vobis, ecce in deserto est, nolite exire. Si dixerint vobis, in penetrabilibus, nolite credere. Et post ista omnia mandata iste nec signum quidem aliquod aut prodigium ullum ostendens neque adfinitatem aliquam habens, sed ne in numero quidem discipulorum positus neque defuncto nostro obsecutus, cuius hereditate gaudemus; cum neque ei languenti adstiterit, non testis extiterit testamenti, immo potius cum ne in notitiam quidem venerit eorum, qui obsecuti sunt aegrotanti; postremo cum nullius prorsus accipiat testimonium, paracletum se esse vult credi: cum etiam si signa et prodigia faceres, falsum Christum et falsum prophetam te reputari oporteret secundum scripturas; et ideo convenit nos cautius agere, secundum quod beatus apostolus monet, dicens in epistula (quam) Colosensibus scripsit: Permanete in fide fundati et radicati et inmobiles ab spe euangelii quod audivimus, quod praedicatum est in omni creatura quae sub caelo est. Et rursum: Sicut ergo accepistis Christum Iesum dominum, in ipso ambulate, radicati et fundati super ipsum, confirmati fide sicut edocti estis, abundantes in gratiarum actione. Videte ne quis vos expoliet per philosophiam et inanem seductionem secundum traditionem hominum, secundum elementa mundi, et non secundum Christum, quia in ipso habitat omnis plenitudo deitatis. Quibus Omnibus ita diligenter expositis, beatus apostolus velut pater filiis addit tamquam signaculum quoddam testamenti dicens: Certamen bonum certavi, circum cucurri, fidem servavi. De cetero reposita est mihi iustitiae Corona, quam reddet mihi dominus in illa die iustus iudex; non solum autem mihi, sed et omnibus qui diligunt adventum eius. ### English translation (Claude) "He said this to show that all the others who would come are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 'And no wonder, for Satan himself disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no great thing if his ministers also disguise themselves as ministers of righteousness; their end will be according to their works.' And he shows what kind of men those were by whom they were being deceived. To the Galatians, who were willing to be turned from the gospel, he says: 'I am astonished that you are so quickly turning from him who called you to another gospel, which is not another; only there are some who trouble you and want to turn you away from the gospel of Christ. But even if we ourselves or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you anything besides what has been handed down to you, let him be accursed.' And again he says: 'To me, the lowest of all the apostles, this grace has been given.' 'For what was lacking of the afflictions of Christ I fill up in my flesh.' And in another place again he professes that he is a minister of Christ above the others, as though no other at all were to be expected afterwards; for he commands that not even an angel from heaven be received. And how are we to believe that Manes, coming from Persia and saying that he is the Paraclete, is so? For I recognize from this that he is one of those who disguise themselves, of whom the vessel of election, the apostle Paul, clearly told us, saying: 'In the last times some will depart from the faith, paying attention to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having a seared conscience, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful and those who have known the truth; for every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving.' "And the holy evangelist Matthew also carefully recorded the word of our Lord Jesus Christ: 'See that no one leads you astray; for many will come in my name, saying, I am the Christ, and they will lead many astray. And if anyone says to you, Look, here is the Christ, or look, there, do not believe it. For false Christs and false apostles and false prophets will arise, and will give great signs and wonders, so as to lead into error, if it were possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand. If they say to you, Look, he is in the desert, do not go out. If they say to you, In the inner rooms, do not believe it.' And after all these commands, this man, showing not even any sign or any wonder, and having no kinship, not even placed in the number of the disciples, nor having followed our departed one, whose inheritance we enjoy; since he did not stand by him in his sickness, was not a witness of the will, indeed did not even come to the knowledge of those who attended him in his sickness; finally, since he receives no one's testimony at all, he wants to be believed to be the Paraclete. Yet even if you were to do signs and wonders, you ought to be reckoned a false Christ and a false prophet according to the Scriptures. "And so it is fitting for us to act more cautiously, according to what the blessed apostle warns, saying in the letter (which) he wrote to the Colossians: 'Remain in the faith, grounded and rooted and immovable from the hope of the gospel which we have heard, which has been preached in every creature under heaven.' And again: 'As therefore you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, walk in him, rooted and grounded upon him, established in the faith as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. See that no one plunders you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ; for in him dwells all the fullness of the deity.' When all these things had been set out so carefully, the blessed apostle, like a father to his sons, adds as it were a seal of his will, saying: 'I have fought the good fight, I have run the course, I have kept the faith. For the rest, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will give me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who love his coming.'" ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 11:13–15: quotation, high confidence - Gal 1:6–8: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:8: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:24: quotation, high confidence - 1 Tim 4:1–4: quotation, high confidence - Matt 24:4–5: quotation, high confidence - Matt 24:23–26: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:23: quotation, high confidence - Col 2:6–9: quotation, high confidence - 2 Tim 4:7–8: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 2 Cor 11:13–15; Gal 1:6–8; Eph 3:8; Col 1:24; 1 Tim 4:1–4; Matt 24:4–5, 23–26; Col 1:23; Col 2:6–9; 2 Tim 4:7–8. "False apostles" in the Matthew quotation is not in the Gospel text; it is in the Latin as printed. "Forbidding to marry" is applied by Archelaus to the Manichees, who rejected marriage for their elect. "(quam)" is the editor's supplement. In 2 Tim 4:7 the scan reads "circum cucurri" (for "cursum" or similar); translated by sense. Beeson's apparatus and running head mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 39 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/39). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 40 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38/#p-40 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus denounces Manes as a forerunner of Antichrist who works no miracles and knows only Chaldean; the judges then ask him whom Paul was awaiting when he spoke of "what is perfect." ### Latin text Nullum ex nobis, o Manes, Galatam facies, ut cito nos transferas a fide Christi. Etiam si signa et prodigia facias, etiam mortuos suscites, etiam si imaginem nobis Pauli ipsius adferas, anathema es, Satana; praescriptum est enim de te; praemoniti et praestructi sumus a sanctis scripturis. Vas es Antichristi et neque bonum vas, sed sordidum et indignum, quod ille sicut aliquis barbarus vel tyrannus, cum in eos qui sub legum iustitia degunt conatur inruere, praemisit prius tamquam morti destinatum, ad explorandum quanta et qualis sit legitimi regis virtus ac populi: ipse enim inopinatus inruere pertimuit, sed neque alium ex necessariis viris mittere ullum ausus est, ne quid pateretur adversi. Talem te nobis sub bono et sancto rege positis velut morti destinatum rex tuus praemisit Antichristus. Et haec quidem non inexplorata proloquor, sed ex eo quod nuUam te video facere virtutem ita de te sentio. lUum enim et in angelum lucis transformandum et ministros eius tales adventuros praenoscimus et signa et prodigia facturos, ita ut, si possibile sit, etiam electi seducantur. Quis ergo es tu, qui neque necessarium aliquem locum sortitus es a patre tuo Satana? Nam quem mortuum suscitas, quod profluvium sanguinis sistis, quo luto caeci oculos inlinitos videre facis? Quando esurientem turbam paucis panibus reficis? Ubi super aquas incedis aut quis te vidit ex his qui in Ierusalem habitant? Persa barbare, non Graecorum linguae, non Aegyptiorum, non Romanorum, non uUius alterius linguae scientiam habere potuisti; sed Chaldaeorum solam, quae ne in numerum quidem aliquem ducitur; nullum alium loquentem audire potes. Non ita spiritus sanctus, absit hoc malum; sed omnibus dividit et omnia linguarum genera bene novit et agnoscit universa et omnibus omnia efficitur, ita ut eum etiam cordis cogitata non lateant. Quid enim dicit scriptura? quia unusquisque propria sua lingua audiebat per paracletum spiritum loquentes apostolos. Sed quid amplius dicam? barbare sacerdos Mithrae et conlusor, solem tantum coles Mithram locorum mysteriorum inluminatorem, ut opinaris, et conscium; hoc est quod apud eos ludes et tamquam elegantem mimum perages mysteria. Verum quid ego haec indignanter accipio? Nonne oportet te multiplicari tamquam zizania, usquequo ille ipse magnus pater tuus adveniat, suscitans mortuos, paene usque ad gehennam omnes persequens qui sibi obtemperare noluerint, plurimos deterrens arrogantiae metu quo est ipse circumdatus? Aliis adhibet minas vultus sui conversione, circumdatione ludificat; sed ultra non proficiet, insipientia enim eius omnibus pervulgata erit, sicut Iannes et Mambres. Iudices dixerunt: Sicut ex te comperimus, tamquam apostolo Paulo dicente, insuper etiam ab euangelio praescribente, nulli alicui (in) posterum praebetur ingressus ad praedicandum vel docendum vel ad euangelizandum vel prophetandum, in hac vita dumtaxat, nisi forte falsus propheta habeatur aut falsus Christus. Unde cum dixeris in Paulo fuisse paracletum et ipsum omnia consignasse, quare dixit: Ex parte scimus et ex parte prophetamus; cum autem venerit quod perfectum est, id quod ex parte est destruetur? Quem alium expectans hoc dixit? Quod si ipse confitetur expectare se aliquem perfectum et si venire aliquem necesse est, ostende nobis de quo dicat, ne forte in hunc videatur iste sermo recurrere aut in eum qui misit illum: Satanan, sicut tu dicis. Si enim confiteris venturum esse quod perfectum est, non potest esse Satanas; si autem Satanam expectas, non potest esse perfectum. ### English translation (Claude) "You will make none of us a Galatian, Manes, so as to turn us quickly from the faith of Christ. Even if you do signs and wonders, even if you raise the dead, even if you bring us the image of Paul himself, you are accursed, Satan; for it has been written beforehand about you; we have been forewarned and prepared by the holy Scriptures. You are a vessel of Antichrist, and not a good vessel but a filthy and unworthy one, which he, like some barbarian or tyrant, when he tries to rush upon those who live under the justice of laws, has sent ahead first as one destined for death, to find out how great and of what kind is the strength of the lawful king and his people; for he himself was afraid to rush in unexpectedly, and did not dare to send any other of his close men either, lest he suffer some setback. Such a one, destined as it were for death, your king Antichrist has sent ahead to us who are set under a good and holy king. And I do not say these things without having examined them; but because I see you do no mighty work, that is what I think of you. For we know beforehand that he will be transformed into an angel of light, and that his ministers will come in the same way and will do signs and wonders, so that, if it were possible, even the elect would be led astray. Who, then, are you, who have not even been allotted any important place by your father Satan? For what dead man do you raise? What flow of blood do you stop? What blind man's eyes, smeared with clay, do you make see? When do you feed a hungry crowd with a few loaves? Where do you walk on the waters, or who of those who live in Jerusalem has seen you? Barbarian Persian, you have been able to acquire knowledge neither of the language of the Greeks, nor of the Egyptians, nor of the Romans, nor of any other language, but only of the Chaldeans, which is not even taken into any account; you can understand no one speaking any other. "Not so the Holy Spirit, far from it; but he distributes to all, and knows well all kinds of languages, and recognizes all things, and becomes all things to all, so that not even the thoughts of the heart are hidden from him. For what does the Scripture say? That each one heard the apostles speaking in his own language through the Spirit, the Paraclete. But why should I say more? Barbarian, priest and fellow player of Mithras, you will worship only the sun, Mithras, the illuminator of places of mysteries, as you think, and their confidant; that is why you will play among them and perform the mysteries like an elegant mime. But why do I take these things indignantly? Must you not be multiplied like tares, until that great father of yours himself comes, raising the dead, pursuing almost to Gehenna all who refuse to obey him, terrifying very many by the fear of the arrogance with which he is surrounded? On some he brings threats by the turning of his face, others he mocks by surrounding them; but he will not progress further, for his folly will be made known to all, as was that of Jannes and Mambres." [41] The judges said: "As we have learned from you, since the apostle Paul says so and the Gospel moreover lays it down, entrance is given to no one (in) the future to preach or teach or evangelize or prophesy, in this life at least, unless he is to be held a false prophet or a false Christ. So since you have said that the Paraclete was in Paul and that he sealed everything, why did he say: 'We know in part and we prophesy in part; but when what is perfect comes, what is in part will be done away'? Whom else was he expecting when he said this? And if he himself confesses that he is expecting someone perfect, and if it is necessary that someone come, show us of whom he speaks, lest perhaps this word seem to come back to this man, or to the one who sent him, Satan, as you say. For if you confess that what is perfect is to come, it cannot be Satan; but if you are expecting Satan, it cannot be what is perfect." ### Scripture references - Gal 1:6: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 11:14: allusion, high confidence - Matt 24:24: allusion, high confidence - Mark 13:22: allusion, medium confidence - Mark 5:25–29: allusion, medium confidence - John 9:6–7: allusion, high confidence - Matt 14:15–21: allusion, high confidence - Matt 14:25: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 12:11: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 9:22: allusion, high confidence - Acts 2:6–11: allusion, high confidence - Matt 13:25: allusion, medium confidence - 2 Tim 3:8–9: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 13:9–10: quotation, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Jan. Jam. (Jannes and Jambres): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Gal 1:6; 2 Cor 11:14; Matt 24:24 and Mark 13:22; Mark 5:25–29; John 9:6–7; Matt 14:15–21, 25; 1 Cor 12:11; 1 Cor 9:22; Acts 2:6–11; Matt 13:25; 2 Tim 3:8–9 (Jannes and Jambres, here "Mambres"); 1 Cor 13:9–10. Archelaus's charge that Manes was a priest of Mithras is polemic, translated as it stands. The scan prints the numeral "XLI" before the judges' speech: Beeson's chapter 41 probably begins there, inside the staged section 40 (the staged section 41 begins with Archelaus's answer); it is marked [41] in the translation and the numeral is removed from the text. "(in)" is the editor's supplement. Beeson's apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 40 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/40). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 41 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38/#p-41 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus argues that the "perfect" Paul awaited is Christ at his coming in glory, when prophecy, tongues, and knowledge will be done away, and that Manes has done away nothing. ### Latin text Archelaus dixit: Quoniam non sine deo dicta sunt quae a beato Paulo prolata sunt, certum est quod dominum nostrum Iesum Christum dixerit expectandum esse perfectum, qui solus patrem novit, et cui voluerit revelare, sicut possum ex verbis ipsius demonstrare. Sed quia, cum venerit quod perfectum est, destruetur id quod ex parte est, iste vero sese adseverat esse perfectum, quid destruxit ostendat; quod enim destruetur, ignorantia est quae in nobis est. Dicat igitur quid destruxit, quid in notitiam pertulit. Si quid facere potest, faciat, ut credi ei possit. Sermo vero iste quantam habeat virtutem, si potuerit diligenter intellegi, ita demum credi poterit his quae a me fuerint adserta. Igitur in prima ad Corinthios epistula haec dicit Paulus de perfecto qui venturus est: Sive prophetiae, destruentur, sive linguae, cessabunt, sive scientia, destruetur; ex parte enim scimus et ex parte prophetamus. Cum autem venerit quod perfectum est, id quod ex parte est destruetur. Vide ergo quantam in sese habeat virtutem quod perfectum est et cuius sit ordinis ipsa perfectio. Dicat autem iste quam destruxerit prophetiam Iudaeorum an Hebraeorum, seu linguas cessare fecit Graecorum aut eorum qui idola colunt, vel quae alia dogmata destruxit Valentiniani aut Marcionis aut Tatiani aut Sabellii ceterorumque qui propriam sibimet ipsis scientiam conposuerant. Quem horum destruxit dicat aut quando destruet quasi perfectus? Inducias fortassis aliquas quaerit? Non plane, non ita obscure et ignobiliter adveniet ille qui perfectus est, id est Iesus Christus dominus noster. Sed sicut rex adveniens ad urbem suam praemittit primo protectores suos, signa, dracones, labaros, duces, principes, praefectos, et universa continuo commoventur, aliis vero metuentibus, aliis vero gaudentibus pro expectatione regis, ita et dominus meus Iesus, qui est vere perfectus, adveniens praemittit in primo gloriam suam, incontaminati atque inmaculati regni praedicatores sacratos, et tunc universa creatura commovebitur et conturbabitur, supplicans atque obsecrans, usquequo eam a servitute liberet. Humanum vero genus metuat necesse est et conplurimum conturbetur, pro eo quod multa delicta commiserit; soli vero iusti laetabuntur, expectantes quae sibi promissa sunt, nec ultra mundanarum rerum substantia permanebit; omnia destruentur sive prophetiae sive horum libri sive linguae totius generis: cessabunt, eo quod ultra non egeant solliciti esse homines et cogitare de his quae ad vitam necessaria sunt, sive scientia quorumcumque doctorum, etiam ipsa destruetur: nihil enim horum sufferre poterit magni illius regis adventum. Sicut enim parva scintilla ad splendorem solis admota absumitur, ilico nec adparet; ita universa creatura, omnis prophetia, cuncta scientia, universae linguae, sicut superius diximus, destruentur. Sed quia caelestis regis praesentiam paucis verbis et fragilibus et valde infimis exponere non valet humana natura, ut fortasse sanctorum debeat esse et valde dignorum de ipso aliquid enarrare, tamen necessitatis causa ista me sufficit protulisse huius inportunitate conpulsum, uti istum vobis qualis esset ostenderem. ### English translation (Claude) Archelaus said: "Since what was spoken by the blessed Paul was not said without God, it is certain that he said that our Lord Jesus Christ, who alone knows the Father and to whom he wills to reveal him, is to be expected as the perfect one, as I can show from his own words. But since, when what is perfect comes, what is in part will be done away, and this man asserts that he is the perfect one, let him show what he has done away. For what will be done away is the ignorance that is in us. Let him say, then, what he has done away, what he has brought to knowledge. If he can do anything, let him do it, so that he can be believed. How much force this saying has, if it can be carefully understood, will in the end be believed from what I have asserted. In the first letter to the Corinthians, then, Paul says this about the perfect one who is to come: 'Whether prophecies, they will be done away; whether tongues, they will cease; whether knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when what is perfect comes, what is in part will be done away.' See, then, how much power what is perfect has in itself, and of what order perfection itself is. But let this man say what prophecy of the Jews or of the Hebrews he has done away, or whether he has made the tongues of the Greeks or of the idol-worshippers cease, or what other doctrines he has done away, of Valentinian, or Marcion, or Tatian, or Sabellius, and the rest who had composed a knowledge of their own for themselves. Let him say which of these he has done away, or when he will do it away as the perfect one. Perhaps he is seeking some delay? "Certainly not; not so obscurely and ignobly will he come who is perfect, that is, Jesus Christ our Lord. But as a king coming to his city first sends ahead his guards, standards, dragon-banners, labara, generals, chiefs, prefects, and everything is at once set in motion, some fearing, others rejoicing at the expectation of the king, so too my Lord Jesus, who is truly perfect, when he comes, sends ahead first his glory, the consecrated heralds of an undefiled and spotless kingdom; and then the whole creation will be moved and troubled, entreating and beseeching until he frees it from slavery. But the human race must fear and be greatly troubled, because it has committed many offences; only the righteous will rejoice, awaiting what has been promised them, and the substance of worldly things will no longer remain. All things will be done away: whether prophecies, or the books of these men; whether the tongues of every race, they will cease, because men will no longer need to be anxious and to think about the things necessary for life; whether the knowledge of any teachers whatever, it too will be done away; for none of these will be able to bear the coming of that great king. For as a small spark brought near the splendour of the sun is consumed and at once disappears, so the whole creation, every prophecy, all knowledge, all tongues, as we said above, will be done away. But since human nature cannot set out the presence of the heavenly king in a few frail and very low words, so that perhaps it ought to belong to the saints and the very worthy to tell something about him, yet for necessity's sake it is enough for me to have brought these things forward, compelled by this man's importunity, in order to show you what kind of man he is." ### Scripture references - Matt 11:27: allusion, high confidence - Luke 10:22: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 13:8–10: quotation, high confidence - Rom 8:19–22: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 11:27 and Luke 10:22; 1 Cor 13:8–10; Rom 8:19–22. Valentinian (Valentinus), Marcion, Tatian, and Sabellius are named as heretics. The "labara" are military standards (the labarum). Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 41 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/41). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 42 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38/#p-42 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus contrasts Manes with earlier heretics who never claimed to be the Paraclete, and argues from Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and the Last Judgment that Manes cannot be the perfect one to come. ### Latin text Et ego quidem beatifico Marcionem et Valentinianum ac Basilidem aliosque hereticos, sicut istius conparatione, qui velut intellectu aliquo usi sunt, qui viderentur sibi omnem scripturam posse intellegere, et ita se ductores statuerunt qui se audire voluissent; nullus tamen ipsorum ausus est deum se praedicare vel Christum vel paracletum sicut iste, qui aliquando quidem de saeculis disputat, aliquando de sole, quomodo facta sint, tamquam maior ipse sit eorum; omnis enim qui de aliquo exponit quomodo factus sit maiorem se et antiquiorem ostendit esse quam est ille de quo dicit. Quis autem et de substantia dei dicere audeat, nisi forte solus dominus noster Iesus Christus? quae quidem ego non ex meis verbis adstruo, sed scripturae quae nos edocuit auctoritate confirmo; quoniam quidem et apostolus dicit ad nos: Ut sitis sicut luminaria in hoc mundo, verbum vitae continentes ad gloriam mihi in diem Christi, quoniam non in vacuum cucurri nec in vacuum laboravi. Intellegere debemus quae sit vis et ratio sermonis huius; verbum enim ducis obtinet locum, opera vero regis. Sicut ergo aliquis regi suo adventanti omnes qui sub cura sua sunt studet oboedientes, paratos et caros hilaresque ostendere ac devotos sed etiam innocentes ac bonis omnibus abundantes, ut ipse laudem consequatur a rege et maiore ab eo honore dignus habeatur, tamquam bene gubemata quae sibi est commissa provincia, ita et beatus Paulus dicit ad nos: Ut sitis velut luminaria in hoc mundo, verbum vitae continentes ad gloriam ipsius in diem Christi. Scilicet quo dominus noster Iesus Christus veniens videat profecisse doctrinam eius in nobis; et quia non in vacuum cucurrit nec in vacuum laboravit, retribuat ei debitam coronam. Et rursus quoque in eadem epistula commonet nos, ne terrena sapiamus, sed conversationem nostram debere esse in caelis; unde et salvatorem expectamus dominum nostrum Iesum Christum. Et quoniam nobis non est tutum scire ultimum diem, designavit in epistula quam scribit ad Thessalonicenses: De temporibus autem et momentis, fratres, non habetis opus ut aliquid vobis scribam; ipsi enim diligenter scitis quia dies domini, sicut fur in nocte, ita veniet. Et quomodo nunc adstat iste, persuadens et rogans unumquemque Manichaeum effici et circumvenit et ingreditur domos, decipere quaerens animas oneratas peccatis? Sed nos non ita sentimus; quin potius res ipsas proferamus in medium et conferamus, si placet, ad perfectum paracletum. Videtis enim quia interdum poenitet, interdum interrogat, nonnumquam deprecatur. Sed scriptum est in euangelio salvatoris nostri quia et illi qui a sinistris regis adsistunt dicant: Domine, quando te vidimus esurientem aut sitientem aut nudum aut peregrinum aut in carcere et non ministravimus tibi? rogantes ut sibi indulgeret; sed quid illis respondit rex iustus iudex? Discedite a me in ignem aeternum, operarii iniquitatis. Abiecit eos in aeternum ignem, cum illi rogare non cessent. Videsne quid sit perfecti regis adventus? non talem qualem tu adseris perfectionem. Quod si post istum expectandus est magnus iudicii dies, multo utique hic illo inferior est. Quod si inferior erit, perfectus non erit. Si perfectus non erit, non de ipso dicit apostolus. Quod si non de ipso dicit apostolus, iste autem de se dictum esse mentitur, pseudopropheta utique iudicandus est. Sed et multa alia horum similia dici possunt, quae si omnia persequi velimus, nullum nobis tempus ad omnia explenda sufficiet. Unde abundare existimavi de multis pauca dixisse, reliquas partes tractatus huius plenius exequi volentibus derelinquens. ### English translation (Claude) "And I count Marcion and Valentinian and Basilides and the other heretics blessed, as compared with this man; they used some understanding, they seemed to themselves able to understand all Scripture, and so they set themselves up as leaders for those who were willing to listen to them. Yet none of them dared to proclaim himself God or Christ or the Paraclete, as this man does, who at one time discourses about the ages, at another about the sun, how they were made, as though he himself were greater than they; for everyone who sets out how something was made shows himself greater and older than the thing he speaks of. And who would dare to speak even of the substance of God, except only our Lord Jesus Christ? I do not build these things up from my own words, but confirm them by the authority of the Scripture that has taught us. For the apostle too says to us: 'That you may be like lights in this world, holding fast the word of life, for my glory in the day of Christ, because I did not run in vain nor labour in vain.' We must understand the force and meaning of this saying; for the word holds the place of a general, the works that of the king. As someone, when his king is arriving, is eager to show all who are under his care obedient, ready and dear and cheerful and devoted, and also innocent and abounding in all good things, so that he himself may win praise from the king and be held worthy of greater honour by him, as having governed well the province entrusted to him, so too the blessed Paul says to us: 'That you may be like lights in this world, holding fast the word of life, for his glory in the day of Christ,' namely, that our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming may see that his teaching has advanced in us, and, because he did not run in vain nor labour in vain, may give him the crown that is due. "And again in the same letter he also warns us not to set our minds on earthly things, but that our way of life ought to be in heaven, from where we also await a Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ. And since it is not safe for us to know the last day, he indicated this in the letter he writes to the Thessalonians: 'Concerning the times and seasons, brothers, you have no need that I write anything to you; for you yourselves know well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.' And how does this man now stand here, persuading and asking each one to become a Manichee, and going round and entering houses, seeking to deceive souls weighed down with sins? But we do not think so; rather let us bring the facts themselves into the open and compare them, if you please, with the perfect Paraclete. For you see that sometimes he repents, sometimes he asks questions, sometimes he pleads. But it is written in the Gospel of our Saviour that those also who stand at the king's left will say: 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or naked or a stranger or in prison, and did not minister to you?' asking him to pardon them. But what did the king, the just judge, answer them? 'Depart from me into the eternal fire, workers of iniquity.' He cast them into the eternal fire, though they did not stop pleading. Do you see what the coming of the perfect king is? Not such a perfection as you assert. And if after this man the great day of judgment is to be awaited, he is surely much inferior to it. And if he is inferior, he will not be perfect. If he is not perfect, the apostle does not speak of him. And if the apostle does not speak of him, but he lies that it was said of him, he must surely be judged a false prophet. Many other things like these could be said; if we wanted to go through them all, no time would be enough for us to complete them all. So I thought it more than enough to have said a few things out of many, leaving the remaining parts of this treatise to those who wish to pursue them more fully." ### Scripture references - Phil 2:15–16: quotation, high confidence - Phil 3:19–20: allusion, high confidence - 1 Thess 5:1–2: quotation, high confidence - 2 Tim 3:6: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 25:44: quotation, high confidence - Matt 25:41: quotation, high confidence - Luke 13:27: quotation, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Phil 2:15–16; Phil 3:19–20; 1 Thess 5:1–2; 2 Tim 3:6; Matt 25:41, 44; Luke 13:27. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 42 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/42). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 43 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38/#p-43 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: The crowd drives Manes away; the narrator notes that the debate was written down at Marcellus's wish; Turbo is ordained deacon, and Manes flees to the village of Diodorus, whose presbyter writes to Archelaus. ### Latin text His auditis dederunt gloriam deo inmensam et ipso dignam; Archelaum vero multis honoribus adfecerunt. Tunc Marcellus, adsurgens et stola se exuens, circumdat Archelaum atque osculis eum defixus amplectitur et inhaeret. Tunc vero infantes, qui forte convenerant primi, Manem pellere ac fugare coeperunt, quos turba reliqua insecuta concitavit se ad efifusrandum Manen. Quod cum pervidisset Archelaus, elevata in modum tubae voce sua, multitudinem cupiens cohibere ait: Cessate, fratres dilecti, ne forte rei sanguinis inveniamur in die iudicii ; scriptum est enim de talibus quia oportet et hereses esse inter vos, ut qui probati sunt manifesti fiant inter vos. Et his dictis sedatae sunt turbae. Quoniam vero placuit Marcello disputationem hanc excipi atque describi, contradicere non potui, confisus de benignitate legentium quod veniam dabunt, si quid inperitum aut rusticum sonabit oratio; hoc enim tantum est quod studemus, ut rei gestae cognitio studiosum quemque non lateat. Tunc ergo, cum effugisset Manes, nusquam conparuit. Turbo vero minister Archelao traditur a Marcello, quem cum diaconum Archelaus ordinasset, in Marcelli contubernio perseveravit. Manes autem fugiens advenit ad quendam vicum longe ab urbe positum, qui appellabatur Diodori. Erat autem presbyter loci illius nomine et ipse Diodorus, quietus et mitis, fidei ac famae bonae valde; et cum quadam die Manes, congregata turba, contionaretur ac peregrina quaedam et aliena a paterna traditione populo qui adstabat adsereret, nullum ex his omnino formidans, quod sibi possit obsistere, Diodorus videns proficere eius nequitiam deliberat Archelao mittere epistulam continentem haec. ### English translation (Claude) When they heard this, they gave glory to God, immense and worthy of him, and showed Archelaus many honours. Then Marcellus, rising and taking off his robe, put it around Archelaus, embraced him, fastened on him with kisses, and clung to him. Then the children, who happened to have gathered first, began to drive Manes away and put him to flight; the rest of the crowd followed them and roused itself to chase Manes off. When Archelaus saw this, raising his voice like a trumpet, wishing to restrain the multitude, he said: "Stop, beloved brothers, lest we be found guilty of blood on the day of judgment; for it is written of such men that there must be heresies among you, so that those who are approved may be made manifest among you." And with these words the crowds were calmed. Since it pleased Marcellus that this disputation should be taken down and written out, I could not refuse, trusting in the kindness of my readers that they will pardon me if the speech sounds unskilled or rustic; for this is all we are eager for, that the knowledge of what took place should not be hidden from anyone who is eager to learn. Then Manes, having fled, appeared nowhere. Turbo was handed over by Marcellus to Archelaus as his minister, and when Archelaus had ordained him deacon, he remained in Marcellus's household. Manes, fleeing, came to a certain village far from the city, which was called Diodorus's. The presbyter of that place was himself also named Diodorus, a quiet and gentle man, of very good faith and reputation. And when one day Manes had gathered a crowd and was haranguing them, asserting to the people who stood by certain strange things foreign to the tradition of the fathers, fearing no one at all who could oppose him, Diodorus, seeing his wickedness advance, decided to send Archelaus a letter containing the following. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 11:19: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 1 Cor 11:19. The narrator speaks in the first person ("I could not refuse"); the work is traditionally ascribed to Hegemonius. In "roused itself to chase Manes off" the scan's "efifusrandum" is unclear (perhaps for "effugandum"); translated by sense. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 43 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/43). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 44 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38/#p-44 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Diodorus writes to Archelaus that Manes is teaching that the law of Moses comes from the evil prince, and lists the contrasts Manes draws between the law and the Gospel. ### Latin text Archelao episcopo Diodorus salutem dicit. Scire te volo, religiosissime pater, quoniam advenit quidam in diebus istis nomine Manes ad loca nostra, qui novi testamenti doctrinam se adinplere promittit. Et quidem erant quaedam in his quae ab eo dicebantur nostrae fidei, quaedam vero adserebat longe diversa ab iis quae ad nos paterna traditione descendunt. Interpretabatur enim quaedam aliene, quibus etiam ex propriis addebat, quae mihi valde peregrina visa sunt et infida. Pro quibus etiam permotus sum scribere haec ad te, sciens doctrinae tuae perfectum et plenissimum sensum, quoniam latere te horum nihil potest; et ideo confisus sum ad explananda nobis haec invidia te non posse prohiberi. Quamvis nee ego quidem in alterum aliquem inclinari potuerim sensum, tamen propter simplices quosque tuae auctoritatis conpulsus sum inplorare sermonem. Re vera enim vir valde vehemens tam sermone quam opere, sed et adspectu ipso atque habitu adparet. Sed et pauca quaedam, (quae) retinere possum ex iis quae ab eo dicta sunt, scribo tibi sciens quia ex iis etiam reliqua intelleges. Nosti quia morem hunc habent qui dogma aliquod adserere volunt, ut quaecumque voluerint de scripturis adsumere, haec propensius sui intellegentia depravent. Sed hos praeveniens apostolicus sermo denotat dicens: Si quis vobis adnuntiaverit praeterquam quod accepistis, anathema sit. Itaque post haec quae semel ab apostolis tradita sunt ultra non oportet quicquam aliud suscipere discipulum Christi. Verum ne sermonem longius protraham, ad propositum redeo. Legem Moysi, ut breviter dicam, dicebat hic non esse dei boni, sed maligni principis nec habere eam quicquam cognationis ad novam legem Christi, sed esse contrariam et inimicam, alteram alteri obsistentem. Ego audiens dicebam ei sermonem euangelicum, quomodo dixit dominus noster Iesus Christus: Non veni solvere legem, sed adinplere. Ille vero ait nequaquam eum hunc dixisse sermonem; cum enim ipsam inveniamus eum resolvisse legem, necesse est nos hoc potius intellegere quod fecit. Deinde coepit dicere plurima ex lege, multa etiam de euangelio et apostolo Paulo, quae sibi viderentur esse contraria, quae etiam cum fiducia dicens nihil pertimescit, credo quod habeat adiutorem draconem illum qui nobis semper inimicus est. Dicebat ergo quod ibi dixerit deus: Ego divitem et pauperem facio; hic vero Iesus beatos diceret pauperes. Addebat etiam quod nemo possit eius esse discipulus, nisi renuntiaret omnibus quae haberet; ibi vero Moyses argentum et aurum ab Aegyptiis sumens cum populo fugisset ex Aegypto; Iesus autem nihil proximi desiderandum esse praeceperit. Deinde quod ille oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente in lege cavisset expendi; noster vero dominus percutienti unam maxillam iuberet etiam alteram praeparari. Quod ibi Moyses eum qui sabbato opus fecisset et non permansisset in omnibus quae scripta sunt in lege puniri lapidarique praeceperit, sicut factum est ei, qui adhuc ignorans in sabbato fascem ligni collegerat; lesus vero in sabbato etiam lectum portare praecepit a se curato, sed et discipulos in die sabbati vellere spicas ac manibus confricare non prohibet, quod sabbatis utique fieri non licebat. ### English translation (Claude) "Diodorus to Bishop Archelaus, greeting. I want you to know, most religious father, that in these days a certain man named Manes has come to our parts, who promises that he fulfils the teaching of the New Testament. And some of the things he said were of our faith, but some he asserted were far different from those which have come down to us by the tradition of the fathers. For he interpreted some things in a strange way, and added to them things of his own, which seemed to me very foreign and faithless. Because of these things I was moved to write this to you, knowing the perfect and most full sense of your teaching, since nothing of these things can be hidden from you; and so I am confident that you cannot be kept by ill will from explaining these things to us. Although I myself could not be inclined to any other opinion, yet for the sake of the simple I have been compelled to beg the word of your authority. For indeed he appears a very forceful man, both in word and in deed, and also in his very look and dress. I write to you a few things, (which) I can remember of what he said, knowing that from these you will understand the rest too. "You know that those who want to assert some doctrine have this habit: whatever they wish to take from the Scriptures, they twist rather readily by their own understanding. But the apostolic word anticipates them and marks them, saying: 'If anyone proclaims to you anything besides what you have received, let him be accursed.' So after what has once been handed down by the apostles, a disciple of Christ must not receive anything else. But not to draw the letter out at length, I return to my purpose. He said, to put it briefly, that the law of Moses is not of the good God but of the evil prince, and that it has no kinship at all with the new law of Christ, but is contrary and hostile, the one opposing the other. When I heard this, I told him the word of the Gospel, how our Lord Jesus Christ said: 'I have not come to abolish the law, but to fulfil it.' But he said that he had by no means said this word; for since we find that he did abolish the law itself, we must rather understand what he did. Then he began to cite very many things from the law, and many also from the Gospel and the apostle Paul, which seemed to him to be contrary; and he says these things with confidence and fears nothing; I believe it is because he has as his helper that dragon who is always our enemy. "He said, then, that there God said: 'I make rich and poor'; but here Jesus called the poor blessed. He added also that no one can be his disciple unless he renounces all that he has; but there Moses, taking silver and gold from the Egyptians, fled with the people from Egypt; while Jesus commanded that nothing of one's neighbour is to be desired. Then, that the one provided in the law that an eye be paid for an eye and a tooth for a tooth; while our Lord commanded that to one who strikes one cheek the other also be offered. That there Moses commanded that the man who had done work on the sabbath and had not continued in all that is written in the law be punished and stoned, as was done to him who, still in ignorance, had gathered a bundle of wood on the sabbath; while Jesus commanded the man he had healed to carry his bed even on the sabbath, and did not forbid his disciples on the sabbath day to pluck ears of grain and rub them in their hands, which was certainly not lawful on sabbaths. ### Scripture references - Gal 1:9: quotation, high confidence - Matt 5:17: quotation, high confidence - 1 Sam 2:7: quotation, high confidence - Matt 5:3: allusion, high confidence - Luke 6:20: allusion, high confidence - Luke 14:33: allusion, high confidence - Exod 12:35–36: allusion, high confidence - Exod 20:17: allusion, medium confidence - Exod 21:24: quotation, high confidence - Matt 5:38–39: allusion, high confidence - Gal 3:10: allusion, medium confidence - Num 15:32–36: allusion, high confidence - John 5:8–10: allusion, high confidence - Matt 12:1–2: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - Manes's contrasts between Moses and Jesus are reported by Diodorus as Manes made them. Scripture: Gal 1:9; Matt 5:17; 1 Sam 2:7; Matt 5:3 and Luke 6:20; Luke 14:33; Exod 12:35–36; Exod 20:17; Exod 21:24 and Matt 5:38–39; Gal 3:10 (Deut 27:26); Num 15:32–36; John 5:8–10; Matt 12:1–2. The letter continues in the next chapter. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 44 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/44). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 45 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/38/#p-45 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Diodorus reports Manes's use of 2 Corinthians 3, Galatians, and Romans against the law, and asks Archelaus to answer. ### Latin text Et quid plura dicam? multis et variis adsertionibus huiuscemodi dogmata ab eo summo nisu atque summo studio adfirmabantur. Nam ex auctoritate apostoli Moysi legem legem esse mortis conabatur adserere; Iesu vero legem legem esse vitae, per id quod ait: In quo et idoneos nos fecit deus ministros novi testamenti non littera, sed spiritu. Littera enim occidit, spiritus autem vivificat. Quod si ministerium mortis in litteris formatum in lapidibus factum est in gloria, ita ut non possent intendere filii Istrahel in faciem Moysi propter gloriam vultus eius, quae destruitur, quomodo non magis ministerium spiritus erit in gloria? Si enim ministerium damnationis gloria est, multo magis abundabit ministerium iustitiae ad gloriam. Neque enim glorificatum est quod gloriosum factum est in hac parte, propter eam quae supereminet gloriam; si enim quod destruitur per gloriam, multo magis quod manet in gloria est. Sed haec quidem, sicut ipse nosti, in secunda ad Corinthios epistula. Addit autem ex prima epistula, terrenos esse dicens discipulos veteris testamenti et animales et ideo carnem et sanguinem regnum dei possidere non posse. Ipsum quoque Paulum ex propria sua persona dicebat adserere id quod ait: Si ea quae destruxi iterum aedifico, praevaricatorem me constituo; sed et illud eundem ipsum evidentissime de carnis circumcisione dixisse; non esse ludaeum eum qui (in manifesto est neque quae) in manifesto in carne est circumcisio neque secundum litteram legem quicquam utilitatis retinere. Et rursum quod Abraham habet gloriam, sed non apud deum; tantummodo agnitionem peccati per legem fieri. Sed et alia multa legi obtrectans inserebat, eo quod lex ipsa peccatum sit, in quibus simplices quique, dicente eo, movebantur; et usque ad Iohannem igitur aiebat lex et prophetae; aiebat autem lohannem regnum caelorum praedicare, nam et abscisione capitis eius hoc esse indicatum quod, Omnibus prioribus et superioribus eius abscisis, posteriore sola servanda sint. Ad haec igitur nobis, o religiosissime Archelae, paucis rescribe; audivi enim non mediocre tibi esse in talibus studium; dei enim donum est idcirco quod dignis et amicis suis sibique propositi societate coniunctis deus donat haec munera. Nostrum enim est propositum praeparare et proximos fieri benignae ac diviti menti, et continuo ab ea largissima munera consequimur. Quoniam ergo in iis voto et proposito meo sermonis non sufficit eruditio (idiotam enim me esse confiteor) ad te misi, sicut saepius dixi, quaestionis huius exolutionem plenissimam recepturus. Incolumis mihi esto, pater inconparabilis et honorabilis. ### English translation (Claude) "And why should I say more? Doctrines of this kind were affirmed by him with many and various assertions, with the utmost effort and zeal. For on the authority of the apostle he tried to assert that the law of Moses is a law of death, but the law of Jesus a law of life, through what he says: 'Who has also made us competent ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the spirit; for the letter kills, but the spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, formed in letters on stones, came in glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, which was being done away, how will the ministry of the spirit not be more in glory? For if the ministry of condemnation is glory, much more will the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. For what was made glorious has not been glorified in this respect, because of the glory that surpasses it; for if what is being done away came through glory, much more what remains is in glory.' But this, as you know, is in the second letter to the Corinthians. And he adds from the first letter, saying that the disciples of the Old Testament are earthly and natural, and that therefore flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God. He said too that Paul himself asserted in his own person what he says: 'If I build again what I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor'; and that the same apostle most evidently said of circumcision of the flesh that he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh (that is outward, nor is that which), and that the law according to the letter retains no usefulness at all. And again, that Abraham has glory, but not before God; and that only knowledge of sin comes through the law. "And he put in many other things too in disparagement of the law, as that the law itself is sin; and by these the simple were moved as he spoke. And he said that the law and the prophets were until John; and he said that John preached the kingdom of heaven, and that by the cutting off of his head it was indicated that, all the former and earlier things being cut off, only the later are to be kept. To these things, then, most religious Archelaus, write back to us briefly; for I have heard that your zeal in such matters is not small. For it is a gift of God, since God gives these gifts to those who are worthy and his friends, joined to him in fellowship of purpose. For it is ours to prepare our purpose and to draw near to a kind and rich mind, and at once we obtain the most generous gifts from it. Since, then, the learning of my speech is not equal to my wish and purpose (for I confess that I am unlearned), I have sent to you, as I have often said, to receive the fullest solution of this question. Farewell, incomparable and honourable father." ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 3:6–11: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:47–50: allusion, high confidence - Gal 2:18: quotation, high confidence - Rom 2:28–29: allusion, high confidence - Rom 4:2: allusion, high confidence - Rom 3:20: allusion, high confidence - Rom 7:7: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 11:13: allusion, high confidence - Luke 16:16: allusion, high confidence - Matt 14:10: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Manes's arguments are reported by Diodorus as Manes made them. Scripture: 2 Cor 3:6–11; 1 Cor 15:47–50; Gal 2:18; Rom 2:28–29; Rom 4:2; Rom 3:20; Rom 7:7; Matt 11:13 and Luke 16:16; Matt 14:10. In the phrase about outward circumcision the editor's bracketed words "(that is outward, nor is that which)" are translated as printed; the sentence is awkward in the Latin. Beeson's apparatus and running heads ("Acta Archel. XLV. XLVI") mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 45 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/45). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 46 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46/#p-46 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus replies to Diodorus that the Old and New Testaments are one fabric, and that Moses was a tutor and foster-father who handed God's people over to Christ, as the parable of the rich man shows. ### Latin text Accepta hac epistula, Archelaus admiratus est hominis audaciam; sed interim Diodori allegationibus, ut res suadebat celerem dare responsum, continuo scripsit hoc modo. Archelaus Diodoro presbytero filio honorabili, salutem. Acceptis litteris tuis, valde gavisus sum, dilectissime. Agnovi autem quod vir iste, qui ante hos dies ad me venerat et scientiam aliam praeter eam quae apostolica est et ecclesiastica introducere cupiebat, ad te quoque venerit; quem quidem ego non admisi, in praesenti enim nobis disputantibus confutatus est. Et velim quidem omnia quae a me dicta sunt scribere tibi, ut ex his agnosceres fidem eius; sed quia hoc de vacanti fieri poterit nunc quod instat paucis respondere tibi necessarium duxi ad ea quae mihi scripsisti quod ab illo dicerentur. Erat ergo ei summum studium legem Moysi ostendere non esse consonantem legi Christi et haec ex nostris scripturis adseverare temptabat. Nos vero ex eadem ipsa scriptura non solum confirmavimus legem Moysi et omnia quae in ea scripta sunt, verum etiam omne vetus testamentum convenire novo testamento et consonare probavimus unumque esse textum, tamquam si una vestis videatur ex subtemine atque stamine esse contexta. Hoc solum, quod velut purpuram videmus in veste, novum testamentum in textura veteris testamenti ; gloriam enim domini in eodem speculamur. Non ergo abiciendum est speculum, cum nobis ipsam imaginem rerum similem veramque demonstret; quin potius et eo amplius honorandum est. Sed et puerum qui ad doctores a pedagogo perducitur cum adhuc parvulus est, numquid, cum ad aetatem pervenerit, dehonorare oportet pedagogum propter quod iam opera eius non indiget et potest solus iam sine eius adminiculo ad scolas pergere atque ad auditoria properare? Aut rursum parvulus qui lacte nutritus est, cum profecerit ad validiores cibos, cum iniuria debet abicere atque exhorrescere nutricis mamillas? quin potius veneratur et colit et beneficii sui debitorem fatetur. Aliud etiam, si videtur, adhibeamus exemplum. Homo quidam proiectum in terram cum vidisset infantem et iam vehementer adflictum, collegit eum et nutrire apud se coepit, usquequo ad aetatem adulescentiae perveniret toleravitque omnes qui evenire solent nutritoribus labores. Accedit vero post tempus is qui naturalis ei fuerat pater requirere puerum et invenit eum apud illum qui nutrierat. Quid faciat hic puer, patre cognito? de iusto enim puero mihi sermo est. Nonne multis donis munerato eo qui se educaverat, sequitur naturalem patrem prospectu hereditatis? Ita mihi intellegendum est magnificum dei famulum Moysen invenisse populum adflictum ab Aegyptiis, quem adsumptum nutriebat in deserto tamquam pater, edocebat ut magister, regebat ut rector. Conservavit populum usquequo veniret cuius est, et post aliquantum tempus adveniens pater proprias oves recepit. Nonne per omnia honorabitur quidem ab eo cui tradidit gregem, glorificabitur vero ab iis ipsis qui ab eo conservati sunt? Quis igitur ita mentis insanae est, o dilectissime Diodore, ut alienos a se dicat eos qui inter se coniuncti sunt, qui pro se invicem prophetarunt, qui aequalia et sibi similia atque cognata, immo potius germana signa ac prodigia demonstrarunt? Et primo quidem Moyses ad populum dixit: Prophetam vobis suscitabit dominus deus vester sicut me. Deinde Iesus ait: De me enim Moyses locutus est. Vide quomodo dexteras sibi invicem tradunt, quam alter propheta, alter vero filius sit dilectus; alter fidelis famulus, alter vero dominus agnoscatur. Sed et quondam volens quis sine pedagogo ire ad scolas non suscipitur a magistro dicente: Non eum suscipiam, nisi acceperit pedagogum. Qui sit autem de quo dicimus breviter exponam. Homo quidam erat dives, gentiliter vivens, in multa luxuria cotidie degens; alius vero pauper erat vicinus eius, qui nec cotidianum quidem cibum poterat invenire. Accidit utrumque vita discedere et in infernum descendere et pauperem mitti in locum requiei et reliqua quae nosti. Verum tamen erant diviti fratres quinque, ea quae et ipse egerat agentes, sine dubio quae domi a tali magistro didicissent. Rogavit dives simul uno tempore ut ediscerent maiorem doctrinam; Abraham vero sciens quoniam adhuc indigent pedagogo, ait ei: Habent Moysen et prophetas. Si enim illos non susceperint, ut ab eo velut pedagogo gubernentur, non poterunt maioris magistri capere doctrinam. ### English translation (Claude) When he had received this letter, Archelaus was amazed at the man's audacity; but meanwhile, since the matter urged him to give a swift answer to Diodorus's pleas, he at once wrote in this way: "Archelaus to Diodorus, presbyter, honourable son, greeting. On receiving your letter I was very glad, dearest one. I learned that this man, who a few days ago came to me wanting to introduce a knowledge other than the apostolic and ecclesiastical one, has come to you too. I did not admit him; for he was refuted in our presence as we disputed. And I would like to write you everything I said, so that from it you might know his faith; but since this can be done at leisure, for now I have thought it necessary to answer briefly what you wrote me was being said by him. "His chief zeal, then, was to show that the law of Moses is not in harmony with the law of Christ, and he tried to assert this from our own Scriptures. But we, from that same Scripture, not only confirmed the law of Moses and everything written in it, but also proved that the whole Old Testament agrees and harmonizes with the New Testament and that they are one fabric, as if one garment were seen to be woven of woof and warp. Only this, that we see the New Testament like purple in the garment, in the weave of the Old Testament; for we behold the glory of the Lord in the same as in a mirror. So the mirror is not to be thrown away, since it shows us the very image of things, like and true; rather it is to be honoured all the more. And a boy who is brought to the teachers by a tutor while he is still small, when he has come of age, ought he to dishonour the tutor because he no longer needs his services and can now go to school and hurry to the lecture halls alone without his help? Or again, a little child who has been fed on milk, when he has advanced to stronger food, should he insultingly cast off and shudder at his nurse's breasts? Rather he venerates and honours her and confesses himself her debtor for her kindness. "Let us use another example too, if you please. A certain man, seeing an infant thrown out on the ground and already badly suffering, picked him up and began to rear him at his home until he reached the age of youth, and endured all the toils that usually befall those who rear children. After a time the one who had been his natural father comes to look for the boy, and finds him with the man who had reared him. What should this boy do, when he has recognized his father? (For I am speaking of a just boy.) Will he not, after rewarding with many gifts the man who brought him up, follow his natural father in view of the inheritance? So I must understand that the magnificent servant of God, Moses, found a people afflicted by the Egyptians, took them up, and reared them in the desert like a father, taught them like a master, ruled them like a governor. He preserved the people until the one should come to whom it belongs, and after some time the father came and received his own sheep. Will he not in every way be honoured by the one to whom he handed over the flock, and glorified by those very ones who were preserved by him? Who, then, is of so insane a mind, dearest Diodorus, as to call strangers to each other those who are joined together, who prophesied for each other, who showed equal, like, and kindred, indeed rather brotherly, signs and wonders? First Moses said to the people: 'The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me.' Then Jesus said: 'For Moses spoke of me.' See how they give each other their right hands, though one is a prophet and the other the beloved Son, one is recognized as a faithful servant and the other as Lord. "And again, someone who wishes to go to school without a tutor is not received by the master, who says: 'I will not receive him unless he has taken a tutor.' Who it is of whom we speak I will set out briefly. There was a certain rich man, living like a pagan, spending every day in great luxury; and another, a poor man, was his neighbour, who could not find even his daily food. It happened that both departed this life and went down to the underworld, and that the poor man was sent to a place of rest, and the rest that you know. Now the rich man had five brothers, doing the things he too had done, no doubt what they had learned at home from such a teacher. The rich man asked that they might at once learn a greater teaching; but Abraham, knowing that they still needed a tutor, said to him: 'They have Moses and the prophets.' For if they do not receive them, so as to be guided by him as by a tutor, they will not be able to take in the teaching of the greater master." ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 3:18: allusion, medium confidence - Gal 3:24–25: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 3:2: allusion, medium confidence - Deut 18:15: quotation, high confidence - John 5:46: quotation, high confidence - Heb 3:5–6: allusion, high confidence - Luke 16:19–31: allusion, high confidence - Luke 16:29: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 2 Cor 3:18; Gal 3:23–25; 1 Cor 3:2; Deut 18:15; John 5:46; Heb 3:5–6; Luke 16:19–31. Beeson's apparatus and running head mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 46 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 47 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46/#p-47 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus answers Manes's contrasts: Jesus' teaching on retaliation advances from justice to goodness, the spoiling of Egypt was just wages, and Jesus too accepts gifts from the rich. ### Latin text Sed et de aliis sermonibus, ut potero, exponam; id est quod non contraria Moysi locutus est lesus aut fecit. Primum quidem quod ait oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente, hoc iustum est; quod autem caesum praestare iubet et alteram maxillam, hoc bonitas est. Numquid iustitia bonitati contraria est? Absit; profectus autem est de iustitia ad bonitatem. Et rursus: Dignus est operarius mercede sua. Quod si voluerit quis fraudem facere, exige ab eo illa quae fraude interceperat: iustissimum est, maxime cum multa sit merces. Hoc autem dico, quando Aegyptii adfligebant filios Istrahel per operum conpulsores in fingendis lateribus, quod cum suppliciis Moyses totum pariter intra unum momentum temporis exegit, numquid hoc iniquitas appellanda est? Absit. Illa sane bonitatis est abstinentia, cum utitur quis frugaliter, renuntians Omnibus quae superflua sunt. Quod vero in veteri testamento dictum est: Ego divitem facio et pauperem, Iesus vero beatificat pauperes. non dixit saeculari substantia pauperes, sed pauperes spiritu, id est qui non superbia inflammantur, sed humilitate se mitigant et inclinant, non plus sapientes quam oportet sapere. Quam quidem adversarius quaestionem non conpetenter aptavit. Hic enim video et Iesum libenter intuentem divitum munera, cum in gazophylacio offeruntur; et parum hoc est, si a solis divitibus in gazophylacio munera offeruntur; immo vero etiam duo minuta pauperculae viduae libenter suscipiuntur, in quo amplius aliquid quam quod Moyses praeceperat de suscipienda pecunia demonstratur. Ille enim ab his tantummodo qui habebant accipiebat; hic autem accipit etiam ab his qui non habent. Sed ait, scriptum est: Nisi quis renuntiaverit omnibus quae possidet, non potest esse meus discipulus. Rursum video centurionem valde divitem et saeculari praeditum potestate fidem habere plus quam omnem Istrahel; ut si quis fuerit, etiam qui renuntiaverat, a centurione superaretur in fide. Sed dicet nobis quis: Non est ergo bonum renuntiare divitiis? Bonum, inquam, his qui possunt; sed et abuti divitiis ad opus iustitiae atque misericordiae parem gratiam tribuit ac si universis pariter renuntietur. ### English translation (Claude) "I will also explain the other sayings as well as I can, that is, that Jesus did not say or do things contrary to Moses. First, that he said 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth': this is just; but that he commands one who has been struck to offer the other cheek too: this is goodness. Is justice contrary to goodness? Far from it; rather, there is an advance from justice to goodness. And again: 'The worker is worthy of his wages.' If someone wants to defraud him, demand from him what he had taken by fraud: this is most just, especially when the wages are large. I say this of when the Egyptians afflicted the sons of Israel through taskmasters in making bricks: when Moses, together with punishments, exacted all of it at once within a single moment of time, is this to be called iniquity? Far from it. That indeed is the abstinence of goodness, when one lives frugally, renouncing all that is superfluous. And as for what was said in the Old Testament, 'I make rich and poor,' while Jesus calls the poor blessed: he did not say poor in worldly substance, but poor in spirit, that is, those who are not inflamed with pride but soften and bow themselves in humility, not thinking more highly than they ought to think. The adversary did not apply this question fittingly. "For here I see Jesus too gladly looking at the gifts of the rich, when they are offered into the treasury; and this is little, if gifts are offered into the treasury by the rich alone; no, even the two small coins of the poor widow are gladly received, in which something more is shown than what Moses had commanded about receiving money. For he received only from those who had; but this one receives even from those who do not have. But, he says, it is written: 'Unless one renounces all that he possesses, he cannot be my disciple.' Again, I see a centurion, very rich and endowed with worldly power, having faith more than all Israel; so that if there were anyone, even one who had renounced, he would be surpassed in faith by the centurion. But someone will say to us: 'Is it not good, then, to renounce riches?' It is good, I say, for those who can; but using riches for the work of justice and mercy also brings equal grace, as if everything were renounced alike." ### Scripture references - Exod 21:24: quotation, high confidence - Matt 5:38–39: allusion, high confidence - Luke 10:7: quotation, high confidence - Exod 1:13–14: allusion, medium confidence - Exod 12:35–36: allusion, high confidence - 1 Sam 2:7: quotation, high confidence - Matt 5:3: allusion, high confidence - Rom 12:3: allusion, high confidence - Mark 12:41–44: allusion, high confidence - Luke 21:1–4: allusion, medium confidence - Luke 14:33: quotation, high confidence - Matt 8:5–10: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Exod 21:24; Matt 5:38–39; Luke 10:7 and Matt 10:10; Exod 1:11–14; Exod 12:35–36; 1 Sam 2:7; Matt 5:3; Rom 12:3; Mark 12:41–44 and Luke 21:1–4; Luke 14:33; Matt 8:5–10. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 47 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/47). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 48 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46/#p-48 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus argues that Christ, Lord of the sabbath, did not destroy it, and that he fulfilled circumcision by circumcision of the heart, which alone saves, while not condemning the fleshly rite. ### Latin text De eo autem quod dicit, destructum esse sabbatum, non plane destruxit; ipse enim dominus erat sabbati; tamquam si sponsi quis custodiens torum diligenter extructum, a nullo alio extraneo vexari vel contingi patiatur usquequo ipse sponsus adveniat, et cum advenerit, strato suo sicut libuerit utatur vel hi quos ipse secum iusserit introire. Testimonium etiam dedit his quae dicimus caelesti voce ipse dominus Iesus Christus dicens: Numquid potestis filios sponsi facere ieiunare, donec cum ipsis est sponsus? Sed circumcisionem non abiecit, quin potius ipse pro nobis in semet ipsum causam circumcisionis excepit, labore nos relevans et pati nos frustra doloris aliquid non sinens. Quid enim prodest circumcidenti se quidem et adversum proximum suum pessima cogitanti? Voluit autem magis largissimae viae spatia conpendioso nobis tramite demonstrare, ne forte, dum longa spatia circuimus, ante nobis dies claudatur in noctem et dum deforis quidem splendidi hominibus adparemus, intrinsecus lupis rapacibus conparemur aut sepulchris conferamur dealbatis. Multo enim ille huic praeferendus est qui veste squalida ac detrita circumdatus nihil mali in corde suo conclusum retinet adversum proximum suum. Cordis enim circumcisio sola salutem confert; nihil praestat eis ista carnalis, nisi forte spirituali circumcisione muniantur. Audi etiam quid dicit scriptura: Beati mundi corde, quoniam ipsi deum videbunt. Quid ergo mihi opus est laborare, cum cognoverim conpendia viae, si possum mundus esse corde sicut et si quis praevaleat in duobus mandatis omnem legem inplere et prophetas? Post haec vero omnia edocet apostolorum maximus Paulus dicens: Aut experimentum quaeritis eius qui in me loquitur Christus? Quid ergo mihi opus est circumcisione, cum possim et in praeputio iustificari? Et scriptum est: Si quis circumcisus est, non adducat praeputium, aut si quis in praeputio est, non circumcidatur. Utrumque enim nihil est, nisi observatio mandatorum dei. Cum ergo nullum possit salvare circumcisio, nec magno opere requirenda est; maxime cum si quis in praeputio vocatus fuerit et circumcidi voluerit, continuo praevaricator legis efficiatur. Si enim circumcidor et mandata legis adinpleo, ut salvari possim, incircumcisus et in praeputio positus, multo magis mandata custodiens, habebo vitam. In spiritu enim circumcisionem cordis accepi, non iam litterae per atramentum, in quo laus non ex hominibus, sed ex deo est. Non ergo referatur ad me huiuscemodi incusatio. Sicut enim aliquis dives multis auri atque argenti talentis, ita ut omne domestici usus ministerium ex huiuscemodi metallis habeat structum, in nullo vasis fictilis speciem requirit, sed non propterea figuli opus et ars aut fictilium vasorum ab eo detestanda est: ita etiam ego gratia dei dives factus sum, et cordis circumcisionem consecutus nequaquam vilissimae illius circumcisionis indigeo; nec tarnen malam esse dico. Absit. Quod si diligentius de his voluerit aliquis edoceri, inveniet haec in prima epistula apostoli plenissime pertractata. ### English translation (Claude) "As to his saying that the sabbath was destroyed: he certainly did not destroy it; for he himself was Lord of the sabbath. It is as if someone guarding a bridegroom's bed carefully made up should allow no other stranger to disturb or touch it until the bridegroom himself comes; and when he has come, he may use his couch as he pleases, he or those whom he himself orders to go in with him. The Lord Jesus Christ himself gave testimony to what we say with his heavenly voice, saying: 'Can you make the sons of the bridegroom fast while the bridegroom is with them?' Nor did he cast away circumcision; rather, he himself took on himself for us the cause of circumcision, relieving us of toil and not allowing us to suffer any pain in vain. For what does it profit one who circumcises himself and yet thinks the worst things against his neighbour? He wanted rather to show us the length of a very broad road by a short path, lest perhaps, while we go round long distances, the day should close into night before we finish, and while outwardly we appear splendid to men, inwardly we should be compared to ravenous wolves or likened to whitewashed tombs. For far to be preferred to such a man is one who, clad in a dirty and worn garment, keeps nothing evil shut in his heart against his neighbour. For circumcision of the heart alone brings salvation; that fleshly one gives them nothing unless they are also protected by spiritual circumcision. Hear also what the Scripture says: 'Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.' Why, then, do I need to toil, when I have learned the shortcuts of the road, if I can be pure in heart, just as one can, if he prevails in two commandments, fulfil the whole law and the prophets? "After all this the greatest of the apostles, Paul, teaches, saying: 'Or do you seek proof of him who speaks in me, Christ?' Why, then, do I need circumcision, when I can be justified even in uncircumcision? And it is written: 'If anyone is circumcised, let him not bring on uncircumcision; or if anyone is in uncircumcision, let him not be circumcised. For neither is anything, but the keeping of God's commandments.' Since, then, circumcision can save no one, it is not to be sought with great effort; especially since if anyone has been called in uncircumcision and wants to be circumcised, he at once becomes a transgressor of the law. For if I am circumcised and fulfil the commandments of the law so that I may be saved, then uncircumcised and placed in uncircumcision, keeping the commandments much more, I shall have life. For I have received circumcision of the heart in the spirit, no longer of the letter in ink, whose praise is not from men but from God. So let no accusation of this kind be brought against me. For as a man rich in many talents of gold and silver, so that he has the whole service of his household made of such metals, looks for no earthenware vessel at all, and yet does not on that account detest the work and craft of the potter or earthenware vessels, so I too, made rich by the grace of God, and having obtained circumcision of the heart, have no need at all of that very cheap circumcision; yet I do not say that it is evil. Far from it. And if anyone wishes to be taught more carefully about these things, he will find them most fully treated in the first letter of the apostle." ### Scripture references - Matt 12:8: allusion, high confidence - Mark 2:19: quotation, high confidence - Luke 5:34: quotation, medium confidence - Matt 7:15: allusion, high confidence - Matt 23:27: allusion, high confidence - Rom 2:29: allusion, high confidence - Matt 5:8: quotation, high confidence - Matt 22:40: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 13:3: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 7:18–19: quotation, high confidence - Gal 5:3: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 12:8; Mark 2:19, Luke 5:34, Matt 9:15; Matt 7:15; Matt 23:27; Rom 2:29; Matt 5:8; Matt 22:40; 2 Cor 13:3; 1 Cor 7:18–19; Gal 5:3. "The first letter of the apostle" is probably Romans (the first in order of Paul's letters), where circumcision is treated (uncertain). Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 48 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/48). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 49 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46/#p-49 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus explains the "ministry of death" and the veil of Moses: the lesser glory of Moses is not rejected, as a lamp is not despised at sunrise, and the veil lies over the hearts of those who read Moses without turning to Christ. ### Latin text De velamento vero Moysi et de ministerio mortis dicam sermone brevissimo. Non enim valde mihi haec insinuare aliquid adversum legem videntur. Ait ergo sermo propositus: Quod si ministerium mortis in litteris formatum in lapidibus factum est in gloria, ita ut non possent filii Istrahel intendere in faciem Moysi propter gloriam vultus eius, quae aboletur et reliqua; tamen gloriam esse confitetur in vultu Moysi, quod est amicum nobis. Quod si destruitur et velamen habet lectio eius, hoc me non exacerbat neque conturbat, si tantum in eo sit gloria. Neque vero omni genere in ignobilitatem redigitur quod destruitur. Cum enim de gloria disputat scriptura, scisse se differentias gloriae testatur; alia enim, inquit, gloria solis, alia gloria lunae, alia gloria stellarum; stella enim ab stella differt in gloria. Si enim sol maiorem habet gloriam quam luna, non continuo in ignobilitatem redigitur luna. Ita et si dominus meus Iesus Christus praecellit in gloria Moysen tamquam dominus famulum, non continuo respuenda est gloria Moysi; ita enim satis possumus facere auditoribus, sicut et verbi ipsius natura persuadet, ex scripturis quae dicimus adfirmantes vel certe etiam exemplis ea manifestius conprobantes. Si quis lucernam accenderit noctu, cum sol exortus fuerit, parvo lucernae igne non indiget propter splendorem solis ubique radiantis; sed non ideo abiecit lucernam velut contrariam soli; quin potius, conperto eius usu, etiam diligentius reservabit. Custodivit ergo populum lex Moysi tamquam lucerna, usquequo sol nobis verus salvator noster oriretur, sicut et ait: Et inluminabit tibi Christus. Sed quod dixit: Obscurati sunt sensus eorum; usque in hodiernum enim ipsum velamen manet in lectione veteris testamenti; non revelatur quia in Christo destruitur; usque in hodiernum enim, cum legitur Moyses, velamen est positum super cor eorum; cum autem conversus fuerit ad dominum, auferetur velamen; dominus autem spiritus est, quid inquit? Usque in hodiernumne praesens est Moyses, non dormivit, non requievit, non abscessit e vita? Quomodo ergo in hodiernum dicit? Sed intuere velamen, ubi dicit, positum supra cor eorum, in lectione eorum. Haec est vox quae arguit filios Istrahel legentes Moysen et non intellegentes neque convertentes se ad dominum, quoniam ipse est qui a Moyse prophetatus est venire. ### English translation (Claude) "About the veil of Moses and the ministry of death I will speak very briefly. For these things do not seem to me to suggest anything much against the law. The proposed saying, then, says: 'If the ministry of death, formed in letters on stones, came in glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, which is being done away,' and the rest; yet it confesses that there was glory in the face of Moses, which is friendly to us. And if it is being done away and its reading has a veil, this does not exasperate or trouble me, if only there is glory in it. Nor is what is being done away reduced in every way to ignominy. For when the Scripture discusses glory, it bears witness that it knows differences of glory; for, it says, there is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory. For if the sun has greater glory than the moon, the moon is not at once reduced to ignominy. So too if my Lord Jesus Christ excels Moses in glory, as a lord excels a servant, the glory of Moses is not at once to be rejected. For in this way we can satisfy our hearers, as the nature of the word itself persuades, affirming what we say from the Scriptures, or at least proving it more plainly by examples. If someone lights a lamp at night, when the sun has risen he has no need of the small flame of the lamp because of the splendour of the sun shining everywhere; but he has not on that account thrown away the lamp as contrary to the sun; rather, having found its use, he will keep it even more carefully. So the law of Moses guarded the people like a lamp, until the true sun, our Saviour, should rise for us, as he also says: 'And Christ will shine on you.' "But what he said: 'Their minds were darkened; for to this day the same veil remains in the reading of the Old Testament, not being unveiled, because in Christ it is done away; for to this day, when Moses is read, a veil is laid over their heart; but when one turns to the Lord, the veil will be taken away; now the Lord is the Spirit': what does he mean? Is Moses present to this day; did he not fall asleep, not rest, not depart from life? How, then, does he say 'to this day'? But see where he says the veil is: laid over their heart, in their reading. This is the voice that convicts the sons of Israel who read Moses and do not understand nor turn to the Lord, since he is the one whom Moses prophesied would come." ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 3:7: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:41: quotation, high confidence - Eph 5:14: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 3:14–17: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 2 Cor 3:7, 13–17; 1 Cor 15:41; Eph 5:14. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 49 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/49). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 50 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46/#p-50 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus interprets the veil as the prophecy of Gen 49:10 and Deut 18:15, fulfilled in Christ, and then lists parallels between Moses and Jesus; the letter to Diodorus closes. ### Latin text Hoc est velamen quod erat positum super faciem Moysi, quod est testamentum eius; ait enim in lege: Non deficiet princeps ex Iuda neque dux de femoribus eius, usquequo veniat cuius est; et ipse erit expectatio gentium. Qui adligabit ad vitem pullum suum et optimam vitem pullum asinae suae. Lavabit in vino stolam suam et in sanguine uvae indumentum suum. Suffusi oculi eius a vino et candidi dentes eius a lacte et reliqua. Qui etiam et unde venturus esset designavit dicens: Prophetam vobis suscitabit dominus deus ex fratribus vestris sicut me; ipsum audite. Et quidem quia non possit intellegi hoc de Iesu Nave dictum esse manifestum est. Nihil enim huius circumcisionis in ipso invenitur; adhuc enim ex luda reges fuerunt post ipsum et ideo aliena longe est ab eo haec prophetia. Et hoc est velamen quod est in Moysen; neque enim, sicut fortasse aliqui inperitorum putant, linteum aliquod aut pellis fuit, quae vultum eius operiret. Sed apostolus diligenter ostendit, dicens velamen esse positum in lectione veteris testamenti, propter quod is qui appellatur antiquitus Istrahel expectat adventare Christum, non intellegens quia defecerunt ex luda principes et ex femoribus eius duces; sicut nunc videmus regibus eos principibusque subiectos tributa pendere, nulla sibi potestate vel iudicandi vel puniendi concessa, sicut Iudas habuit, quia Thamar, postea quam condemnaverat, potuit iustificare. Sed et videbitis vitam vestram pendentem ante oculos vestros, Habet etiam hic sermo velamen. Usque ad Herodem enim ex parte aliqua regnum tenere videbantur; ab Augusto autem prima adscriptio in eis facta est et coeperunt tributa pendere et censum dare. Ex quo autem dominus meus Iesus coeptus est prophetari atque expectari, ex eo principes ex luda esse coeperunt et duces populi, qui rursum defecerunt in adventu praesentiae eius. Si ergo auferatur velamen quod in illa lectione positum est, intellegent virtutem circumcisionis, invenient et generationem eius quem praedicamus et crucem et quaecumque de domino nostro gesta sunt ipsa esse quae de eo fuerant praedicta. Et velim quidem de scripturis discutere unumquemque sermonem et ostendere, ut intellegi dignum est; sed quoniam nunc aliud est quod urget, de vacanti nobis ista dicentur; haec enim dixisse nunc sufficit, ut ostendamus non sine causa velamen positum super cor quorundam in lectione veteris testamenti. Quicumque vero ad dominum convertuntur, ab his velamen aufertur. Quae omnia quam vim habeant in sese his qui sensu vigent intellegendum relinquo. Veniamus etiam ad illum sermonem Moysi quod ait: Prophetam vobis suscitabit dominus deus vester ex fratribus vestris sicut me; in quo magnam video prophetiam famuli Moysi scientis eum qui venturus esset et amplius quidem se auctoritatis habiturum, similia tamen esse passurum et similia signa ac prodigia ostensurum. Ibi enim Moyses natus, a matre sua in tibin positus, exponitur ad ripas fluminis; hic dominus noster Iesus Christus natus ex matre sua Maria per angelum fugatur in Aegyptum. Ibi Moyses educens populum de medio Aegyptiorum salvavit; et hie Iesus populum de medio Pharisaeorum educens aeternae tradidit saluti. Ibi Moyses per orationem petens e caelo accepit panem quo pasceret populum in deserto; hic dominus meus Iesus virtute propria ex quinque panibus viros quinque milia satiavit in deserto. Ibi Moyses cum probaretur, positus in monte ieiunavit quadraginta dies; et hie dominus meus Iesus ab spiritu actus in desertum, cum temptaretur a diabolo, quadraginta diebus similiter ieiunavit. Ibi in conspectu Moysi propter infidelitatem Pharaonis omnia Aegyptiorum primogenita perierunt; et hie lesu nascente propter infidelitatem Herodis omne masculinum Iudaeorum subito periit. Ibi Moyses orat ut parcatur a plagis Pharaoni ac populo eius; et hie dominus noster Iesus orat indulgeri Pharisaeis, dicens: Pater, ignosce eis, quoniam nesciunt quid faciunt. Ibi Moysi vultus resplenduit in gloria domini, ita ut non possent filii Istrahel intendere in faciem eius propter gloriam vultus eius; et hie Iesus Christus dominus resplenduit sicut sol, et discipuli eius non poterant adspicere in faciem eius propter gloriam vultus ipsius et inmensum luminis splendorem. Ibi Moyses eos qui vitulum statuerant gladio deiecit; et hie dominus Iesus ait: Veni gladium mittere super terram et dividere hominem a proximo suo et reliqua. Ibi Moyses in caliginem nubium aquas ferentium sine metu incessit; et hie dominus Iesus cum omni potestate super aquas ambulavit. Ibi Moyses inperavit mari; et hie dominus lesus, cum esset in navi, surgens inperavit ventis et mari. Ibi Moyses cum inpugnaretur extensis manibus certavit adversum Amalech; et hie dominus Iesus, inpugnatis nobis et pereuntibus violentia erratici spiritus (qui nunc in istis operatur), extensis in cruce manibus, salutem dedit. Sed et alia multa praetereo, dilectissime Diodore, dum festino ad te libellum hunc velociter mittere, quae tu pro tua prudentia facile poteris reparare. Scribe autem mihi, carissime, quid postea egerit adversariae partis minister. Incolumem te anima et spiritu custodiat deus omnipotens. ### English translation (Claude) "This is the veil that was laid over the face of Moses, that is, his testament; for he says in the law: 'A ruler shall not fail from Judah, nor a leader from his thighs, until he comes to whom it belongs; and he will be the expectation of the nations. He will bind his colt to the vine, and the colt of his donkey to the choicest vine. He will wash his robe in wine, and his garment in the blood of the grape. His eyes are suffused with wine, and his teeth white with milk,' and the rest. He also indicated who he was and from where he would come, saying: 'The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet from your brothers like me; listen to him.' And it is plain that this cannot be understood as said of Joshua son of Nun. For nothing of this circumcision is found in him; for after him there were still kings from Judah, and so this prophecy is far from applying to him. And this is the veil that is in Moses; for it was not, as perhaps some of the unskilled think, some linen cloth or skin that covered his face. But the apostle carefully shows it, saying that the veil is laid in the reading of the Old Testament, because the one who was called Israel of old awaits the coming of Christ, not understanding that rulers have failed from Judah and leaders from his thighs; as we now see them subject to kings and rulers, paying tribute, with no power granted them either of judging or of punishing, such as Judah had, since he was able to justify Tamar after he had condemned her. And: 'You will see your life hanging before your eyes.' This saying too has a veil. For up to Herod they seemed in some part to hold the kingdom; but from Augustus the first enrolment was made among them, and they began to pay tribute and give the census. And from the time my Lord Jesus began to be prophesied and awaited, from then rulers from Judah and leaders of the people began to exist, who in turn failed at the coming of his presence. If, then, the veil that is laid in that reading is taken away, they will understand the force of circumcision, and they will find that the birth of the one we preach, and the cross, and whatever was done concerning our Lord, are the very things that had been foretold of him. I would like to discuss each saying from the Scriptures and show it as it deserves to be understood; but since something else is pressing now, these things will be said by us at leisure. For it is enough to have said this now, to show that not without cause is a veil laid over the heart of certain people in the reading of the Old Testament. But whoever turn to the Lord, from them the veil is taken away. How much force all these things have in themselves I leave to those of vigorous sense to understand. "[51] Let us come also to that saying of Moses, where he says: 'The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet from your brothers like me.' In this I see a great prophecy of the servant Moses, who knew that the one who was to come would have greater authority than himself, yet would suffer like things and show like signs and wonders. There, Moses was born, placed by his mother in a basket, and exposed on the banks of the river; here, our Lord Jesus Christ, born of his mother Mary, is made to flee into Egypt by an angel. There, Moses saved the people, leading them out of the midst of the Egyptians; and here, Jesus, leading the people out of the midst of the Pharisees, handed them over to eternal salvation. There, Moses, asking in prayer, received bread from heaven to feed the people in the desert; here, my Lord Jesus, by his own power, satisfied five thousand men from five loaves in the desert. There, Moses, when he was being tested, set on the mountain, fasted forty days; and here, my Lord Jesus, driven by the Spirit into the desert, when he was tempted by the devil, likewise fasted forty days. There, in the sight of Moses, because of Pharaoh's unbelief, all the firstborn of the Egyptians perished; and here, when Jesus was born, because of Herod's unbelief, every male child of the Jews suddenly perished. There, Moses prays that Pharaoh and his people be spared the plagues; and here, our Lord Jesus prays that the Pharisees be forgiven, saying: 'Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.' There, the face of Moses shone with the glory of the Lord, so that the sons of Israel could not look at his face because of the glory of his face; and here, Jesus Christ the Lord shone like the sun, and his disciples could not look at his face because of the glory of his face and the immense splendour of the light. There, Moses struck down with the sword those who had set up the calf; and here, the Lord Jesus says: 'I came to send a sword on the earth and to divide a man from his neighbour,' and the rest. There, Moses went without fear into the darkness of the clouds that bear the waters; and here, the Lord Jesus walked with all power on the waters. There, Moses commanded the sea; and here, the Lord Jesus, when he was in the boat, rose and commanded the winds and the sea. There, Moses, when he was attacked, fought against Amalek with outstretched hands; and here, the Lord Jesus, when we were attacked and perishing by the violence of the wandering spirit (who is now at work in these men), stretched out his hands on the cross and gave salvation. "But I pass over many other things, dearest Diodorus, while I hurry to send you this little book quickly; these you will easily be able to supply by your own prudence. Write to me, dearest one, what the minister of the opposing party has done since. May almighty God keep you safe in soul and spirit." ### Scripture references - Gen 49:10–12: quotation, high confidence - Deut 18:15: quotation, high confidence - Gen 38:24–26: allusion, high confidence - Deut 28:66: quotation, high confidence - Luke 2:1–2: allusion, medium confidence - 2 Cor 3:16: allusion, high confidence - Exod 2:3: allusion, high confidence - Matt 2:13–14: allusion, high confidence - Exod 16:4: allusion, high confidence - Matt 14:21: allusion, high confidence - Exod 24:18: allusion, high confidence - Matt 4:1–2: allusion, high confidence - Exod 12:29: allusion, high confidence - Matt 2:16: allusion, high confidence - Luke 23:34: quotation, high confidence - Exod 34:29–35: allusion, high confidence - Matt 17:2: allusion, high confidence - Exod 32:27–28: allusion, high confidence - Matt 10:34–35: quotation, high confidence - Exod 20:21: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 14:25: allusion, high confidence - Exod 14:21: allusion, high confidence - Matt 8:26: allusion, high confidence - Exod 17:11–12: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - The scan shows the numeral "LI" before "Let us come also": Beeson's chapter 51 begins there, inside the staged section 50; it is marked [51] in the translation. Scripture: Gen 49:10–12 (Old Latin, close to the Greek); Deut 18:15; Gen 38:24–26 (Judah and Tamar); Deut 28:66 ("your life hanging before your eyes"), read of the cross; Luke 2:1–2; 2 Cor 3:16; Exod 2:3; Matt 2:13–14; Exod 16; Matt 14:21; Exod 24:18 and 34:28; Matt 4:1–2; Exod 12:29; Matt 2:16; Exod 8–10; Luke 23:34; Exod 34:29–35; Matt 17:2; Exod 32:27–28; Matt 10:34–35; Exod 20:21; Matt 14:25; Exod 14; Matt 8:26; Exod 17:11–12. "Basket" renders thibis (Greek θῖβις). "Nothing of this circumcision is found in him" is as printed (perhaps a slip for "prophecy"). Beeson's apparatus and running heads mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 50 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/50). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 52 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46/#p-52 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Using Archelaus's letter, Diodorus argues against Manes that two unbegotten principles would need two old or two new testaments, and that Jannes and Mambres, not Moses, resisted the truth. ### Latin text Accepta hac epistula Diodorus et collecto ex ea sensu conflixit adversum Manen, ita ut ab omnibus conlaudaretur, quod diligenter et conpetenter ostenderit duorum testamentorum atque utriusque legis inter sese cognationem. Plura etiam ex semet ipso inveniens, obiecit ei valida valde et fortia pro veritate. Conclusit etiam adversarium Diodorus ex nominibus, dicens ita: Dixisti duo esse testamenta; dic ergo duo esse vetera aut duo nova. Eiusdem enim temporis vel potius aeternitatis duo adseris esse ingenita; et si duo sunt, duo esse oportet vetera testamenta aut duo nova. Quod si hoc non dicis, sed unum esse vetus et aliud novum, rursum unus utriusque auctor ostenditur et eius esse vetus cuius et novum consequentia ipsa edocent. Velut si quis dicat homini diviti: Loca mihi veterem domum tuam, nonne per hoc etiam novae domus dominum eum esse pronuntiat? Aut rursum si dicat ei: Novam domum tuam praesta mihi, nonne eodem verbo etiam veterem eum habere designat? Deinde etiam illud pervidendum est quia ex quo duo sunt ingenitam habentes naturam, ex eo necesse est etiam habere unumquemque ipsorum vetus testamentum, et fient duo vetera testamenta, si tamen ambos antiquos et sine initio esse dicis. Ego autem non ita didici neque ita continent scripturae. Tu vero, qui dicis legem Moysi esse maligni principis et non boni dei, dic mihi, qui erant illi qui resistebant in faciem Moysi, Iannem dico et Mambrem? Omne enim quod resistit non sibimet ipsi resistit, sed alii aut meliori aut deteriori, sicut Paulus indicat ad Timotheum in secunda epistula sua ita scribens: Quemadmodum Iannes et Mambres restiterunt Moysi, ita et isti restiterunt veritati, homines corrupti mente, reprobi circa fidem; sed ultra non proficient. Insipientia enim eorum omnibus nota est sicut et illorum fuit. Vides quomodo Iannem et Mambrem hominibus conparat corruptis mente et reprobis circa fidem Moysen vero veritati. Sed et sanctus Johannes maximus euangelistarum ait gratiam gratia praestare et differre; ex plenitudine enim Jesu legem Moysi accepisse nos dicit; aliam autem gratiam pro illa gratia per Iesum Christum in nobis esse conpletam. Quod ostendens etiam ipse dominus noster Iesus aiebat: Non putetis quia ego vos accusabo apud patrem. Est qui vos accuset, Moyses, in quem vos speratis; si enim creditis Moysi, crederetis utique forsitan et mihi; de me enim ille scripsit. Quod si litteris illius non creditis, quomodo verbis meis credetis? Sunt etiam alia multa quae dici possint et de apostolo Paulo et de euangeliis, ex quibus ostendere possumus veterem legem non esse alterius quam domini, cuius est et novum testamentum, quae nos conpetenter exponere et aptare convenit. Iam vesper inpedit; dies enim clauditur et finem nos disputandi facere par est; crastino autem nobis de quibus tibi videtur quaestiones habeantur. Et his dictis discesserunt. ### English translation (Claude) When Diodorus had received this letter and gathered its sense, he contended against Manes, so that he was praised by all for having carefully and fittingly shown the kinship of the two testaments and of each law with one another. Finding more things of his own as well, he brought against him very strong and powerful arguments for the truth. Diodorus also cornered his adversary from the names, saying this: "You said that there are two testaments; then say that there are two old ones or two new ones. For you assert that there are two unbegotten of the same time, or rather of the same eternity; and if there are two, there must be two old testaments or two new ones. But if you do not say this, but that one is old and the other new, then again one author of both is shown, and the very sequence teaches that the old belongs to the one to whom the new also belongs. As if someone should say to a rich man, 'Let me your old house,' does he not by this declare that he is also the owner of the new house? Or again, if he should say to him, 'Lend me your new house,' does he not by the same word indicate that he has an old one too? Then this too must be seen: that since there are two that have an unbegotten nature, each of them must also have an old testament, and there will be two old testaments, if indeed you say that both are ancient and without beginning. But I did not learn so, nor do the Scriptures contain this. "But you, who say that the law of Moses belongs to the evil prince and not to the good God, tell me, who were those who resisted Moses to his face, I mean Jannes and Mambres? For everything that resists does not resist itself, but another, either better or worse, as Paul shows to Timothy in his second letter, writing thus: 'As Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses, so these men also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith; but they will not progress further, for their folly is known to all, as theirs also was.' You see how he compares Jannes and Mambres to men corrupted in mind and reprobate concerning the faith, but Moses to the truth. And the holy John too, the greatest of the evangelists, says that grace excels grace and differs from it; for he says that we received the law of Moses from the fullness of Jesus, but that another grace in place of that grace has been fulfilled in us through Jesus Christ. Showing this, our Lord Jesus himself also said: 'Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father. There is one who accuses you, Moses, on whom you have set your hope; for if you believed Moses, you would perhaps believe me too; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?' There are also many other things that could be said, both from the apostle Paul and from the Gospels, from which we can show that the old law belongs to none other than the Lord, to whom the New Testament also belongs, and which it would be fitting for us to set out and apply suitably. But now evening hinders us; for the day is closing, and it is right for us to make an end of disputing; tomorrow let us take up whatever questions you think fit." And when these things had been said, they departed. ### Scripture references - 2 Tim 3:8–9: quotation, high confidence - John 1:16–17: allusion, high confidence - John 5:45–47: quotation, high confidence - Exod 7:11: allusion, low confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Jan. Jam. (Jannes and Jambres): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 2 Tim 3:8–9 (Jannes and Jambres, here "Mambres"); John 1:16–17; John 5:45–47; Exod 7:11. A German note of Beeson's apparatus ("perhaps Eph 2") mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 52 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/52). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 53 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46/#p-53 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus arrives at Diodorus's village as Manes challenges Diodorus, recalls Manes's failure with Marcellus, and invites him to choose the question. ### Latin text Cum autem mane factum esset, subito adventavit Archelaus ad castellum hunc in quo demorabatur Diodorus, priusquam omnino quisquam ad publicam procederet. Manes vero ignorans praesentem esse Archelaum, rursum Diodorum provocabat ad publicum, ut cum eo disputatione contenderet, volens eum verbis opprimere, ex eo quod advertebat eum bominem esse simplicem et non satis scripturarum quaestionibus eruditum; Archelai enim doctrinae iam perceperat gustum. Cum ergo et turbae convenissent ad solitum disputationis locum et Manes iam verba facere coepisset, subito in medio eorum adparuit Archelaus ac Diodorum conplexus sancto osculo salutavit. Diodorus vero et omnes qui praesentes erant admirati sunt opus divinae providentiae, ut in tempore ipso adventaret Archelaus quo quaestio movebatur; re enim vera, quod fatendum est, quasi ex parte aliqua religiosus Diodorus pertimuerat conflictum. Cum autem vidisset Archelaum Manes, cessavit quidem continuo ab insultatione et supercilio non parum deiecto manifeste intellegebatur quod conflictum vellet eflfugere. Multitudo vero auditorum adventum Archelai velut apostoli praesentiam opinata est, pro eo quod ad verbi defensionem tam paratus et tam promptus existeret. Et cum dextera silentium poposcisset a populo (tumultus enim non mediocris extiterat), hoc modo coepit Archelaus. Tametsi prudentiae gloriam etiam nostrorum nonnulli adsecuti sunt, tamen hoc vos deprecor ut eorum quae ante me dicta sunt testimonium reservetis. Scio enim et certus sum, fratres, quoniam Diodoro non pro ipsius inpossibilitate successi, sed quoniam istum ego novi tunc cum ad loci mei partes inprobus advenisset Marcelli viri incliti gratia, volens eum devertere a nostra doctrina et a fide, videlicet, quo inpietatis huius idoneus efficeretur adsertor; et tamen omnibus suis verbis in nullo eum divertere et movere praevaluit. Similis enim inventus est religiosissimus Marcellus petrae, in qua aedificata est domus solidissimis fundamentis, et cum descendisset pluvia et inruissent flumina ac venti et inlisissent in domum illam, perstitit; fundata enim erat solidissimis et inmobilibus fundamentis: huic autem, qui praesens est, infamiam potius intulit conatus ipse quam laudem. Non enim mihi venia dignus videtur qui ignoraverit quod futurum est; oportebat enim eum praenoscere qui sunt proprii sui, si quidem Spiritus paracletus habitat in eo. Sed quoniam ignorantiae tenebris obcaecatus est, in vanum cucurrit cum iter faceret ad Marcellum, et similis facere astrologo describenti quidem caelestia, ignoranti vero quae domi suae geruntur. Sed ne videar per haec verba differre quaestiones, iam sileam; de iis vero dabo ipsi potestatem : sumat quodcumque vult propositionis et quaestionis initium. Vos tantummodo, sicut superius dixi, indeclinabiles iudices esse quaeso, ut vera dicenti honorem verum palmamque tradatis. ### English translation (Claude) When morning came, Archelaus suddenly arrived at the fortified village where Diodorus was staying, before anyone at all had gone out into public. Manes, not knowing that Archelaus was present, again challenged Diodorus to come out in public to contend with him in disputation, wanting to overwhelm him with words, because he noticed that he was a simple man and not well trained in questions of the Scriptures; for he had already had a taste of Archelaus's teaching. So when the crowds had gathered at the usual place of disputation and Manes had already begun to speak, Archelaus suddenly appeared in their midst, embraced Diodorus, and greeted him with a holy kiss. Diodorus and all who were present wondered at the work of divine providence, that Archelaus had arrived at the very time when the question was being raised; for in truth, it must be confessed, the devout Diodorus had in some degree feared the contest. When Manes saw Archelaus, he at once stopped his insults, and with his brow not a little lowered it was plainly seen that he wanted to escape the contest. The multitude of hearers thought the coming of Archelaus like the presence of an apostle, because he was so ready and so prompt for the defence of the word. And when he had asked the people for silence with his right hand (for no small uproar had arisen), Archelaus began in this way: "Although some of our people too have attained the glory of prudence, yet I beg you to keep the testimony of what was said before me. For I know and am sure, brothers, that I have taken Diodorus's place not because of any inability of his, but because I knew this man when he came shamelessly to the region of my see for the sake of the illustrious Marcellus, wanting to turn him from our teaching and from the faith, so that he might become a fit champion of this impiety; and yet with all his words he could not turn or move him in anything. For the most religious Marcellus was found like the rock on which a house was built on most solid foundations; and when the rain came down and the rivers and winds rushed and beat on that house, it stood firm; for it was founded on most solid and immovable foundations. But on this man who is present, his very attempt brought disgrace rather than praise. For he does not seem to me worthy of pardon who did not know what was going to happen; for he ought to have known beforehand who are his own, if indeed the Spirit, the Paraclete, dwells in him. But since he is blinded by the darkness of ignorance, he ran in vain when he made his journey to Marcellus, and he is like an astrologer who describes the heavens but does not know what is happening in his own house. But lest I seem by these words to put off the questions, I will now be silent; I will give him himself the power over them: let him take whatever beginning of proposition and question he wishes. Only you, as I said above, I beg to be unswerving judges, so as to give true honour and the palm to the one who speaks the truth." ### Scripture references - Matt 7:24–25: allusion, high confidence - Luke 6:48: allusion, medium confidence - John 10:14: echo, low confidence - Gal 2:2: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 7:24–25 and Luke 6:48; John 10:14; Gal 2:2. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 53 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/53). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 54 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/46/#p-54 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes, claiming the patience of an apostle, spars with Archelaus over who should debate, and denies that Christ was born of Mary, citing sayings that he "came" and was "sent." ### Latin text Tunc Manes, silentio ab omnibus facto, ita exorsus est: Tu quoque, Archelae, bene me de deo sentientem dignamque opinionem de Christo retinentem verbis molestissimis obtundis, licet tale sit apostolorum genus, patiens et ferens omnia, etiam si eis conviciis quis aut maledictis obtrectet. Si persequi volueris, paratus sum, et si inferre supplicia, non refugiam. Si etiam interficere me vis, non reformido ; illum enim solum oportet timeri qui potest animam et corpus perdere in gehennam. Archelaus dixit: Absit a me. Non est mihi tale propositum. Quid enim perpessus es a me vel a nostris? et quidem cum obtrectares atque iniuriam inrogares et cum detraheres de paternis nostris traditionibus et cum velles animas hominum bene institutas ac diligenti cautela servatas interficere, quibus utique repensari non possunt universae mundi divitiae. Verum tamen propter quod adsumis, o Manichaee? Quid est quod indicas? Quae salutis signa ad nos deferas dicito. Verborum enim nuda iactatio non poterit praesenti multitudini satisfacere, ut agnoscant qui nostrum rectius obtinet scientiam veritatis. De quo ergo vis nos capite disputare, hoc prius dicito, cum prius dicendi acceperis facultatem. Manes dixit: Si non iterum his quae a nobis recte dicuntur infideliter resistis, dicam; si autem talis existis qualem te prius sensi, dicam adversus Diodorum, declinans inquietudinem tuam. Archelaus dixit: Praedixi iam quod abutimur inanitate verborum. Si quis nostrorum resistere infideliter invenitur, iudicibus haec permitte discernere; tu autem quid adseras dicito. Manes dixit : Si non iterum resistis his quae a me iterum recte dicuntur, incipiam. Archelaus dixit: Si non hoc est, si non illud, sermo est hominis ignorantis. Ignoras ergo quod futurum est. Sed hoc quod futurum ais, resistere me aut non resistere, in mea est potestate. Quomodo ergo stabit sermo ille duarum arborum, in quo fidis velut scuto firmissimo? Si enim contrariae partis ego sum, quomodo oboedientiam meam requiris? Quod si oboedientiae in me est mens, quomodo pertimescis ne resistam? Ais enim quia malum semper permanet malum et bonum semper permanet bonum, vim verbi istius penitus ignorans. Manes dixit: Numquid te advocatum meorum adhibui sermonum, ut etiam meae scientiae intellegentiam disponas? quippe qui propria explanare non valeas, quomodo aliena poteris explicare? Quod si victum iam se profitetur Diodorus, tunc mihi tecum sermo movebitur. Si autem stat ille et est idoneus ad dicendum, desine tu et noli perturbare substantiam veritatis. Es enim ovis aliena, efficieris tamen postea in numero eiusdem gregis, sicut vox Jesu ostendit, eius qui adparuit quidem in hominis specie nec tamen fuit homo. Archelaus dixit: Ergo non putas eum ex Maria virgine esse? Manes dixit: Absit ut dominum nostrum Iesum Christum per naturalia pudenda mulieris descendisse confitear; ipse enim testimonium dat quia de sinibus patris descendit. Et: Qui me recipit, recipit eum qui me misit. Et: Non veni facere voluntatem meam sed eius qui misit me. Et: Non sum missus nisi ad oves perditas domus Istrahel. Sunt et alia innumera testimonia huiuscemodi, quae indicant eum venisse et non natum esse. Quod si potentior illo es et magis scire potes quod verum est, quomodo iam illi credimus? Archelaus dixit : Neque illo potentior sum, servus enim sum, et neque aequalis domini mei esse possum; ego enim sum inutilis servus, verborum eius discipulus, credens his quae ab ipso dicta sunt, et haec indeclinabilia esse confirmo. ### English translation (Claude) Then Manes, when silence had been made by all, began thus: "You too, Archelaus, batter me with most offensive words, though I think well of God and hold a worthy opinion of Christ; but such is the race of apostles, patient and bearing everything, even if one disparages them with abuse or curses. If you wish to persecute me, I am ready; and if to inflict punishments, I will not flee; and if you want to kill me, I do not shrink from it; for only he is to be feared who can destroy soul and body in Gehenna." Archelaus said: "Far be it from me. I have no such intention. For what have you suffered from me or from our people? And this though you disparaged and did wrong, and though you detracted from our ancestral traditions, and though you wanted to kill the souls of men well instructed and kept with careful vigilance, which all the riches of the world cannot repay. But still, on what account do you take this up, Manichaeus? What is it that you declare? Tell us what signs of salvation you bring us. For a bare boast of words cannot satisfy the multitude present, so that they may recognize which of us holds the knowledge of the truth more rightly. On what heading, then, do you wish us to dispute? Say this first, since you have received the first opportunity to speak." Manes said: "If you do not again resist unfaithfully what is rightly said by us, I will speak; but if you are such as I found you before, I will speak against Diodorus, avoiding your disturbance." Archelaus said: "I have already said beforehand that we are wasting ourselves on empty words. If either of us is found to resist unfaithfully, leave it to the judges to decide; but you, say what you assert." Manes said: "If you do not again resist what is again rightly said by me, I will begin." Archelaus said: "'If not this, if not that' is the speech of a man who does not know. So you do not know what is going to happen. But this thing which you call future, whether I resist or do not resist, is in my power. How then will that saying of the two trees stand, in which you trust as in a very strong shield? For if I am of the contrary part, how do you ask for my obedience? And if there is in me a mind for obedience, how do you fear that I will resist? For you say that evil always remains evil and good always remains good, wholly ignorant of the force of this word." Manes said: "Did I call you as advocate of my words, that you should also arrange the understanding of my knowledge? Since you cannot explain your own, how will you be able to explain another's? If Diodorus now confesses himself defeated, then I will have discourse with you. But if he stands and is able to speak, you stop and do not disturb the substance of the truth. For you are a stranger sheep; yet you will afterwards be in the number of the same flock, as the voice of Jesus shows, of him who appeared in the form of a man and yet was not a man." Archelaus said: "Then you do not think that he is from Mary the virgin?" Manes said: "Far be it from me to confess that our Lord Jesus Christ came down through the natural private parts of a woman; for he himself testifies that he came down from the bosom of the Father. And: 'He who receives me receives him who sent me.' And: 'I have not come to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me.' And: 'I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.' And there are countless other testimonies of this kind, which show that he came and was not born. But if you are mightier than he and can know better what is true, how then shall we believe him?" Archelaus said: "I am not mightier than he, for I am a servant, nor can I be equal to my Lord; for I am an unprofitable servant, a disciple of his words, believing what he said, and I affirm that these things cannot be swerved from." ### Scripture references - Matt 10:28: quotation, high confidence - John 1:18: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 10:40: quotation, high confidence - John 13:20: quotation, medium confidence - John 6:38: quotation, high confidence - Matt 15:24: quotation, high confidence - Luke 17:10: allusion, high confidence - John 10:16: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Manes's denial of Christ's birth from Mary (docetism) is reported as he states it; Archelaus answers in the following chapters. Scripture: Matt 10:28; Matt 7:17–18 (the two trees); John 1:18; John 3:13; Matt 10:40 and John 13:20; John 6:38; Matt 15:24; Luke 17:10. Beeson's running head mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 54 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/54). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 55 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-55 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes argues from "Who is my mother?" and Peter's confession that Jesus had no human mother or brothers, so that Mary cannot be his mother. ### Latin text Manes dixit: Similis tui quidam cum ei aliquando dixisset: Maria mater tua et fratres tui foris stant, non libenter accipiens eum qui dixerat, increpavit dicens: Quae est mater mea aut qui sunt fratres mei? et ostendit eos qui facerent voluntatem suam et matres sibi esse et fratres. Sin autem vis matrem ipsius dicere Mariam, non est tibi sine periculo; sine dubio enim etiam fratres ex ea habuisse monstrabitur. Et dic utrum de Ioseph generati sunt aut ex eodem spiritu sancto. Ergo et multos Christos habuimus, si ex eodem spiritu sancto generatos dixeris. Quod si non ex eodem spiritu, sed tamen dixeris eum fratres habuisse, sine dubio intellegendum est quia post spiritum, post Gabrihel, nupserit Ioseph virgo castissima et inmaculata ecelesia* Quod si etiam hoc absurdum est omnino eam quolibet modo concubuisse cum Ioseph, dic an fratres habuerit. Numquidnam etiam moechiae ei crimen inpingis, prudentissime Marcelle? Quod si horum nihil convenit incontaminatae virgini, unde ei fuisse fratres adstruis? Quod si fratres ei fuisse non potes edocere, quomodo Maria mater eius erit, sicut ait ille qui scribere ausus est : Ecce mater tua et fratres tui foris stant ? Quod etiam si ille ausus est dicere, illo ipso potentior aut maior esse nemo potest qui ostendit nobis matrem aut fratres suos; sed et David lesse non dignatur audire. Apostolus Petrus discipulorum omnium eminentissimus tunc agnoscere eum potuit, cum singuli opiniones suas quas de ipso habebant promerent, ait: Tu es Christus filius dei vivi, et statim beatificat eum dicens: Quoniam revelavit tibi pater meus caelestis. Vide quanta sit differentia eorum quae ab Iesu dicta sunt. illi enim qui dixerat: Ecce mater tua foris stat, respondit: Quae mihi est mater aut fratres? Ei autem qui dixit: Tu es Christus filius dei vivi, beatitudinem benedictionemque restituit. Si ergo de Maria vis esse eum natum, mentitur ipse cum Petro; si autem verum dicit Petrus, sine dubio ille prior fefellit. Quod si prior fefellit, causa ad scriptorem reicienda est. Unum igitur Christum nos scimus esse secundum apostolum Paulum, cuius vocibus credimus consonantibus dumtaxat adventui eius. ### English translation (Claude) Manes said: "Someone like you, when he had once said to him, 'Mary your mother and your brothers are standing outside,' he did not gladly receive the one who had said it, but rebuked him, saying: 'Who is my mother, or who are my brothers?' And he showed that those who did his will were both mothers and brothers to him. But if you want to call Mary his mother, it is not without danger for you; for without doubt he will be shown to have had brothers from her as well. And tell me whether they were begotten by Joseph or by the same Holy Spirit. Then we have had many Christs, if you say they were begotten by the same Holy Spirit. And if not by the same Spirit, but you still say that he had brothers, then without doubt it must be understood that after the Spirit, after Gabriel, the most chaste and spotless virgin married Joseph. And if it is wholly absurd that she lay with Joseph in any way, tell me whether he had brothers. Do you even charge her with the crime of adultery, most prudent Marcellus? But if none of these things befits the undefiled virgin, from where do you build up that she had brothers? And if you cannot show that she had brothers, how will Mary be his mother, as he says who dared to write: 'Look, your mother and your brothers are standing outside'? And even if that man dared to say it, no one can be mightier or greater than him who shows us his mother and brothers; and he does not deign to hear even of David and Jesse. "The apostle Peter, the most eminent of all the disciples, was able to recognize him at the time when each was putting forward the opinions they had of him; he said: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God'; and at once he blesses him, saying: 'Because my heavenly Father has revealed it to you.' See how great is the difference between the things said by Jesus. To the one who had said, 'Look, your mother is standing outside,' he answered: 'Who is my mother, or my brothers?' But to the one who said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,' he gave back blessedness and benediction. If, then, you want him to have been born of Mary, he himself lies, together with Peter; but if Peter speaks the truth, then without doubt the former was deceived. And if the former was deceived, the blame must be thrown back on the writer. So we know one Christ, according to the apostle Paul, whose words we believe, so far as they agree with his coming." ### Scripture references - Matt 12:47–50: quotation, high confidence - Mark 3:32–33: allusion, medium confidence - Luke 8:20: allusion, medium confidence - Luke 1:26–35: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 22:42–45: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 16:16–17: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 8:6: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Manes's arguments against the birth from Mary are reported as he states them. The address "most prudent Marcellus" is as printed, though the scene is at Diodorus's village (perhaps a slip in the transmission; uncertain). After "the most chaste and spotless virgin" the scan adds "ecelesia" ("church"?), which does not fit the sentence and is not translated. "He does not deign to hear even of David and Jesse" probably means that he refused to be called son of David (cf. Matt 22:42–45); the Latin is terse. Scripture: Matt 12:47–50, Mark 3:31–35, Luke 8:20–21; Luke 1:26–35; Matt 1:18–25; Matt 22:42–45; Matt 16:16–17; 1 Cor 8:6. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 55 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 56 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-56 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus answers that Jesus did not rebuke the messenger but simply would not leave his work of teaching and healing for his family, as he taught his disciples to put God first. ### Latin text His auditis turbae permotae sunt, velut rationem veritatis continentibus et Archelao nil habente quod his posset opponere; hoc enim indicavit tumultus, qui inter eos fuerat exortus. Sed cum multitudo conquievisset, Archelaus hoc modo respondit: Vocis quidem domini nostri Iesu Christi nullus poterit esse potentior, si enim neque nomen aliquod aequale ei esse invenitur, propter quod deus eum exaltavit et donavit illi nomen quod est super omne nomen, neque in testimonio quis aequalis ei esse poterit; et ideo ego vocis eius tibi testimonia proferam, primum quidem dissolvens haec quae a te dicta sunt, uti ne dicas quoniam nec sibi ipsi consonant, ut est tibi consuetudo dicendi. Ais enim quia eum qui nuntiaverat ei de matre aut de fratribus increpaverit Iesus quasi fallentem secundum id quod scriptorem fefellit. Neque is qui adnuntiavit ei de matre et fratribus increpatus est neque Petrus supra illum solus beatificatus est; sed uterque ab eo dignam responsionem propria interrogatione percepit, sicut in consequentibus sermo monstrabit. Cum quis parvulus est, cogitat sicut parvulus, sapit ut parvulus; cum autem perfectus fuerit vir, destruit ea quae sunt parvuli, id est, dum ad priora se quis extendit, obliviscatur quae post se sunt. Unde domino nostro Iesu Christo docente et curante humanum genus, uti ne simul omnia deperirent, cumque in talibus studiis mens omnium auditorum esset intenta, non oportune ingressus hic nuntius de matre eius suggessit ac fratribus. Quid enim? debuit etiam te ipso iudicante derelinquere eos, quos curabat et quos erudiebat, et cum matre ac fratribus conloqui? Nonne continuo de hoc ipso detraheres? Cum enim peccati onus praegravatos ad discipulatum deligit duodecim numero, quos et apostolos nominavit, dicens eis: Derelinquite matrem et patrem, ut me digni efficiamini, ut ultra non possit eis memoria patris aut matris robustum pectus inflectere. Et iterum volente alio quodam dicere ei: Ibo et sepeliam patrem meum, ait: Dimitte mortuos sepelire mortuos suos. Intuere ergo quomodo dominus meus Iesus ad necessaria discipulos aedificat et pro meritis unicuique sancta verba committit. Ita et in eo tempore quo inportune adnuntiaverat quidam ei de matre, non amplectitur pro matris praesentia paternum praeterire praeceptum. ### English translation (Claude) When they heard this, the crowds were moved, as if it held the reason of truth and Archelaus had nothing he could set against it; for the uproar that had arisen among them showed this. But when the multitude had quieted down, Archelaus answered in this way: "No one could be mightier than the voice of our Lord Jesus Christ; for if no name is found equal to him, because God exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, neither can anyone be equal to him in testimony. And so I will bring you testimonies of his voice, first resolving what you have said, so that you may not say that they do not agree even with themselves, as is your custom to say. For you say that Jesus rebuked the one who had told him about his mother and brothers, as if he were lying, in the same way as the writer deceived. But neither was the one who told him about his mother and brothers rebuked, nor was Peter alone blessed above him; but each received from him a fitting answer to his own question, as the discussion will show in what follows. "When someone is a little child, he thinks like a child, he understands like a child; but when he has become a mature man, he does away with the things of a child; that is, while one stretches forward to what lies ahead, let him forget what lies behind. So when our Lord Jesus Christ was teaching and healing the human race, so that all things should not perish together, and the mind of all the hearers was intent on such pursuits, this messenger came in at an inopportune time and brought up his mother and brothers. What then? Ought he, even by your own judgment, to have left those whom he was healing and teaching and talked with his mother and brothers? Would you not at once disparage him for this very thing? For when he chose for discipleship twelve in number, burdened with the weight of sin, whom he also named apostles, he said to them: 'Leave mother and father, so that you may become worthy of me,' so that the memory of father or mother could no longer bend their strong hearts. And again, when someone else wanted to say to him, 'I will go and bury my father,' he said: 'Let the dead bury their own dead.' See, then, how my Lord Jesus builds up his disciples for what is necessary, and entrusts holy words to each according to his deserts. So too at the time when someone had inopportunely told him about his mother, he did not choose to pass over the Father's command for the sake of his mother's presence." ### Scripture references - Phil 2:9: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 13:11: allusion, high confidence - Phil 3:13: allusion, high confidence - Matt 12:46–50: allusion, high confidence - Luke 6:13: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 10:37: allusion, medium confidence - Luke 14:26: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 8:21–22: quotation, high confidence - Luke 9:59–60: quotation, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Phil 2:9; 1 Cor 13:11; Phil 3:13; Matt 12:46–50; Luke 6:13; Matt 10:37 and Luke 14:26; Matt 8:21–22 and Luke 9:59–60. Beeson's apparatus and running head mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 56 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/56). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 57 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-57 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus contrasts Jesus' sharp rebuke of Peter and of the confessing demons with his gentle answer to the messenger, explaining the answer by a parable of a king interrupted in battle. ### Latin text Ut autem tibi ostendam haec ita esse: Petrus aliquando, cum iam beatificationem fuisset ab eo consecutus, ait ad Iesum: Propitius esto, domine, non erit tibi istud, cum dixisset ei Iesus quia oportet filium hominis ascendere Ierosolymam et occidi et tertia die resurgere; respondens ait Petro: Vade retro, Satana, quia non sapis quae dei sunt, sed quae hominum sunt. Quoniam ergo existimas illum qui ei de matre renuntiaverat et fratribus increpatum esse ab Iesu, istum vero qui ei paulo ante dixerat: Tu es filius dei vivi, beatitudinem consecutum, vide quia magis hunc praetulit Iesus, cui et clementius et cum venia responsum dare dignatus est; Petro vero post illam benedictionem nullum iam veniae titulum largitur, pro eo quod naturam rei sibi dictae non diligenter adverterit. Illius enim nuntii error responsi ratione corrigitur; huius vero tarditas intellectus acerbiori increpatione damnatur. Ex quo advertere potes quod dominus Iesus, interrogationum sibi oportunitate servata, dignum promat singulis oportunumque responsum. Quod si, ut ais, ex eo quod verum dixerat, Petrus beatificatur et pro eo quod fefellit nuntius ille culpatur, dic mihi quare, cum daemones eum confiterentur dicentes: Scimus te qui sis sanctus dei, increpavit eos et silere praecepit? Cur non (si quidem confitentium se testimoniis delectatur) etiam istos, sicut Petrum vera dicentem, benedictionibus remuneratus est? Quod si hoc absurdum est, relinquitur ut pro loco, pro tempore, pro personis, pro rebus, pro accidentium salute ea quae dicta sunt intellegamus, uti ne temere pronuntiantes digna cohercitione feriamur. Et ut te magis ac magis edoceam multo amplius illum qui de matre nuntiaverat honoratum (tu enim, oblitus rei quae nobis proposita est, in aliud conversus es), audi ergo breviter; si enim volueris diligentius intueri quae dicta sunt, inveniemus in illo priore multam dominum Iesum ostendisse clementiam idque convenientibus te exemplis edoceam. Rex quidam, cum adversus hostem processisset armatus et cogitaret atque disponeret quemadmodum posset manum sibi hostilem et barbaram subiugare cumque in multa esset cura et sollicitudine constitutus, in medio adversariorum positus ac postea iam captivos eos tenere incipiens, cum iam illa sollicitudo inmineret quemadmodum eos qui secum laboraverant ac pondus belli tolerarant procuraret, quidam ei nuntius inportunus occurrens de rebus domesticis suggerere aliqua coepit. At ille admiratus est audaciam atque inportunam suggestionem et morti tradere huiuscemodi hominem cogitabat; quod nisi de carissimis adfectibus talis nuntius extitisset, eo quod incolumes esse hos et recte ac prospere agentes omnia nuntiasset, dignum protinus potuit excepisse supplicium. Quae enim erat cura alia regis, belli dumtaxat tempore, nisi provincialium salus, nisi dispositio rei militaris? Ita et domino meo lesu Christo pugnanti adversum passiones quae profunda viscerum obsederant et curanti eos qui multo tempore variis infirmitatibus fuerant devincti et inclinato omni nisu pro salute universitatis, ille nuntius inportune adveniens de matre et fratribus nuntiavit. Et potuit quidem similem Petro aut etiam graviorem excepisse sententiam; sed matris et fratrum interiectum nomen clementiam domini provocavit. ### English translation (Claude) "But to show you that these things are so: Peter once, when he had already obtained the blessing from him, said to Jesus, 'Be merciful to yourself, Lord; this shall not happen to you,' when Jesus had told him that the Son of Man must go up to Jerusalem and be killed and rise on the third day; and he answered Peter: 'Get behind me, Satan, for you do not think the things of God but the things of men.' Since, then, you think that the one who told him about his mother and brothers was rebuked by Jesus, while the one who had said to him shortly before, 'You are the Son of the living God,' obtained blessedness, see that Jesus rather preferred the former, to whom he deigned to give an answer more gently and with pardon; while to Peter, after that blessing, he grants no title of pardon any longer, because he did not carefully notice the nature of what was said to him. For the error of that messenger is corrected by the reasoning of the answer; but the slowness of this one's understanding is condemned by a sharper rebuke. From this you can notice that the Lord Jesus, keeping the fitting occasion of the questions put to him, gives each a worthy and fitting answer. But if, as you say, Peter is blessed because he had spoken the truth, and that messenger is blamed because he lied, tell me why, when the demons confessed him, saying, 'We know who you are, the Holy One of God,' he rebuked them and ordered them to be silent? Why did he not (if indeed he delights in the testimonies of those who confess him) reward these too with blessings, like Peter speaking the truth? But if this is absurd, it remains that we should understand what was said according to the place, the time, the persons, the matters, and the welfare of those concerned, lest by pronouncing rashly we be struck with a fitting punishment. "And to teach you more and more that the one who brought news about his mother was much more honoured (for you, forgetting the matter put before us, have turned to something else), hear, then, briefly; for if you are willing to look more carefully at what was said, we will find that the Lord Jesus showed great mercy in that first case, and I will teach you this by suitable examples. A certain king, when he had gone out armed against an enemy and was thinking and planning how he could subdue a hostile and barbarous force, and was placed in great care and anxiety, set in the midst of his adversaries and already beginning to hold them captive, when that anxiety was pressing how he might provide for those who had laboured with him and borne the weight of the war, a certain messenger, meeting him inopportunely, began to suggest some things about his domestic affairs. He was astonished at the man's audacity and his inopportune suggestion, and thought of handing such a man over to death; and had he not been a messenger about his dearest kin, reporting that they were safe and doing everything rightly and prosperously, he could at once have received a fitting punishment. For what other care did the king have, at least in time of war, but the safety of the provincials and the ordering of military affairs? So too when my Lord Jesus Christ was fighting against the passions that had besieged the depths of the inward parts, and healing those who for a long time had been bound by various infirmities, and was bent with all his effort on the salvation of the whole, that messenger, coming inopportunely, brought news about his mother and brothers. And he could have received a sentence like Peter's, or even heavier; but the name of mother and brothers, put in between, called forth the Lord's mercy." ### Scripture references - Matt 16:21–23: quotation, high confidence - Mark 8:31–33: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 16:16: quotation, high confidence - Mark 1:24–25: quotation, high confidence - Luke 4:34–35: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 12:46–50: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: Matt 16:21–23 and Mark 8:31–33; Matt 16:16; Mark 1:24–25 and Luke 4:34–35; Matt 12:46–50. Beeson's apparatus and running head mixed into the text by the OCR are removed; "sinere" ("allow") in the scan is read as "silere" ("be silent"). ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 57 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/57). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 58 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-58 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus argues that denying Christ's birth from Mary destroys his passion, resurrection, the resurrection of the dead, and the judgment, and asks Manes on whom the Spirit descended at the baptism. ### Latin text Sed et amplius adhuc omnibus ostendere cupio, ut agnoscant universi adsertio tua quantum in se inpietatis obtineat. Si enim, secundum quod tu dicis, non est natus, sine dubio nec passus est; pati enim eum qui natus non est inpossibile est. Quod si non est passus, crucis nomen aufertur. Cruce autem non suscepta, nec Jesus ex mortuis resurrexit. Quod si Iesus ex mortuis non resurrexit, nec alius aliquis resurget. Quod si nullus resurget, nee iudicium erit. Certum est enim quia, si non resurgam, nec iudicer. Quod si iudicium non erit, frustra erit observatio mandatorum dei; nullus abstinentiae locus est; manducemus et bibamus, cras enim moriemur. Haec autem omnia conectis, negans id quod de Maria natus est; si enim confessus eum fueris de Maria natum, et passio subsequatur necesse est et passionem resurrectio et resurrectionem iudicium et salva iam nobis erunt scripturae praecepta. Non ergo iam una est quaestio, sed plurimae in hoc verbo. Sicut enim omnis lex et prophetiae in duobus sermonibus constant, ita etiam nostra omnis spes in beatae Mariae partu suspensa est; et ideo responde mihi ad singula quae te interrogabo. Quo abiciemus tantas et tales apostoli voces, quae dicunt: Cum autem fuit dei voluntas in nobis, misit filium suum factum ex muliere? Et iterum: Pascha nostrum inmolatus est Christus. Et quia: Deus et dominum suscitavit et nos cum illo suscitabit per virtutem suam. Et alia multa his similia dicta sunt, ut est illud: Quomodo dicunt quidam in vobis quia resurrectio mortuorum non est? Si enim resurrectio mortuorum non est, nec Christus resurrexit. Si autem Christus non resurrexit, inanis est ergo praedicatio nostra. Inveniemur etiam falsi testes dei, qui testimonium perhibuimus adversus deum, quia suscitaverit Christum, quem non suscitavit. Si quidem mortui non resurgunt, nec Christus resurrexit. Si autem Christus non resurrexit, vana est fides vestra; adhuc estis in peccatis vestris; ergo et qui dormierunt in Christo, perierunt. Si in hac vita tantummodo speramus in Christo, miserabiliores sumus omnibus hominibus. Nunc autem Christus resurrexit a mortuis initium dormientium et reliqua. Quis rogo ita temerarius et inpudens invenitur, qui (his) tam sacrosanctis vocibus non accommodet fidem, in quibus nulla est distinctio, nulla dubitatio? Quisnam quaeso etiam te, o stulte Galata, fascinavit, sicut et illos, quorum ante oculos Jesus Christus praescriptus est crucifixus? Unde arbitror sufficere haec testimonia ad ostensionem iudicii et resurrectionis et passionis, quibus consequenter et pariter etiam ex Maria partus ostenditur. Quid enim? si tu nolis adquiescere, sed evidentissime scriptura proclamet. Verum tamen interrogabo te, tu autem mihi responde, quando Iesus de Johanne testimonium dabat et dicebat, quia maior in natis mulierum nullus surrexit Johanne Baptista; qui autem minor est in regno caelorum maior est illo: dic mihi qua ratione maior illo est in regno caelorum? Numquid Iesus minor erat Johanne in regno caelorum? Dico, absit. Dic ergo in quo, ut vel te ipsum superare possis. Sine dubio minor erat Johanne Jesus inter natos mulierum; in regno autem caelorum maior illo erat. Dic mihi illud etiam, o Manichaee, si ais Iesum non esse ex Maria natum, sed adparuisse quidem ut hominem, cum homo non esset, praestante hoc et agente virtute quae in ipso est; dic mihi, super quem spiritus sanctus sicut columba descendit? Quis est etiam, qui baptizatur a Johanne? Si perfectus erat, si filius erat, si virtus erat, non poterat spiritus ingredi, sicut nec regnum potest ingredi intra regnum. Cuius autem ei caelitus emissa vox testimonium detulit dicens: Hic est filius meus dilectus, in quo bene conplacui? Dic age, nihil remoreris, quis ille est qui patrat haec omnia, qui agit universa. Responde, itane blasphemiam pro ratione inpudenter allegas et inferre conaris? ### English translation (Claude) "But I want to show all still more, so that everyone may recognize how much impiety your assertion holds. For if, as you say, he was not born, then without doubt he did not suffer either; for it is impossible for one who was not born to suffer. And if he did not suffer, the name of the cross is taken away. And if the cross was not undergone, neither did Jesus rise from the dead. And if Jesus did not rise from the dead, neither will anyone else rise. And if no one will rise, there will be no judgment either. For it is certain that if I do not rise, I shall not be judged either. And if there will be no judgment, the keeping of God's commandments will be in vain; there is no place for self-restraint; let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. All these things you link together by denying that he was born of Mary. For if you confess that he was born of Mary, his passion must follow, and resurrection must follow his passion, and judgment his resurrection, and then the precepts of the Scriptures will be kept safe for us. So there is not just one question now, but very many in this word. For as the whole law and the prophets depend on two sayings, so too our whole hope hangs on the childbearing of blessed Mary. "And so answer me on each thing I will ask you. Where shall we throw away so many and such great sayings of the apostle, which say: 'But when it was God's will among us, he sent his Son, made of a woman'? And again: 'Christ our Passover has been sacrificed.' And that: 'God both raised the Lord and will raise us with him by his power.' And many other things like these have been said, such as this: 'How do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? For if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither has Christ risen. And if Christ has not risen, then our preaching is empty. We are even found false witnesses of God, because we bore witness against God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise. If indeed the dead do not rise, neither has Christ risen. And if Christ has not risen, your faith is vain; you are still in your sins; then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now Christ has risen from the dead, the first-fruits of those who sleep,' and the rest. Who, I ask, is found so rash and shameless as not to give credence (to these) so sacred sayings, in which there is no distinction and no doubt? Who, I ask, has bewitched you too, foolish Galatian, as he did them, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified? So I think these testimonies are enough to show the judgment, the resurrection, and the passion, by which in consequence the birth from Mary is shown as well. What then? Suppose you are unwilling to agree; yet the Scripture proclaims it most clearly. "Yet I will ask you, and you answer me. When Jesus bore witness to John and said that among those born of women none has arisen greater than John the Baptist, but the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he, tell me in what way he is greater than him in the kingdom of heaven? Was Jesus less than John in the kingdom of heaven? I say, far from it. Tell me, then, in what, so that you may at least surpass yourself. Without doubt Jesus was less than John among those born of women, but in the kingdom of heaven he was greater than he. Tell me this too, Manichaeus: if you say that Jesus was not born of Mary, but appeared as a man though he was not a man, the power that is in him bringing this about and doing it, tell me, upon whom did the Holy Spirit descend like a dove? Who is it, too, who is baptized by John? If he was perfect, if he was the Son, if he was the power, the Spirit could not enter, just as a kingdom cannot enter within a kingdom. And whose was the testimony that the voice sent from heaven brought, saying: 'This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased'? Come, tell me, do not delay: who is it that accomplishes all these things, who does all? Answer: do you thus shamelessly allege blasphemy in place of reason and try to bring it in?" ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 15:32: quotation, high confidence - Isa 22:13: quotation, medium confidence - Matt 22:40: allusion, high confidence - Gal 4:4: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 5:7: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 6:14: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:12–20: quotation, high confidence - Gal 3:1: quotation, high confidence - Matt 11:11: quotation, high confidence - Luke 7:28: quotation, medium confidence - Matt 3:16–17: quotation, high confidence - Luke 3:22: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 1 Cor 15:32 (Isa 22:13); Matt 22:40; Gal 4:4 (the Latin as printed opens "But when it was God's will among us," for "when the fullness of time came"); 1 Cor 5:7; 1 Cor 6:14; 1 Cor 15:12–20; Gal 3:1; Matt 11:11 and Luke 7:28; Matt 3:16–17 and Luke 3:22. Archelaus reads "the least in the kingdom" as Jesus. "(his)" is the editor's supplement. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 58 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/58). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 59 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-59 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes argues that the Son needed no mother or baptism, and that if Jesus was a real man the dove must be a real dove; Archelaus answers that a spirit dwells in a true man, as Manes himself claimed of the Paraclete. ### Latin text Manes dixit: Nemo quidem, qui adversum haec quae a te dicta sunt respondere potuerit, blasphemiae crimen incurrit; quin potius est omni laude dignissimus. Oportet enim artificem rebus propositis responsione diligenter aptata, manifesta omnibus ea de quibus quaeritur vel dubitatur ostendere et maxime idiotis. Et quoniam tibi doctrinae nostrae non placet ratio, tamquam artifex bonus etiam hanc mihi quaestionem rationabiliter exsolve. Mihi enim pium videtur dicere quod nihil eguerit filius dei in eo quod adventus eius procuratur ad terras neque opus habuerit columba neque baptismate neque matre neque fratribus, fortasse neque patre, qui ei secundum te fuit Ioseph; sed totus ille ipse descendens, semet ipsum in quocumque voluit transformavit in hominem eo pacto quo Paulus dicit, quia habitu repertus est ut homo. Cuius igitur rei indiguerit is qui semet ipsum in omnia transformarit, ostende. Quando enim voluit, hunc hominem rursus transformavit in speciem solis ac vultum. Quod si rursus resistis, mihi recte dicenti fidem nolens accommodare, audi definitionem tuam in qua stas. Si enim hominem eum tantummodo ex Maria esse dicis et in baptismate spiritum percepisse, ergo per profectum filius videbitur et non per naturam. Si tamen tibi concedam dicere secundum profectum esse filium quasi hominem factum hominem vere esse opinaris, id est qui caro et sanguis sit? Necesse est ergo et spiritum, qui sicut columba adparuit, non aliud esse quam naturalem columbam; sicut homo enim dictum est et sicut columba et quaecumque opinari potest de eo sermone, quod dictum est, sicut homo, hac opinione concipe etiam de eo, quod dictum est, sicut columba. Necesse est et haec aequaliter recipere, ita enim in scripturis quae de eo scripta sunt inveniuntur. Archelaus dixit: Sicut tibi ipse non potes, tamquam bonus artifex, neque ego tibi hanc quaestionem diligenter aptarem tam manifestam atque manifeste dissolverem, nisi propter hos qui adsistunt et qui nos audiunt; et ideo, sicut convenit, quaestionis huius quoque exponam rationem. Tibi quidem non videtur pie dici matrem habuisse Iesum Mariam et reliqua quae nunc prosecutus es, quae quidem omnia repetere perhorresco. Interdum quidem cogi solet artifex propter inperitiam resistentis dicere et facere ea quae tempus recusat; et ideo quia mihi est inlata necessitas propter praesentem turbam, ad ea quae a te non recte dicta sunt paucis respondeam. Dic ergo mihi: si lesum hominem naturaliter factum intellexerimus ex Maria, habentem carnem et sanguinem, intellegamus necesse est etiam spiritum sanctum veram columbam fuisse et non spiritum? Et quomodo poterit vera columba verum hominem ingredi atque in eo permanere? caro enim carnem ingredi non potest; sed magis, si Iesum hominem verum confiteamur, eum vero qui dicitur sicut columba spiritum sanctum, salva est nobis ratio in utroque. Spiritus enim secundum rectam rationem habitat in homine et descendit et permanet, et conpetenter hoc et factum est et fit semper, sicut tu te ipsum ante hoc tempus profitebaris esse paracletum dei, ut dicam: Delire, non homo, qui frequenter oblivisceris ea quae dicis. Spiritum enim venisse super te dixisti, quem promiserat Iesus esse missurum; et unde nisi de caelo descendat? Et si descendit spiritus super hominem dignum se, super te autem veras columbas descendisse sentiendum est? ut te columbarum potius furem accipiamus, insidias eis ac laqueos molientem; dignus enim es qui verbis ridiculis inludaris; ego tamen parco, ne auditores videar offendere haec dicens, et maxime quia praeter propositum est meum in te ingerere quae merearis audire. ### English translation (Claude) Manes said: "No one who has been able to answer what you have said incurs the charge of blasphemy; rather, he is most worthy of all praise. For a skilled man ought, by carefully fitting his answer to the matters proposed, to make plain to all the things that are being asked or doubted, especially to the unlearned. And since the reasoning of our teaching does not please you, solve this question too for me reasonably, like a good craftsman. For it seems to me pious to say that the Son of God needed nothing in arranging his coming to earth, and had no need of a dove, or of baptism, or of a mother, or of brothers, perhaps not even of a father, who according to you was Joseph; but he himself, coming down whole, transformed himself into a man in whatever way he wished, in the manner in which Paul says that he was found in appearance as a man. Show me, then, what thing he needed who transformed himself into all things. For when he wished, he transformed this man again into the form and face of the sun. And if you resist again, unwilling to give credence to me when I speak rightly, hear your own definition, in which you stand. For if you say that he was only a man from Mary and received the Spirit at baptism, then he will seem to be Son by advancement and not by nature. And if I grant you to say that he is Son by advancement, as a man made, do you think he is truly a man, that is, one who is flesh and blood? Then the Spirit too, which appeared like a dove, must be nothing other than a natural dove; for it was said 'like a man' and 'like a dove,' and whatever can be thought of the saying 'like a man,' hold the same opinion of the saying 'like a dove.' These things must be received alike; for so they are found in the Scriptures that are written about him." Archelaus said: "As you cannot do it yourself, like a good craftsman, neither would I carefully fit and plainly solve so plain a question for you, were it not for those who stand by and hear us; and so, as is fitting, I will set out the reasoning of this question too. It does not seem pious to you to say that Jesus had Mary as his mother, and the rest you have now gone through, all of which I shudder to repeat. Sometimes a skilled man is compelled, because of the inexperience of his opponent, to say and do things that the occasion refuses; and so, since necessity has been put on me because of the crowd present, let me answer briefly the things you have not said rightly. Tell me, then: if we understand Jesus to have been made a man by nature from Mary, having flesh and blood, must we understand that the Holy Spirit too was a real dove and not a spirit? And how could a real dove enter a real man and remain in him? For flesh cannot enter flesh. But rather, if we confess Jesus to be a true man, and the one who is said to be 'like a dove' to be the Holy Spirit, the reasoning is safe for us in both. For by right reason a spirit dwells in a man, descends and remains; and fittingly this both happened and happens always, as you yourself before this time professed to be the Paraclete of God, so that I may say: You madman, not a man, who often forget what you say. For you said that the Spirit had come upon you, whom Jesus had promised to send; and from where, except that he descends from heaven? And if the Spirit descended upon a man worthy of himself, must we think that real doves descended upon you? So that we should rather take you for a thief of doves, contriving snares and traps for them; for you deserve to be mocked with ridiculous words; yet I spare you, lest I seem to offend my hearers by saying these things, and especially because it is beside my purpose to heap on you what you deserve to hear." ### Scripture references - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence - Matt 17:2: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 3:16: allusion, high confidence - Luke 3:22: allusion, high confidence - John 1:32: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Manes's view that Christ only took the appearance of a man is reported as he states it. Scripture: Phil 2:7; Matt 17:2; Matt 3:16, Mark 1:10, Luke 3:22, John 1:32. Beeson's Scripture apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 59 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/59). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 60 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-60 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus argues that a Christ who was man only in appearance could not have been seized, have suffered, or been baptized, and that he was baptized not for his own sin but to bear the Spirit in the body born of Mary. ### Latin text Sed redeam ad rem. Memor sum enim transformationis suae, qua dicis quia deus transformaverit se in hominem vel in solem, ex hoc volens ostendere Iesum nostrum habitu solo et visu factum esse hominem, quod absit ab unoquoque fidelium dicere. Alioquin haec secundum te ad somnium nobis redeunt universa et figuras; non solum autem, sed et adventus nomen delebitur; poterat enim in caelo positus facere quae voluerat, si spiritum eum esse non hominem dicis. Sed non ita est, quoniam exinanivit semet ipsum formam servi accipiens. Dico autem de eo qui ex Maria factus est homo. Quid enim? non poteramus et nos multo facilius et lautius ista narrare? sed absit ut a veritate declinemus iota unum aut unum apicem. Est enim qui de Maria natus est filius, qui totum hoc quod magnum est voluit perferre certamen Iesus. Hic est Christus dei, qui descendit super eum qui de Maria est. Quod si non credis neque voci quae caelitus facta est, temerarium aliquid ipse pronuntias et, si dixeris, nemo credet. Statim enim in desertum ab spiritu ductus est Iesus, ut temptaretur a diabolo; quem cum diabolus ignoraret, dicebat ei: Si filius es dei. Ignorabat autem propter qui genuisset filium dei. Praedicabat regna caelorum, qui erat habitaculum magnum nec ab ullo alio portari potuisset; unde et adfixus cruci, cum resurrexisset ab inferis, adsumptus est illuc ubi Christus filius dei regnabat, ut cum iudicium habere coeperit, hi qui ignoraverunt eum videant quem conpunxerunt. Ut autem credas: cum discipuli eius per annum integrum manserint cum eo, quare nullus ipsorum procidit super faciem suam, sicut paulo ante dicebas sed in una hora illa, quando sicut sol resplenduit vultus eius? Nonne propter habitaculum illud, quod ex Maria fuerat effectum? Sicut enim paracleti pondus nullus alius valuit sustinere nisi soli discipuli et Paulus beatus, ita etiam spiritum, qui de caelis descenderat, per quem vox paterna testatur dicens: Hic est filius meus dilectus, nullus alius portare praevaluit nisi qui ex Maria natus est, super omnes sanctos Iesus. Sed et ad haec quae obicio, responde. Si habitu eum et specie dicis esse hominem, quomodo ab his, qui ex viro et muliere nati sunt, Pharisaeis teneri potuit et ad iudicium pertrahi, cum spirituale corpus a crassioribus corporibus non valeat conprehendi? Quod si habes aliquid quod ad verbum atque ad propositum respondeas, qui numquam ad proposita respondisti, perge quaeso et pugillum plenum solis mihi adfer aut modium plenum. Ipse vero sol pro eo quod subtilioris est corporis, cooperire te et circumdare potest, tu vero eum, etsi conculcaveris, nihil laedis. Dominus vero meus Iesus, si tentus est, ut homo ab hominibus tentus est. Si non est homo, nec tentus est. Si non est tentus, nec passus est nec baptizatus est. Si ille non est baptizatus, nec quisquam nostrum baptizatus est. Baptisma autem si non est, nec erit remissio peccatorum, sed in suis peccatis unusquisque morietur. Manes dixit: Ergo baptisma propter remissionem peccatorum datur? Archelaus dixit: Etiam. Manes dixit: Ergo peccavit Christus, quia baptizatus est? Archelaus dixit: Absit; quin potius pro nobis peccatum factus est, nostra peccata suscipiens, (propter) quod ex muliere natus est et propter quod ad baptisma venit, ut huius partis perciperet purificationem, ut spiritum, qui descenderat in specie columbae, corpus quod susceperat portare posset. ### English translation (Claude) "But let me return to the matter. For I remember his transformation, by which you say that God transformed himself into a man or into the sun, wanting to show from this that our Jesus was made a man in appearance and look only, which far be it from any of the faithful to say. Otherwise, according to you, all these things come back to us as a dream and figures; and not only that, but even the name of his coming will be blotted out; for he could have done what he wanted while remaining in heaven, if you say that he is a spirit and not a man. But it is not so, since he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant. I speak of him who was made man from Mary. For what? Could we not too have told these things much more easily and elegantly? But far be it from us to turn aside from the truth by one iota or one stroke. For he who was born of Mary is the Son, who willed to bear this whole great contest, Jesus. This is the Christ of God, who descended upon him who is from Mary. And if you do not believe even the voice that came from heaven, you yourself pronounce something rash, and if you say it, no one will believe it. For at once Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil; and since the devil did not know him, he said to him: 'If you are the Son of God.' But he did not know why she had borne the Son of God, who preached the kingdom of heaven, who was a great dwelling-place and could not have been borne by anyone else; and so, fastened to the cross, when he had risen from the underworld, he was taken up there where Christ the Son of God reigned, so that, when he begins to hold the judgment, those who did not know him may see him whom they pierced. "And so that you may believe: since his disciples remained with him a whole year, why did none of them fall on his face, as you said a little before, except in that one hour when his face shone like the sun? Was it not because of that dwelling-place which had been made from Mary? For as no one else could bear the weight of the Paraclete except only the disciples and blessed Paul, so too no one else could bear the Spirit who had come down from heaven, through whom the Father's voice testifies, saying, 'This is my beloved Son,' except Jesus, who was born of Mary, above all the saints. But answer this too that I put to you. If you say that he was a man in appearance and look, how could he be seized by the Pharisees, who were born of man and woman, and be dragged to judgment, since a spiritual body cannot be grasped by grosser bodies? If you have anything with which to answer to the word and the proposition, you who have never answered the propositions, go on, I beg you, and bring me a handful of the sun, or a measure full of it. But the sun itself, because it is of a finer body, can cover and surround you, while you do it no harm even if you trample on it. But my Lord Jesus, if he was held, was held as a man by men. If he is not a man, neither was he held. If he was not held, neither did he suffer, nor was he baptized. If he was not baptized, neither has any of us been baptized. And if there is no baptism, there will be no forgiveness of sins either, but each one will die in his sins." Manes said: "So baptism is given for the forgiveness of sins?" Archelaus said: "Yes." Manes said: "Then Christ sinned, since he was baptized?" Archelaus said: "Far from it; rather he was made sin for us, taking our sins on himself, (for this reason) because he was born of a woman, and for this reason he came to baptism, to receive purification for this part, so that the body he had taken on could bear the Spirit who had come down in the form of a dove." ### Scripture references - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence - Matt 5:18: allusion, high confidence - Matt 3:17: quotation, high confidence - Matt 4:1–3: quotation, high confidence - John 19:37: allusion, high confidence - Zech 12:10: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 17:2–6: allusion, high confidence - John 8:24: allusion, medium confidence - 2 Cor 5:21: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Archelaus distinguishes Jesus, born of Mary, from the Christ, the Son of God, who descended on him at the baptism; this is his own Christological language, translated as it stands (it is not the language of the later councils). "He did not know why she had borne the Son of God" renders the terse Latin (propter qui genuisset filium dei), taking Mary as the subject; uncertain. Scripture: Phil 2:7; Matt 5:18; Matt 3:17; Matt 4:1–3; Zech 12:10 and John 19:37; Matt 17:2–6; John 8:24; 2 Cor 5:21. "(propter)" is the editor's supplement. Beeson's apparatus and running head mixed into the text by the OCR are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 60 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/60). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 61 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-61 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: The crowds praise Archelaus; he promises to tell, on the word of Manes's former companion Sisinnius, who Manes is, and recalls the apostolic order of the church. ### Latin text Haec cum dixisset Archelaus, admiratae sunt turbae veritatem doctrinae eius et laudes ei inmensas cum clamoribus reddiderunt, ita ut omni studio conarentur ultra ei non sinere ad propria remeare. Et tunc quidem discesserunt; postea vero congregatis eis Archelaus adquiescere sibi atque audire verbum suadebat: non enim soli qui cum Diodoro erant audiebant eum, sed et omnes quicumque ex provincia eius aderant atque ex vicinis locis; factoque silentio, hoc modo de Mane dicere adgressus est. Qualiter quidem se habeat nostra doctrina audistis et fidei nostrae experimenta cepistis; prout potui enim intellegere scripturas coram omnibus vobis exposui. Sed nunc paucissime dicere volentem deprecor ut cum silentio audiatis, ut agnoscatis quis sit et unde et qualis sit iste qui advenit, sicut Sisinnius quidam unus ex comitibus eius indicavit mihi, quem etiam ad testimonium eorum quae a me dicentur si placet, vocare paratus sum. Sed ne ipse quidem me dicere recusabit eadem, quae nos dicimus, praesente Mane; credidit enim doctrinae nostrae supradictus, sicut et apud me alius Turbo nomine. Quaecumque ergo contestati sunt mihi, sed et ea quae nos ipsi deprehendimus in hoc viro, non faciam latere conscientiam vestram. Tunc vero turbae eo amplius incitatae congregatae sunt ad audiendum Archelaum; etenim ea quae ab eo dicebantur plurimam eis oblectationem praebebant. Propter quod et certatim adhortabantur eum dicere quaecumque vellet, quaecumque sentiret; paratos se esse ad audiendum et usque ad vesperum permanere, etiam accensis luminaribus, pollicebantur: quorum animositate incitatus Archelaus cum omni fiducia dicere exorsus est. Viri fratres, superiores quidem causas domini mei Iesu audistis, dico autem eas quae ex lege et prophetis indicantur; inferiores vero domini mei Christi Iesu salvatoris nostri non ignoratis. Sed quid plura? Appellati sumus ex salvatoris desiderio Christiani, sicut universus orbis terrarum testimonium perhibet atque apostoli edocent; sed et optimus architectus et fundamentum nostrum, id est ecclesiae, Paulus posuit et legem tradidit, ordinatis ministris et presbyteris et episcopis in ea; describens per loca singula quomodo et qualiter oporteat ministros dei, quales et qualiter fieri presbyteros qualesque esse debeant qui episcopatum desiderant; quae omnia bene nobis et recte disposita usque in hodiernum statum suum custodiunt et permanent apud nos huius regulae disciplinae. ### English translation (Claude) When Archelaus had said this, the crowds wondered at the truth of his teaching and gave him immense praise with shouts, so that they tried with all eagerness not to let him go back home any more. And then they departed; but afterwards, when they had gathered, Archelaus urged them to agree with him and to hear the word; for not only those who were with Diodorus heard him, but also all who were present from his province and from neighbouring places. And when silence had been made, he began to speak about Manes in this way: "How our teaching stands you have heard, and you have made trial of our faith; for as far as I could understand the Scriptures, I have set them out before you all. But now, as I wish to say a very little, I beg you to listen in silence, so that you may know who and from where and of what kind this man is who has come, as a certain Sisinnius, one of his companions, told me; whom I am ready, if you please, to call as a witness of what I will say. Nor will he refuse to say the same things that we say, in the presence of Manes; for the aforesaid man has believed our teaching, as has another with me, named Turbo. Whatever, then, they have testified to me, and also what we ourselves have found out about this man, I will not keep hidden from your knowledge." Then the crowds, roused all the more, gathered to hear Archelaus; for the things he said gave them very great delight. For this reason they eagerly urged him to say whatever he wished, whatever he thought; they promised that they were ready to listen and to stay until evening, even with the lamps lit. Roused by their eagerness, Archelaus began to speak with all confidence: "Brothers, you have heard the earlier facts about my Lord Jesus, I mean those that are shown from the law and the prophets; and you are not ignorant of the later facts about my Lord Christ Jesus our Saviour. But why say more? We are called Christians from our desire for the Saviour, as the whole world bears witness and the apostles teach; and Paul too, the best architect, laid our foundation, that is, the church's, and handed down its law, ordaining ministers and presbyters and bishops in it, describing in each place how and in what way the ministers of God ought to be made, of what kind and how presbyters, and of what kind those ought to be who desire the office of bishop; all of which, well and rightly ordered for us, keep their state to this day, and the discipline of this rule remains among us." ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 3:10: allusion, high confidence - Acts 14:23: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Tim 3:1–13: allusion, high confidence - Titus 1:5–9: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Scripture: 1 Cor 3:10; Acts 14:23; 1 Tim 3:1–13; Titus 1:5–9. "Ministers" (ministri) here are probably deacons. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 61 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/61). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 62 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-62 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus traces Manes's teaching to Scythianus, a Saracen who learned the wisdom of Egypt, had four books written, and died in Judea, leaving his disciple Terebinthus. ### Latin text Istius vero qui nunc nobis ex Persarum provincia ebullivit, Manes nomine, adversum quem mihi disputatio iam secundo commota est, genus vobis dicam et actum; sed et doctrina eius unde descendat lucidissime demonstrabo. Iste non est primus auctor huiuscemodi doctrinae nec solus; sed quidam Scythianus nomine apostolorum tempore fuit sectae huius auctor et princeps, sicut fuerunt et multi alii apostatae, qui primatus sibi vindicare cupientes, falsa pro veris conscripserunt, simpliciores quosque ad suam libidinem pervertentes, quorum nomina et perfidias dicere nunc tempus non sinit. Hic ergo Scythianus dualitatem istam introducit contrariam sibi, quod ipse a Pythagora suscepit sicut et alii omnes huius dogmatis sectatores, qui omnes dualitatem defendunt, declinantes scripturae viam directum; sed non in amplius proficient. Nullus tamen ita inpudenter praevaluit sicut iste Scythianus. Inimicitias enim inter duos ingenitos introduxit et omnia haec quae consequuntur huiuscemodi adsertionem. Quique Scythianus ipse ex genere Saracenorum fuit et captivam quandam accepit uxorem de superiore Thebaide, quae eum suasit habitare in Aegypto magis quam in desertis. Atque utinam numquam eum illa provincia suscepisset, in qua cum habitaret cum Aegyptiorum sapientiam didicisset; erat enim, ut quod verum est dicamus, valde dives ingenio et opibus, sicut hi qui sciebant eum per traditionem nobis quoque testificati sunt. Discipulum autem habuit quendam, qui scripsit ei quattuor libros, ex quibus unum quidem appellavit Mysteriorum, alium vero Capitulorum, tertium autem Euangelium et novissimum omnium librum Thesaurum appellavit; et erant ei isti quattuor libri et unus discipulus nomine Terebinthus. Quia ergo aliquantum temporis secum isti ambo decreverant, soli placuit Scythiano discurrere in ludaeam, ut ibi congrederetur cum omnibus, quicumque ibi videbantur esse doctores; et provenit eum continuo vita defungi nec potuisse aliquid promovere. ### English translation (Claude) "But this man, Manes by name, who has now bubbled up to us from the province of the Persians, against whom the disputation has now been stirred up for me a second time, I will tell you his origin and his doings; and I will also show most clearly where his teaching comes from. He is not the first author of a teaching of this kind, nor the only one; but a certain man named Scythianus, in the time of the apostles, was the author and leader of this sect, as there were also many other apostates, who, wanting to claim the first place for themselves, wrote false things in place of true, perverting all the simpler people to their own pleasure; their names and treacheries time does not now allow me to tell. This Scythianus, then, brought in this duality opposed to itself, which he took from Pythagoras, like all the other followers of this doctrine, who all defend duality, turning aside from the straight way of Scripture; but they will not progress further. Yet none prevailed so shamelessly as this Scythianus. For he brought in enmities between two unbegotten ones, and all the things that follow from an assertion of this kind. This Scythianus himself was of the race of the Saracens, and he took as wife a captive woman from the Upper Thebaid, who persuaded him to live in Egypt rather than in the deserts. And would that that province had never received him, in which, while he lived, he learned the wisdom of the Egyptians; for he was, to tell the truth, very rich in talent and in wealth, as those who knew him have testified to us also by tradition. He had a disciple who wrote four books for him, of which he called one the book of Mysteries, another the book of Chapters, the third the Gospel, and the last of all he called the Treasure; and he had these four books and one disciple, named Terebinthus. When the two of them had spent some time together, Scythianus alone decided to go to Judea, to meet with all who seemed to be teachers there; and it happened that he at once died and could accomplish nothing." ### Scripture references - 2 Tim 3:9: allusion, medium confidence - Acts 7:22: echo, low confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Mani, Thes. (Mani, Treasure): allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - Archelaus's account of the origins of Manichaeism (Scythianus, Terebinthus) is the polemical tradition of the Acts, translated as it stands; its historical value is doubtful. The four books (Mysteries, Chapters, Gospel, Treasure) are titles of works ascribed to Mani. Scripture: 2 Tim 3:9; Acts 7:22. The bracketed numeral "LII" in the scan is an older chapter number (removed). Beeson's apparatus mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 62 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/62). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 63 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-63 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Terebinthus flees with Scythianus's books to Babylonia, calls himself Buddas, claims a virgin birth, and is accused of lying by Parcus and Labdacus. ### Latin text Ille vero discipulus, omnibus quaecumque fuerant convasatis, in fugam versus est et Babyloniam petiit, quae nunc provincia habitatur a Persis quaeque abest nunc a locis nostris itinere dierum ac noctium ferme sex; quo cum venisset, talem de se famam pervulgavit ipse Terebinthus, dicens omni se sapientia Aegyptiorum repletum et vocari iam non Terebinthum, sed Buddam nomine sibique hoc nomen inpositum; ex quadam autem virgine natum se esse simulavit et ab angelo in montibus enutritum. Parcus vero quidam propheta et Labdacus Mithrae filius arguebant eum mendacii et erat eis cotidie satis animosa certatio de huiuscemodi negotio. Sed quid plura? Licet frequen ### English translation (Claude) "That disciple, packing up everything there was, took to flight and made for Babylonia, which is now a province inhabited by the Persians and lies now about six days' and nights' journey from our parts. When he had come there, Terebinthus himself spread such a report about himself, saying that he was filled with all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was now called not Terebinthus but Buddas, and that this name had been given to him; and he pretended that he had been born of a certain virgin and brought up by an angel in the mountains. But a certain prophet, Parcus, and Labdacus, son of Mithras, accused him of lying, and there was a fairly spirited contest between them every day over this matter. But why say more? Though often …" ### Translation notes - The scan breaks off in mid-sentence ("Licet frequen…"); the rest of the chapter (in which, in the fuller text, Terebinthus dies and the books pass to a widow) is lost in the OCR and is marked "…". Archelaus's account is polemical tradition, translated as it stands. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 63 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/63). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 64 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/55/#p-64 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus continues: a widow inherits Scythianus's books and leaves them to her freed slave Corbicius, who renames himself Manes, rewrites the books, sends out disciples, and is imprisoned after failing to cure the king's son. ### Latin text Tunc omnia illa quae secum de Aegypto pertulerat manserunt apud eam et gavisa est valde morte eius duplici causa, primo quod non libenter adspiceret artes illius, secundo pro his quae de hereditate fuerat consecuta; erat enim multum praescia. Quae cum sola esset, habere aliquem ad ministerium voluit et conparavit sibi puerulum annorum ferme Septem Corbicium nomine, quem statim manu misit ac litteris erudivit. Quique cum duodecim annorum esset effectus, anus illa diem obiit ipsique universa bona sua tradidit et cum ceteris reliquiis etiam quattuor illos libellos quos Scythianus scripserat, non multorum versuum singulos. Tunc ergo Corbicius, sepulta domina, bonis sibi derelictis omnibus uti coepit et migravit ad medium civitatis locum in quo manebat rex Persarum et commutato sibi nomine Manen semet ipsum pro Corbicio appellavit, nec Manen, sed Manes; Persarum enim lingua tali utitur declinatione. Effectus igitur puer ille annorum prope sexaginta, eruditus secundum doctrinam quae in locis illis est, et paene dixerim super omnem hominem, diligentius tamen ea didicit, quae in illis quattuor libellis continebantur; adquisivit etiam ipse discipulos tres, quorum nomina sunt haec: Thomas, Addas et Hermas. Tunc adsumit illos libellos et transfert eos, ita ut multa alia ex semet ipso insereret eis, quae anilibus fabulis similia sunt. Habebat ergo tres istos discipulos conscios malorum suorum; nomen vero libellis proprium adscribit, prioris nomine deleto, tamquam si eos solus ex semet ipso conscripserit. Tunc visum est ei mittere discipulos suos cum his quae conscripserat in libellis ad superiora ipsius provinciae loca et per diversas civitates et vicos, ut haberet aliquos se sequentes; et Thomas quidem partes Aegypti voluit occupare, Addas vero Scythiae, solus autem Hermas residere cum eo elegit. Cum ergo illi essent profecti, regis filius aegritudine quadam adreptus est, quem rex curare desiderans edictum proposuit, invitans, si quis eum curare posset, accederet, praemio multo proposito. Tunc iste, sicut illi qui cubum (quod nomen est aleae) ludere solent, praesentiam sui Manes exhibet apud regem, dicens se esse puerum curaturum; quae cum audisset rex, suscepit eum cum obsequio ac libenter habuit. Verum ne multa narrando quae gessit taedium auditoribus inferam, mortuus est puer in manibus eius vel potius extinctus. Tunc rex in carcerem detrudi iubet Manen et ferri talento onerari. illi vero duo discipuli eius qui missi fuerant ad docendum per singulas civitates quaerebantur ad poenam, quique, fugientes licet, numquam manem ### English translation (Claude) "Then everything he had brought with him from Egypt remained with her, and she rejoiced greatly at his death for two reasons: first, because she did not look kindly on his arts; second, because of what she had gained from the inheritance; for she was very foresighted. Being alone, she wanted to have someone to serve her, and she bought herself a little boy about seven years old, named Corbicius, whom she at once set free and taught letters. When he was twelve years old, the old woman died and handed over to him all her goods, and with the rest of what was left also those four little books that Scythianus had written, each of not many lines. Then Corbicius, having buried his mistress, began to use all the goods left to him, and moved to the middle of the city where the king of the Persians lived; and changing his name, he called himself Manen instead of Corbicius, or rather not Manen but Manes; for the Persian language uses such an inflection. So that boy, when he had become about sixty years old, was learned in the teaching current in those places, almost, I might say, above every man; yet he studied more carefully what was contained in those four little books. He also acquired three disciples, whose names are these: Thomas, Addas, and Hermas. Then he took those little books and translated them, so as to insert into them many other things of his own, which are like old wives' tales. He had, then, these three disciples as accomplices in his evils; and he wrote his own name on the books, deleting the name of the former owner, as if he alone had written them himself. "Then he decided to send his disciples with what he had written in the books to the upper regions of that province and through various cities and villages, so as to have some followers; and Thomas wished to take the regions of Egypt, Addas those of Scythia, while Hermas alone chose to stay with him. When they had set out, the king's son was seized by some illness; and the king, wishing to cure him, put up an edict inviting anyone who could cure him to come forward, with a great reward offered. Then this man, like those who play at cubus (which is the name of a game of dice), presented himself before the king, saying that he would cure the boy. When the king heard this, he received him with deference and was glad to have him. But not to weary my hearers by telling many of the things he did: the boy died in his hands, or rather was done to death. Then the king ordered Manes to be thrust into prison and loaded with a talent's weight of iron. And those two disciples of his who had been sent to teach through the various cities were sought for punishment; and they, though fleeing, never …" ### Translation notes - Archelaus's account is the polemical tradition of the Acts, translated as it stands. The beginning of the chapter refers to the widow with whom Terebinthus had lodged; the end of chapter 63, where she is introduced, is lost in the scan. The chapter also breaks off at the end ("numquam manem…"): the rest of the sentence (in which the disciples, though fleeing, go on spreading his teaching) is lost in the OCR, and a German note of Beeson's apparatus ("on the margin: changes his name") that follows is removed. "Cubus" is a dice game; the comparison means that Manes gambled on the cure. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 64 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/64). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 65 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/65/#p-65 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus continues: in prison Manes has his disciples buy the Christian Scriptures, recasts his teaching with Christ's name and the Paraclete, escapes to the fortress of Arabion, and is still sought by the Persian king. ### Latin text Post haec ad magistrum suum redeunt, referentes quae eis acciderint; audiunt etiam ea quae in ipsum conlata sunt mala. Accedentes ergo, ut decebat, ad eum sui et suggerentes ei de his malis quae per loca singula patiebantur, de reliquo converti se debere ad salutem suadebant; pertimuerant enim, verentes ne quid sibi ex his malis quae illi inferebantur accideret. At ille suadens eos nihil vereri ad orationem consurgit. Tunc deinde iubet in carcere positus legis Christianorum libros conparari; valde enim hi qui missi ab eo fuerant per civitates singulas ab omnibus hominibus execrationi habebantur, maxime apud quos Christianorum nomen venerationi erat. Sumpto ergo aliquantulo auri modo, abierunt ad loca in quibus Christianorum libri conscribebantur et simulantes se novicios esse Christianos rogabant praestari sibi libros ad conparandum; et, ut ne multa dicam, conparant universos libros scripturarum nostrarum et deferunt ad eum in carcere constitutum, quibus ille acceptis homo astutus coepit in nostris libris occasiones inquirere dualitatis suae nec suae quidem, sed Scythiani, qui hoc ante plurimum temporis protulerat, et ex nostris libris, sicut etiam adversum me disputans fecit, adsertionem suam proferre, quaedam in his accusans, quaedam permutans, solo Christi nomine adiecto; quem se idcirco suscipere simulavit, ut per civitates singulas sanctum et divinum nomen audientes Christi, minime execrantes eos, discipulos istius non fugarent. Inveniens autem etiam vocem de paracleto positam in scripturis, semet ipsum esse subiecit, qui non legerat diligenter quia paracletus iam tunc venisset cum apostoli adhuc essent super terram. His ergo tam scelerate conpositis, mittit et discipulos suos praedicaturos intrepide fictos simulatosque errores et novas falsasque voces adnuntiaturos per loca singula. Quod cum rex Persarum cognovisset, dignis eum suppliciis subdere parat. Quo Manes agnito, admonitus in somnis, elapsus de carcere in fugam versus est, auro plurimo custodibus corruptis, et mansit in castello Arabionis. Unde scriptam epistulam per Turbonem ad Marcellum nostrum misit, in qua se significavit esse venturum. Quo cum venisset, fuit nobis certamen tale quale et hic vidistis et audistis, in quo prout potuimus ostendimus eum pseudoprophetam esse manifeste. Sed custos quidem carceris qui eum dimiserat punitus est; rex vero eum requiri iussit et in quibuscumque locis repertum conprehendi. Haec cum ego cognovissem, necessarium fuit me etiam vobis indicare quia requiritur iste a rege Persarum usque in hodiernum diem. ### English translation (Claude) "After this they went back to their master and reported what had happened to them; and they also heard of the evils that had been brought on him. So his own people, approaching him as was fitting and telling him of the evils they were suffering in each place, urged him for the rest to turn to safety; for they were afraid, fearing lest something of the evils that were being inflicted on him should happen to them. But he, urging them to fear nothing, rose to pray. Then, while placed in prison, he ordered them to procure the books of the law of the Christians; for those who had been sent by him through the various cities were held in execration by all men, especially by those among whom the name of Christians was held in veneration. So, taking a small amount of gold, they went to the places where the books of the Christians were copied, and, pretending to be new Christians, asked to be allowed to buy books; and, not to say much, they bought all the books of our Scriptures and brought them to him in prison. When he had received them, the crafty man began to look in our books for pretexts for his duality, or rather not even his, but Scythianus's, who had put this forward a very long time before; and from our books, as he did also when disputing against me, to bring forward his assertion, accusing some things in them, changing others, adding only the name of Christ. He pretended to accept it for this reason: so that in the various cities people, hearing the holy and divine name of Christ, would not curse his disciples and drive them away. And finding also the saying about the Paraclete placed in the Scriptures, he put himself forward as being him, he who had not read carefully that the Paraclete had already come while the apostles were still on earth. "Having put these things together so wickedly, he sent out his disciples too, to preach fearlessly his invented and feigned errors and to proclaim new and false sayings in each place. When the king of the Persians learned this, he prepared to subject him to fitting punishments. When Manes learned it, warned in a dream, he slipped out of the prison and took to flight, having bribed the guards with a great deal of gold, and he stayed in the fortress of Arabion. From there he sent a letter by Turbo to our Marcellus, in which he indicated that he would come. When he had come there, there was a contest between us such as you have seen and heard here too, in which, as far as we could, we showed plainly that he is a false prophet. The keeper of the prison who had let him go was punished; and the king ordered him to be sought and seized wherever he was found. When I learned this, it was necessary for me to tell you too that this man is being sought by the king of the Persians to this very day." ### Scripture references - John 14:16: allusion, medium confidence - Acts 2:1–4: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Polemical account, translated as it stands. Scripture: John 14:16, 26; Acts 2:1–4. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 65 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/65). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 66 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/65/#p-66 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Manes flees again, is later captured and executed by the Persian king, and Archelaus adds the account of his death to the record of the disputation. ### Latin text His auditis, turbae volebant Manen conprehensum tradere potestati barbarum, qui erant vicini ultra Strangam fluvium, quoniam et ante tempus venerant quidam ad requirendum eum, quo nusquam reperto discesserant; erat enim tunc in fuga constitutus. Cum ergo haec ita Archelaus prodidisset, continuo se in fugam dedit Manes et evadere potuit, dum nemo eum insequeretur, cum populus Archelai quem libenter audiebant relatione teneretur, quidam tamen crebre insecuti sunt post eum. Sed ille vias quibus venerat repetens transito fluvio ad Arabionis castellum rediit, ubi postea conprehensus, oblatus est regi; quique plurima adversus eum indignatione commotus, duas mortes in eum vindicare cupiens, unam filii, alteram carcerarii, iussit eum ante portas civitatis excoriatum suspendi et pellem eius medicamentis infectam inflari, carnes vero volucribus dari iussit. Quibus postea agnitis, Archelaus adiecit ea priori disceptationi ut omnibus innotesceret, sicut ego, qui haec scripsi, in prioribus exposui. Congregatis igitur omnibus Christianis ferri adversus eum sententiam placuit, velut epylogum quendam morti eius transmittentes consonantem reliquae vitae eius negotiis. ### English translation (Claude) When they heard this, the crowds wanted to seize Manes and hand him over to the power of the barbarians who lived nearby beyond the river Stranga, since some had come before to look for him and had gone away without finding him; for at that time he was in flight. When Archelaus had disclosed these things, Manes at once took to flight and was able to escape, while no one pursued him, since the people were held by the account of Archelaus, whom they were glad to hear; yet some did follow him closely. But he, going back by the roads by which he had come, crossed the river and returned to the fortress of Arabion. There he was later seized and brought to the king; and the king, moved with very great indignation against him and wishing to avenge two deaths on him, one of his son and the other of the jailer, ordered him to be flayed and hung up before the gates of the city, and his skin to be steeped in drugs and inflated, and his flesh to be given to the birds. When these things were learned later, Archelaus added them to the earlier disputation, so that they might be known to all, as I, who wrote these things, have set out above. So when all the Christians had gathered, it was resolved that a sentence should be passed against him, sending it as a kind of epilogue to his death, in keeping with the other affairs of his life. ### Translation notes - The account of Mani's execution is the polemical tradition of the Acts (Manichaean sources describe his death in prison under Bahram I); translated as it stands. The narrator speaks in the first person ("as I, who wrote these things"). ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 66 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/66). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 67 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/65/#p-67 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus argues that Manes did not invent his dualism but took it over, and quotes the thirteenth book of Basilides's treatises on light and darkness as an earlier witness to it. ### Latin text Addidit etiam hoc Archelaus dicens: Viri fratres, ne quis vestrum incredulus sit his quae a me dicta sunt, id est quod non ipse primus auctor scelerati huius dogmatis extiterit Manes, sed tantum quod per ipsum aliquibus terrae partibus manifestatum sit. Sed non statim is qui aliquid quocumque portaverit auctor eius putandus est, sed qui invenerit. Sicut enim gubernator acceptam navem, quam alius fecit, ad quaecumque loca voluerit perducere potest, alienus est tamen omni genere a constructione eius, ita intellegendus est et iste. Non enim ex initio huic rei ipse originem dedit, sed tantum quae ab alio fuerant inventa per se detulit hominibus, sicut certis testimoniis notum est, quibus propositum est nobis ostendere: non ex Mane originem mali huius manasse, sed ab alio, et ante multum temporis a barbaro quodam exorta in silentio habita, ab isto vero ignota et latentia velut propria eius esse prolata, deleto conscriptoris titulo, sicut superius exposui. Fuit praedicator apud Persas etiam Basilides quidam antiquior, non longo post nostrorum apostolorum tempore; qui et ipse cum esset versutus et vidisset quod eo tempore iam essent omnia praeoccupata, dualitatem istam voluit adfirmare quae etiam apud Scythianum erat. Denique cum nihil haberet quod adsereret proprium, aliis dictis proposuit adversariis. Et omnes eius libri difficilia quaedam et asperrima continent. Extat tamen tertius decimus liber tractatuum eius, cuius initium tale est: „Tertium decimum nobis tractatuum scribentibus librum necessarium sermonem uberemque salutaris sermo praestabit: per parabolam divitis et pauperis naturam sine radice et sine loco rebus supervenientem unde pullulaverit indicat". Hoc autem solum caput liber continet? Nonne continet et alium sermonem? At, sicut opinati sunt quidam, nonne omnes offendamini ipso libro, cuius initium erat hoc? Sed ad rem rediens Basilides interiectis plus minusve quingentis versibus ait: „Desinamus ab inani et curiosa varietate; requiramus autem magis quae de bonis et malis etiam barbari inquisierunt et in quas opiniones de his omnibus pervenerunt. Quidam enim horum dixerunt initia omnium duo esse, quibus bona et mala adsociaverunt, ipsa dicentes initia sine initio esse et ingenita; id est in principiis lucem fuisse ac tenebras, quae ex semet „ipsis erant, non quae (genitae) esse dicebantur. Haec cum apud semet „ipsa essent, proprium unumquodque eorum vitam agebant quam vellent „et quäle sibi conpeteret; omnibus enim amicum est, quod est proprium et nihil sibi ipsum malum videtur. Postquam autem ad alterutrum agnitionem uterque pervenit et tenebrae contemplatae sunt lucem, „tamquam melioris rei sumpta concupiscentia insectabantur ea et coadmisceri ac participari de ea cupiebant. Et tenebrae quidem haec agebant, „lux vero nequaquam ex tenebris quicquam recipiebat in sese nec in „earum desiderium veniebat, tantummodo quod etiam ipsa spectandi libidinem passa est. Et quidem et respexit eas velut per speculum. Enfasis igitur, id est color quidam lucis, ad tenebras factus est solus, sed „lux ipsa respexit tantummodo et abscessit, nulla scilicet parte sumpta „de tenebris. Tenebrae vero ex luce sumpserunt intuitum et yles enfasin „vel colorem, in quo ei displicuerant. Cum ergo nequiores de meliore „sumpsissent non veram lucem, sed speciem quandam lucis atque enfasin, . . . boni raptiva mutatione traxerunt. Unde nec perfectum bonum „est in hoc mundo, et quod est valde est exiguum, quia parum fuit etiam „illud, quod initio conceptum est. Verum tamen per hoc ipsum exiguum „lucis, immo potius per speciem quandam lucis, creaturae valuerunt generare similitudinem perferentem ad illam, quam de luce conceperant, permixtionem. Et haec est ista, quam cernimus, creatura." Sed et reliqua eorum similia in consequentibus executus est. Haec autem sufficere aestimavi ad ostendendam eius in hac parte sententiam. In his enim de mundi conditione conscripsit secundum quod Scythianus senserat ### English translation (Claude) Archelaus added this too, saying: "Brothers, let none of you be unbelieving about what I have said, namely that Manes was not himself the first author of this wicked doctrine, but only that it was made known through him in some parts of the earth. For one who has carried something anywhere is not at once to be thought its author, but the one who found it. For as a helmsman who has received a ship that another built can take it to whatever places he wishes, yet is in every way a stranger to its construction, so this man too is to be understood. For he did not give this thing its origin from the beginning, but only brought to men by himself what had been found by another, as is known by sure testimonies, by which it is our purpose to show you that the origin of this evil did not flow from Manes but from another, and that, having arisen long before from a certain barbarian and been kept in silence, it was brought out by this man as his own when it was unknown and hidden, the writer's title having been deleted, as I set out above. "There was also among the Persians a preacher, a certain Basilides, older, not long after the time of our apostles; and he too, being crafty and seeing that at that time everything had already been taken up, wanted to affirm this duality which was also in Scythianus. In short, since he had nothing of his own to assert, he put forward others' sayings to his adversaries. And all his books contain some difficult and very harsh things. Yet the thirteenth book of his treatises is extant, which begins thus: 'As we write the thirteenth book of our treatises, the saving word will supply us with the necessary and fruitful word: through the parable of the rich man and the poor man it shows from where a nature without root and without place, supervening on things, sprang up.' Does the book contain only this heading? Does it not contain another discourse too? And, as some have thought, will you not all be offended at the book itself, whose beginning was this? But returning to the subject, Basilides, after some five hundred lines more or less have intervened, says: 'Let us leave off empty and curious variety, and let us rather seek out what the barbarians too have inquired about good and evil, and what opinions they have reached about all these things. For some of them said that the beginnings of all things are two, to which they joined good and evil, saying that the beginnings themselves are without beginning and unbegotten; that is, that in the beginnings there were light and darkness, which were from themselves, not which were said to be (begotten). While these were by themselves, each of them led the life it wished and that suited it; for to all, what is its own is friendly, and nothing seems evil to itself. But after each came to know the other, and the darkness beheld the light, as if seized with desire for the better thing, it pursued it and longed to be mixed with it and to share in it. And the darkness did this; but the light received nothing at all from the darkness into itself, nor came to desire it, except that it too suffered a longing to look. And indeed it looked at it as through a mirror. So a reflection (emphasis), that is, a certain colour of light, came to the darkness alone; but the light itself only looked and withdrew, taking no part at all from the darkness. But the darkness took from the light the look, and the reflection or colour of matter, in which it had displeased it. So when the worse had taken from the better not the true light but a certain appearance of light and a reflection, … they drew off by a rapacious change of the good. Therefore there is no perfect good in this world, and what there is, is very small, because that too was small which was conceived at the beginning. Yet through this very small amount of light, or rather through a certain appearance of light, the creatures were able to beget a likeness reaching to that mixture which they had conceived from the light. And this is the creation that we see.' And he followed out the rest like these in what comes after. But I thought this enough to show his opinion on this point. For in these words he wrote about the making of the world according to what Scythianus had thought." ### Scripture references - Luke 16:19–31: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The Basilides quoted here is described as a Persian preacher of the generation after the apostles; whether he is the Alexandrian Gnostic Basilides is disputed. The passage is a fragment of his treatises preserved only here, translated as printed; the Latin is in places obscure. "Reflection" renders enfasis (Greek ἔμφασις). A gap in the text is marked "…" as in the edition. "(genitae)" is the editor's supplement. Scripture: Luke 16:19–31 (the rich man and the poor man). The public-domain English (ANF 6) breaks off early in the quotation; the rest was re-read against the Latin. Beeson's running head mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 67 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/67). ## Acta Archelai (Latin) 68 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/65/#p-68 - Source: Beeson GCS 16 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-10-23 Summary: Archelaus closes by tracing Manes's teaching through Basilides to Scythianus; the work ends with Hegemonius's signature and a short appended catalogue of heresies down to the Apollinarians, Novatians, Montenses, and Luciferians. ### Latin text Hic vero adsumptis eius litteris adiecit etiam nomina daemonum et commotiones inquietas atque elementorum cursus non secundum illum ordinem, qui a veteribus scriptus est, sed ut sarcinam quandam verborum multorum et inutilium congregaret et permixtiones inmensas ac confusiones legentibus generaret. Quia vero omnis eius dogma et inscientia Basilide illi obversante conscripta in dualitate suspensa sunt, nulli dubium est. Si quis ergo subvertere potuerit ingenitam dualitatem, quam ipse adserit, dico: universam eius verborum silvam pariter abscideret. Sicut enim quis draconis caput esecans reliqua corporis eius inutilia atque inania derelinquet, ita et nos, si dispositam non recte creaturam et commixtionem duorum ingenitorum, lucis ac tenebrae, sicut Basilides praesumit, ostenderimus, sine dubio omnia reliqua, quae ipse scribit, inania et quae nos scripsimus, vera esse signabimus. Hoc autem deprecor eos, qui his exemplis uti voluerint, ut subtilius intueantur unumquemque sermonem, quoniam quidem argute et breviter Basilides locutus est ea, quae apud Scythianum reppererat definita; quae hic translata subtilius argumentis quoque violentioribus communivit, uti verborum novitate propria sua esse putarentur. Haec, ut potuimus, a nobis dicta sunt. Poterunt autem hi, qui nos sensu sublimiori praecellunt, plura horum ac meliora proferre atque conscribere adversum eos libros, qui ab illo editi sunt. Finita ergo disputatione ista, Archelaus turbas cum pace dimisit ad propria. Qui benedicentes eum voce, qua dignum est, cum omni laetitia discesserunt. Ego Egemonius scripsi disputationem istam exceptam ad describendum volentibus. Veteres heretici propemodum omnes divinitatem duplicem simularunt, ut alium bonum deum, alium iustum esse confingerent et dicerent boni dei subvenitoris atque melioris filium dominum Iesum Christum venisse in hunc mundum, ut de iusti dei, quem tantum severum putant dominum, animas ad pristinas reduceret sedes, quae creatoris praecepto corporibus fuissent ligatae. Ex quibus est Cerdon atque Marcion et ceteri qui eorum sequuntur errorem. Valentinus vero et ipse duplicem esse simulavit divinitatem; is simul et aeonum numerum novum visus est introferre, quod triginta aeonas visus est dicere. Basilides quoque de hac inpietate descendit, qui tot deos simulat esse, quot dies in anno sunt, et de his quasi minutalibus unam summam divinitatis efficit et appellat Mithram, siquidem iuxta conputationem Graecarum litterarum Mithras anni numerum habet. Hi non multum a gentilitate distant et eisdem paene mysteriis inbuuntur, quibus a gentilibus initiatur. Hoc defuncto aliae rursum multae diversae hereses ebullierunt, quae divinitatem Christi negantes tantummodo confitentur humanitatem eius ex Maria. Ex quibus est Cerinthus, Ebion et nunc Fotinus, qui eorum heresim instauravit. Erupit et alia heresis, quae Catafrigae appellatur ex promissione spiritus sancti, quam dominus salvator noster pollicitus est dicens: Vadam et alium paracletum mittam vobis, adserens non in apostolis, sed in Montanum, Priscillam et Maximillam. Post has erupit Manichaeus, post dormitionem sancti martyris Cypriani, modicum ante Diocletianum, qui alium deum bonum, alium malum indicant et omnium universa quae a corpore sunt dicunt esse Satanae. Huius heresis de Pythagorae fonte libatur et commixta magicis artibus astrologia quoque utuntur, sicut et ipse Pythagoras de his exordium sumit. Et uti infinita praeteream, nunc de novis heresibus breviter increpandum est. Super funere Constantini erupit heresis Arriana apud Alexandriam, quae unum patrem deum esse, filium vero eiusdem dominum nostrum Iesum Christum et spiritum sanctum adoptione esse filium non natura et quantum distare dicit filium a patre tantum rursus dicit a filio spiritum separari. Haec in tria scinditur. Eunomius quippe, a quo vocantur Eunomiani audaciter proclamant et libere, quod quorum diversa natura est, similes eos esse non posse, itaque filium et patrem, quoniam alterius substantiae essent, dissimiles esse. Macedonius vero, a quo vocantur Macedoniani, qui etiam Arriani nuncupantur, sub inpietate pietatem videntur inferre, ut dicant similem esse filium patri; et in eo differunt ab Arrianis, quod Arriani filium similem patri dicunt, Macedoniani vero, ut plus ei donare videantur, similem dicunt esse per omnia. Sed et eos dolus et lapsa quasi pietas detegit, cum etiam homo ad imaginem et similitudinem dei conditus sit. Extrema est heresis Apollinaris, quae quot homines habent tot paene sententias. Necdum enim inter eos decretum est, in quae quasi pro certo et statuto blasphemabunt. Alii dicunt nec sensum nee animam humanam habuisse dominum nostrum Iesum Christum. Qui vero audaciores sunt, etiam corpus illius sic de Maria confitentur, ut nihilominus etiam hoc de caelestibus vindicent. Nonnulli animam et corpus tantummodo profitentes, sensum, id est mentem, negant. Sed istos si discusseris, et animam et corpus incipiunt denegare et dicunt pro anima inhabitatorem fuisse verbum deum; et dum volunt humanitatem in Christo negare, id est: quod et cogitationibus humanis non subiectus fuerit, omnes passiones eius ad deitatem referunt, si animam non habuit nec mentem. Flevit autem et contristatus est et ceteros passus est affectus. Haec enim per se corpus pati non potest. Superest, ut deitas in illo haec passa fuerit. Inter Novatianos et Montenses hoc interest, quod Novatiani maiorum criminum poenitentiam non accipiunt, id est negationis, adulterii, homicidii, fornicationis et ceterorum his similium; Montenses vero dicunt nos scripturas sanctas exurendas tradidisse, simulantes suos episcopos ecclesiam gubernasse et quod faciunt Luciferiani monentibus sacerdotibus, hoc illi faciunt in omnibus ecclesiis, dicentes eorum sacerdotes esse non posse, qui scripturas tradiderunt, et super hoc addunt, quia nostram ecclesiam traditorum infamant quemcumque a nobis invenerint. ### English translation (Claude) "This man, taking up his writings, added also names of demons, and restless movements, and courses of the elements, not according to the order written by the ancients, but so as to gather a bundle of many useless words and produce immense mixtures and confusions for his readers. That his whole doctrine and ignorance, written with that Basilides before him, hangs on duality, no one doubts. If anyone, then, can overturn the unbegotten duality that he asserts, I say, he will cut down the whole forest of his words at once. For as one who cuts off a dragon's head leaves the rest of the body useless and empty, so we too, if we show that the creation and the mixture of the two unbegotten ones, light and darkness, as Basilides presumes, has not been rightly arranged, will without doubt mark all the rest that he writes as empty, and what we have written as true. And this I ask of those who wish to use these examples: that they look more closely at each saying, since Basilides spoke shrewdly and briefly the things he had found defined in Scythianus; which this man, having taken them over, fortified more subtly with more violent arguments too, so that by the novelty of the words they might be thought his own. These things have been said by us as we could. But those who surpass us in loftier sense will be able to bring forward and write more and better things than these against the books that were published by him." So when this disputation was finished, Archelaus dismissed the crowds home in peace. And they, blessing him with the voice he deserved, departed with all joy. I, Hegemonius, wrote this disputation, taken down to be copied for those who wish it. Almost all the ancient heretics feigned a double divinity, so as to invent that one god is good and the other just, and to say that the Lord Jesus Christ, the son of the good god, the helper and the better, came into this world to bring back to their former seats the souls from the just god, whom they think only a severe lord, souls which had been bound to bodies by the creator's command. Among them are Cerdon and Marcion and the others who follow their error. Valentinus too feigned a double divinity; at the same time he seemed to bring in a new number of aeons, since he seemed to speak of thirty aeons. Basilides also comes down from this impiety, who feigns that there are as many gods as there are days in the year, and out of these, as small coins, he makes one sum of divinity and calls it Mithras, since according to the reckoning of Greek letters Mithras has the number of the year. These are not far from paganism and are imbued with almost the same mysteries into which one is initiated by the pagans. After his death many other different heresies bubbled up again, which deny the divinity of Christ and confess only his humanity from Mary. Among them are Cerinthus, Ebion, and now Fotinus, who has renewed their heresy. Another heresy also broke out, which is called the Cataphrygians, from the promise of the Holy Spirit which our Lord and Saviour promised, saying, 'I will go and send you another Paraclete,' asserting that it was not in the apostles, but in Montanus, Priscilla, and Maximilla. After these broke out Manichaeus, after the falling asleep of the holy martyr Cyprian, a little before Diocletian, whose followers declare one god good and another evil, and say that everything that comes from the body belongs to Satan. This heresy is drawn from the spring of Pythagoras, and, mixed with magic arts, they also use astrology, just as Pythagoras himself takes his beginning from these things. And to pass over countless others, now the new heresies must be briefly rebuked. At the funeral of Constantine the Arian heresy broke out at Alexandria, which says that God the Father is one, but that his Son our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are sons by adoption, not by nature, and that as far as the Son stands apart from the Father, so far again the Spirit is separated from the Son. This is split into three. For Eunomius, from whom the Eunomians are named, proclaims boldly and freely that those whose nature is different cannot be like, and so that the Son and the Father, since they are of different substance, are unlike. Macedonius, from whom the Macedonians are named, who are also called Arians, seem to bring in piety under impiety, saying that the Son is like the Father; and they differ from the Arians in that the Arians say the Son is like the Father, while the Macedonians, to seem to give him more, say he is like in all things. But deceit and a fallen, as it were, piety exposes them too, since man also was made in the image and likeness of God. Last is the heresy of Apollinaris, which has almost as many opinions as it has men. For it has not yet been decided among them on what they will blaspheme as if certain and settled. Some say that our Lord Jesus Christ had neither human sense nor soul. Those who are bolder confess even his body to be from Mary in such a way that they nonetheless claim it too as from heaven. Some, professing only soul and body, deny sense, that is, mind. But if you examine these, they begin to deny both soul and body, and say that in place of the soul the indweller was God the Word; and while they want to deny the humanity in Christ, that is, that he was not subject to human thoughts, they refer all his passions to the deity, if he had no soul or mind. But he wept and was grieved and suffered the other affections. For these the body cannot suffer by itself. It remains that the deity suffered these things in him. Between the Novatians and the Montenses there is this difference: the Novatians do not accept the repentance of the greater sins, that is, of denial, adultery, murder, sexual immorality, and the rest like them; the Montenses say that we handed over the holy Scriptures to be burned, pretending that their own bishops governed the church; and what the Luciferians do when the priests admonish them, they do in all churches, saying that those who handed over the Scriptures cannot be priests; and on top of this they add that they defame as belonging to the church of traditors whoever they find from among us. ### Scripture references - John 14:16: quotation, high confidence - Gen 1:26: allusion, high confidence - John 11:35: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 26:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The signature "I, Hegemonius, wrote this disputation" is the only place where the author's name appears. The catalogue of heresies that follows is a later appendix transmitted with the work in the Latin manuscripts (it names fourth-century groups: Arians, Eunomians, Macedonians, Apollinarians, Luciferians); Beeson prints it at the end. It is translated as printed; its views are its own, stated without comment. "Montenses" ("the mountain people") is a name for the Donatists at Rome; "traditors" are those who handed over the Scriptures in persecution. Basilides's god is usually named Abrasax, whose letters total 365; the text says Mithras (whose Greek letters, spelled Meithras, also total 365). "Macedonians … also called Arians" and the description of their teaching are as printed (the catalogue appears to confuse the Macedonians with the Homoiousians). Scripture: John 14:16; Gen 1:26; John 11:35; Matt 26:38. The public-domain English (ANF 6) does not include this chapter; it was re-read against the Latin. Beeson's running head mixed into the text by the OCR is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Hegemonius, Acta Archel. (Lat.) 68 (Beeson GCS 16; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/hegemonius-acta-archelai-latina/68).