Gênesis 1
Jerome · Comentário Patrístico (catena)
Gênesis 1:1
I have received the desired letters of my Desiderius, who in a foretelling of things to happen has obtained with Daniel a certain name [see Vulgate Daniel 9.23: quia vir desideriorum es tu, "for you are a man of desires"], beseeching that I might hand over to our hearers a translation of the Pentateuch in the Latin tongue from the Hebrew words. Certainly a dangerous work, open to the barkings of detractors, who accuse me of insult to the Seventy to prepare a new interpretation from the old ones, thus approving ability (or "genius") like wine. As has very often been testified by me, I, for my part, am able to offer a portion in the Tabernacle of God, without the riches (or "abilities") of one being damaged by the poverties of others. But that I may have dared, the effort of Origen provoked me, who mixed the translation of Theodotion to the ancient edition, with asterisk and obelus, that is, star and spit, a work distinguishing everything, while he either makes to shine those things which were previously lacking, or he slays and pierces through everything superfluous. And especially by the authority of the Evangelists and the Apostles, in which we read many things from the Old Testament which are not found in our books, as it is (with): "Out of Egypt I have called My Son," and "For He shall be called a Nazarene," and "They will look on Him Whom they have pierced," and "Rivers of living waters shall flow from his belly," and "Things which no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor has arisen in the heart of man, which God has prepared for those loving Him," and many others which are desiring a proper context (or "book" [Jerome uses a Greek word here: συνταγμα]). Therefore let us ask them where these are written, and when they are unable to say, we may produce them from the Hebrew books. The first witness is in Hosea, the second in Isaiah, the third in Zechariah, the fourth in Proverbs, the fifth is also in Isaiah, of which many are ignorant, the follies of apocrypha being followed, preferring Iberian dirges to authentic books. The cause of the error is not for me to explain. The Jews say it was done wisely in deliberation, so Ptolemy, the worshipper of one god, might not yet discover a double divinity with the Hebrews; he made them (do so) chiefly for this reason, because he was seen to fall into the dogma of Plato. Accordingly, wherever anything sacred in Scripture is witnessed of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit, they are either translated otherwise, or they have passed over all in silence, so they might both satisfy the king, and might not divulge the secret of the Faith. And I don't know who was the first author to construct with his lying the seventy cells in Alexandria, into which were divided those who wrote, with Aristeas the champion [another Greek word: υπερασπιστης] of the same Ptolemy, and many after the time of Josephus having reported no such thing, but rather (for them) to have gathered in groups, writing in one basilica, (and) not to have prophesied. For it is one thing to be a seer, another to be an interpreter. In that one the Spirit predicts things to come; in this one by his learning and abundance of words he translates those things he has understood. Unless Tullius (Cicero) is understood to have translated, by inspiration of the spirit of rhetoric, the Economics of Xenophon, the Protagoras of Plato, and the For Ctesiphon by Demosthenes. Or the Holy Spirit wove together the witnesses of these books one way through the Seventy interpreters and another way through the Apostles, so that what they passed over in silence, what was written by these was invented [? - obscure]. Therefore, what? We condemn the ancients? By no means! But after those earlier in the House of God, we work at what we can. They are interpreted before the coming of Christ and what they didn't know, they tranlated in ambiguous (or "uncertain") sentences. We write after His Passion and Resurrection, not so much prophecy as history. For in the one are told what things were heard, in the other what were seen. What we understand better, we also translate better. Hear, therefore, O rival; listen, O detractor! I do not condemn, I do not censure the Seventy, but I confidently prefer the Apostles to all of them. Christ speaks to me through their mouth, who I read were placed before the prophets among the Spiritual gifts, among which interpreters hold almost the last place. Why are you tortured by spite? Why do you incite ignorant souls against me? If anywhere in the translation I have been seen by you to err, ask the Hebrews. Consult the teachers of the many different cities. What theirs have of Christ, yours do not have. It is another matter if they have afterward removed the testimonies used by the Apostles against them, and the Latin copies are more correct than the Greek, (and) the Greek than the Hebrew! Truth is against these enviers. Now I pray you, dearest Desiderius, so that in such a great work which you have made me undertake and take up a beginning from Genesis, you might help in (your) prayers, how I might, by the same Spirit by Whom the books were written, be able to translate them into Latin words.
Gênesis 1:1
Chapter 1, Verse 1. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Many people believe, as it is also written in the Altercation of Jason and Papiscus, and Tertullian in his book against Praxeas argues: and also Hilary in the exposition of a certain Psalm affirms, that it is found in Hebrew: 'In the son, God created the heavens and the earth', which is false, as the truth of the matter itself proves. For even the Seventy Interpreters, and Symmachus, and Theodotion translated it as 'In the beginning'. And it is written in Hebrew, Bresith (); which Aquila interprets, in the chapter: and not Baben (), which is called ((Al. interpreted)), in the son. Therefore, it can be understood more according to the meaning than according to the literal translation about Christ: who is approved both in the very beginning of Genesis, which is the head of all books, and also in the beginning of the Gospel of John, as the creator of heaven and earth. Hence, in the Psalms (Psalm 39:9), he says about himself: In the chapter ((Al. chapter)) of the book it is written about me, that is, in the beginning of Genesis. And in the Gospel: All things were made through him, and without him nothing was made (John 1:3). But it should also be known that among the Hebrews this book is called B'reishit: having the custom of giving names to their volumes from their beginnings. — Hebrew Questions on Genesis
Gênesis 1:2
In the beginning of Genesis, it is written: "And the Spirit was stirring above the waters." You see, then, what it says in the beginning of Genesis. Now for its mystical meaning—"The Spirit was stirring above the waters"—already at that time baptism was being foreshadowed. It could not be true baptism, to be sure, without the Spirit. — HOMILIES 10
Gênesis 1:2
(Verse 2.) And the spirit of God was moving over the waters. Because in our books it is written 'was moving', in Hebrew it has 'Merefeth', which we can call 'hovering' or 'brooding', in the likeness of a bird, warming the eggs with the heat of life. From which we understand that it is not said to be the spirit of the world, as some suppose, but the Holy Spirit, who is also said to be the giver of life to all things from the beginning. And if a giver of life, then also a creator. But if You are the creator and God. For, He says, send forth Your Spirit, and they shall be created (Psalm 103, 30). — Hebrew Questions on Genesis
Gênesis 1:10
(10) And he called the gatherings of waters seas. It should be noted that every gathering of waters, whether they be salty or fresh, according to the language of the Hebrews, are called seas. Therefore, Porphyry falsely accuses the Evangelists of ignorance in performing a miracle, because the Lord walked on the sea, that he called the lake of Genezareth a sea, when every lake and gathering of waters are called seas. — Hebrew Questions on Genesis