LatineEnglish
QUESTION III. Whether by those words is signified a fire surrounding Paradise like a wall.1
QUAESTIO III. An illis verbis significetur Ignis ambiens Paradisum instar muri.
Nicolaus de Lyra, qui putavit Paradisum in celsissimo orbis terrarum monte fuisse collocatum, hoc loco arbitratur, ex illo altissimo paradisi monte, iussu Dei, circumquaque maximam vim, & copiam ignis erupisse, & in modum coronae seu muri, omnem paradisi aditum a Deo esse circumclusum. Non probatur hoc Tostato, quia si ex illo monte tanta vis ignis perpetuo eructaretur; necesse esset interiora illius montis esse sulphurea, terramque illam penitus exustam, quod...
Nicholas of Lyra, who thought that Paradise was placed on the highest mountain of the earth, judges in this place that, from that highest mountain of paradise, at God's command, on every side a very great force and abundance of fire erupted, and, in the manner of a crown or wall, the whole entrance of paradise was enclosed by God. This is not approved by Tostatus, because if such a force of fire were perpetually belched forth from that mountain, the interior of that mountain would necessarily be sulphurous, and that land utterly burned up — which...2
locum paradisi fecisset infructuosum, sterilem, atque inamoenum. Credit ipse (quae est opinio etiam Magistri Historiae scholasticae) illum gladium igneum non fuisse aliud, quam ingentem quandam vim, & copiam ignis non ex terra paradisi emicantis, sed vel aliunde illuc allati, vel inibi recens a Deo creati, qui instar muri circum paradisum esset, vel ad similitudinem propugnaculi ante paradisi aditum esset positus: quae duo impedimenta putat Epiphanius tantisper duntaxat durasse, quoad vixit Adamus. Ille autem ignis, dictus est gladius versatilis vel gladius utrimque scindens, ad indicandam vim & efficacitatem ignis maxime penetrantis: cuius natura in perpetuo motu, & agitatione versatur, & ad modum gladii in acumen desinens, flammas quasi vibrat. Verum istorum explanatio, & mutila est, quia de Cherubim nullum faciunt verbum, & impropria est nec litteralis: quippe quae verba Mosis a propria significatione detorquens aliorsum, sensum historicum non exprimit.
...would have made the place of paradise unfruitful, sterile, and unpleasant. He himself thinks (which is also the opinion of the Master of the Scholastic History) that that fiery sword was nothing else than a certain huge force and abundance of fire — not flashing forth from the earth of paradise, but either brought thither from elsewhere, or there recently created by God — which was like a wall around paradise, or was placed like a bulwark before the entrance of paradise: which two impediments Epiphanius thinks lasted only so long as Adam lived. But that fire was called a 'turning sword,' or a 'sword cutting on both sides,' to indicate the force and efficacy of the most penetrating fire, whose nature is engaged in perpetual motion and agitation, and, ending in a point like a sword, vibrates flames as it were. But the explanation of these interpreters is both mutilated, because they make no word about the Cherubim, and is improper and not literal: inasmuch as, twisting the words of Moses from their proper signification elsewhere, it does not express the historical sense.3
Translator’s notes
- Heading of Question III of the disputation. ↩
- Answering Question III: Nicholas of Lyra (who placed Paradise on the earth's highest mountain) held that fire erupted from that mountain at God's command, enclosing paradise's entrance like a crown or wall. Rejected by Tostatus: such perpetual fire would make the mountain's interior sulphurous and the land utterly burnt (an absurdity). Marginal gloss: 'Opinio Lyrae, Tostati, & Magistri Historiae scholasticae.' Page footer signature 'XXX'; catchword 'locum' (continues on the next page). ↩
- Conclusion of Question III: Peter Comestor (Master of the Historia Scholastica), following Lyra, held the fiery sword to be a huge fire (brought or newly created by God) forming a wall/bulwark before paradise; Epiphanius: these two impediments lasted only as long as Adam lived; called a 'turning'/'two-edged' sword for its penetrating force in perpetual motion. Pererius rejects it as 'mutilated' (it says nothing of the Cherubim) and non-literal. Running head '704'; true printed page 714. ↩