Толкование К Титу послание ап. Павла 1 глава 12 стих - Экзегет

Слова: из них же самих один пророк сказал¹, как кажется, относятся к тем, о ком говорилось выше. Так как этот гекзаметр не находится ни у кого из пророков, кто пророчествовал у иудеев, то, как мне кажется, это место следует прочесть двояко. Сказал некто из них, их собственный пророк, то есть — критянин. Но поскольку под этим понимается многое, и это кажется абсурдным, и, вероятно, никто этого не примет применительно ко всем критянам, то это относится не специально к иудеям и, более всего, к тем, кто от обрезания, — но ко многим, кто были непокорны и тщеславны, и обманщики; и прежде всего потому, что они были на Крите, считались критянами.

*** А что ты в конце письма спрашиваешь, зачем я в своих сочинениях иногда представляю примеры из светских наук и белизну Церкви оскверняю нечистотами язычников... кому неизвестно, что и у Моисея, и в писаниях пророков нечто заимствовано из книг языческих, что и Соломон и предлагал вопросы, и отвечал философам Тирским? ...И апостол Павел в письме Титу употребил стих из поэта Эпименида: Критяне всегда лживы, злые звери, утробы праздные, — полустишие, впоследствии употребленное Каллимахом.

In terms of the text itself and as far as it pertains to the content of the passage, what he says, “One of themselves, a prophet of their own said,” seems to refer to those of whom he said above, “especially those who are of the circumcision, whom it is necessary to restrain, who overturn entire homes, teaching what is not fitting for the sake of disgraceful profit.” Thus it follows: “one of themselves, a prophet of their own said.” But since this brief hexameter verse is not found in any of the prophets who prophesied in Judea, to me it seems that there are two ways this should be read. Thus when what he says, “one of themselves, a prophet of their own said,” is joined with what precedes, “For the sake of this matter, I left you in Crete, so that you would correct the things that were lacking,” it follows, “one of themselves, a prophet of their own said,” that is, one of the Cretans.
But because there are many things in between, and this seems absurd, and perhaps no one would receive it, therefore one should apply it in another manner with the preceding things that are nearer to it, so that we read, “For there are also many who are insubordinate, vain talkers, and deceivers of minds, but especially those who are of the circumcision.” “It is necessary to restrain many who are insubordinate, vain talkers, and deceivers of minds, along with those who are of the circumcision, who overturn entire homes, teaching what is not fitting for the sake of disgraceful profit.” “One of themselves, a prophet of their own said.” Thus his words, “a prophet of their own,” refers not particularly to the Jews, and to those especially “who are of the circumcision,” but to the “many who are disobedient and vain talkers and deceivers of minds.” Especially because they were in Crete, they must be believed to have been Cretans.
Now this brief verse is said to be found among the oracular sayings of the Cretan poet Epimenides. In the present circumstances he has either mockingly called him a prophet, namely, because such Christians deserve to have prophets like this, just as there were also prophets of Baal and prophets of confusion and others of stumbling blocks, and whatever other corrupt prophets Scripture mentions; or he has truly called him one, because he had written about oracles and responses that both predict the future itself and tell well ahead of time the things that are coming. After all, the book itself is marked on the title page “Oracles.” Because it seemed to promise something divine, for this reason I think the apostle looked into it to see what the divination of the pagans promised. And on the occasion of writing to Titus, who was in Crete, he used (abusum) this little verse in order to crush the false teachers of the Cretans by means of an author from their own island.
Now it is noticeable that Paul does this not only in this passage but also in others. For in the Acts of the Apostles, when he was assembled with the people and was involved in discussion on the Areopagus, which is the Senate Building of the Athenians, among other things he says, “Just as one of your own poets said: ‘For we are indeed his offspring.’” This half-line is read in the Phaenomena of Aratus, which Cicero translated into the Latin language, as well as Germanicus Caesar and recently Avienus and many whom it would take too long to enumerate. He also does this in his letter to the Corinthians, who were themselves polished by Attic eloquence. And because of the proximity of locations, they are seasoned with a taste of the Athenians. There he took an iambic line from a comedy of Menander: “Bad company ruins good morals.”
It is not surprising if on occasion he makes use (abutatur) of lines from pagan poets, since he even changes some things from the inscription of an altar and says to the Athenians, “For while passing through and observing your objects of worship, I even found an altar in which it was inscribed: ‘To an unknown God.’ And so, what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you.” Now the inscription of the altar was not precisely as Paul claimed: “to an unknown God,” but “to the gods of Asia and of Europe and of Africa, to the unknown and foreign gods.” But because Paul did not require several unknown gods but only one unknown God, he used the word in the singular, in order to teach that that God is his own, whom the Athenians had designated on the inscription of the altar; and that by knowing him in the right way, they ought to worship him whom they were venerating in ignorance and whom they were unable not to know. Now Paul did this seldom and as the occasion of the passage demanded, rather than from ostentation, in the manner of bees, which are accustomed to store up honey from different flowers and to fit together the little storerooms of their honeycombs.
There are those who think that this verse has been taken from the poet Callimachus of Cyrene and to some extent they are not wrong. For in fact he himself, while repeatedly writing in praise of Jove against the Cretans, who boasted that they displayed a tomb, says, “Cretans are always liars, who by their sacrilegious mind have fabricated even his tomb.” But, as we said above, the apostle took the entire verse from the poet Epimenides. And his Callimachus made use of an introduction in his poem. Or, without plagiarism of someone else’s work, he rendered into meter a common proverb in which the Cretans were called liars.
Some think that the apostle should be rebuked because he impru-dently slipped, and while accusing false teachers he approved of that little line, that the reason the Cretans are said to be liars is because they inanely built Jupiter’s tomb. For if, they say, the reason Epimenides, or Callimachus, prove that the Cretans are liars and evil beasts and idle bellies is because they do not perceive divine things; and they imagine that Jove, who reigns in heaven, is buried on their island; and that which they said is proven to be true by the apostle’s judgment; then it follows that Jupiter is not dead but alive. Unskillfully, therefore, Paul, the destroyer of idolatry, while he pleads against perverse teachers, has asserted the gods whom he was fighting against.
One should briefly respond to them as follows. Just as in what he says, “Bad company corrupts good morals,” and in this, “For we are his offspring,” he has not all at once approved of the entire comedy of Menander and book of Aratus; but he has made use of the occasion of a brief line; so also in the present passage. By one little verse he has not affirmed the whole work of Callimachus or Epimenides, one of whom sings Jove’s praises, the other who writes often of oracles; but he merely rebuked the mendacious Cretans for a vice that is characteristic of their nation. He silences them by means of an author from their own country, not on account of that opinion by which they are convicted by the poets, but on account of their inborn readiness to lie.
But those who think that someone who uses a part of a book is ob-ligated to follow the entire book seem to me to be receiving among the Scriptures of the church the apocrypha Enoch from which the apostle Jude has cited a testimony in his epistle, and the many other things that the apostle Paul has spoken about recondite matters. For by this argument we could say the following: among the Athenians he said that they worshiped the unknown God whom they pointed out to him on the altar. Paul ought to follow the other things as well that were written on that altar, and he should do the things that the Athenians were doing. For he had partly agreed with the Athenians in the worship of the unknown God. Far be it from me to drag his argument and scholarship from elegance into calumny in this way.
There is no one who is so much a murderer, so much a parricide, so much a poisoner, that he does not do something good once in a while. Well then, if I see and approve of the one good thing in such men, am I immediately burdened by the necessity to approve the other evils things that they do? If an enemy who is against us is scolded and
cries out, does he not speak some truth amidst the words of enmity and wrangling, which are not faulted absolutely, even by us against whom he is speaking? And so, both Callimachus and Epimenides have not therefore spoken truly, that Jove is a god and the remaining things that are contained in their poems, just because the Cretans are liars; but they have spoken truth only in that matter, since they have expressed a congenital vice of mendacity in the Cretans, who because they are liars have not immediately not spoken truth as well once in a while. For Ju-piter would not therefore be a god, if the Cretans spoke truth; but even with them being silent, he who was dead would not have the name of god.