bold = Main text
    Book, Chapter        grey = Comment text

  1   Int               | introduction to the Apocriticus of Macarius Magnes cannot be written
  2   Int,        1     |       represent a dialogue between Macarius and a heathen philosopher,
  3   Int,        2     |     contains part of the answer of Macarius to an objection to the miracle
  4   Int,        2     |          proper name, as of course Macarius Magnes may simply mean "
  5   Int,        3     |     identified the author with the Macarius, Bishop of Magnesia, who
  6   Int          (14) |           a fact in the article on Macarius in the Dict. Christ. Biog.~ ~
  7   Int          (15) |           No. 31), p. 404 et seq., Macarius Magnes, a Neglected Apologist,
  8   Int,        3     |         anonymous writer, and that Macarius did not know they were from
  9   Int,        3     |          remain of another work of Macarius, his Homilies on Genesis.
 10   Int,        3     |           as we see in the rest of Macarius.~ ~
 11   Int,        4     |          in office at Palmyra. Now Macarius came from Asia Minor, but
 12   Int,        5     |    APOCRITICUS.~ ~Upon the date of Macarius depends the question as
 13   Int,        5     |       debate. But, in any case, if Macarius is writing long after Christianity
 14   Int,        5     |       words of the heathen, not of Macarius, and in any case a round
 15   Int,        5     |            the year A.D. 292.~ ~3. Macarius gives a short list of some
 16   Int,        5     |         the usual diffuse style of Macarius, and the possibility is
 17   Int,        5     |            so that the theory that Macarius borrowed in each case cannot
 18   Int,        5     |          instance, the language of Macarius about our Lord enticing
 19   Int,        6     |      safely speak of the author as Macarius, and regard Magnes as a
 20   Int,        6     |           a bishop, whose name was Macarius, has naturally suggested
 21   Int,        6     |          Photius records that this Macarius came forward at the Synod
 22   Int          (43) |       author was confused with the Macarius of the Oak, and "hinc fortasse
 23   Int,        6     |            small-minded man as the Macarius of the Oak, who accused
 24   Int,        6     |            the very common name of Macarius,52 who was not a bishop,
 25   Int,        6     |            work was seized upon by Macarius Magnes, the Bishop of Magnesia,
 26   Int,        6     |        Catholic exegesis from this Macarius. It well accords with what
 27   Int,        8     |      probable, but uncertain, that Macarius shows a knowledge of 2 Peter,
 28   Int          (60) |             3 Of Apocryphal books, Macarius quotes Bel and the Dragon (
 29   Int,        8     |           31.61 In the latter case Macarius follows him, but adds that
 30   Int,        8     |       Scriptures; we may note that Macarius makes several indirect references
 31   Int,        8     |           Gospel divides kinsfolk, Macarius gives as an instance the
 32   Int,        8     |           each case the defence of Macarius is entirely different from
 33   Int,        8     |            the list of heresies in Macarius and one in Epiphanius, it
 34   Int,        9     |    insertion, of a later date than Macarius. Perhaps some one who reads
 35   Int,       10     |            deal with outlines, but Macarius is unique in his defence
 36   Int,       10     |            teaching and methods of Macarius, but it is better simply
 37   Int,       10     |         little exordium with which Macarius begins each fresh series,
 38   Int,       10     |            hope in writing thus on Macarius Magnes is that many to whom
 39     I          (72) |            is this contradicted by Macarius.~ ~
 40     I          (73) |          of the favourite words of Macarius, thus linking this fragment
 41    II               |           were six objections, and Macarius has combined two of them
 42    II          (81) |                                  5 Macarius, as a faithful follower
 43    II          (82) |           the alternative title of Macarius' book, appears here for
 44    II          (83) |         light of other passages in Macarius, there is a special interest
 45    II,      XIX     |            He died in pretence.~ ~[Macarius continues this lament of
 46    II          (101)|              cast down" ( ka&tw ). Macarius in his answer at once notices
 47    II          (105)|          is another ambiguity, and Macarius makes it fit with his argument
 48   III          (107)|      helped to win the victory for Macarius by his support.~ ~
 49   III               |     Introduction to the answers of Macarius to the objections of Chapters
 50   III          (109)|         are given in the answer of Macarius in ch. viii. p. 66, 1. 19.
 51   III          (119)|    parelqei~n in the previous one. Macarius in his answer only faces
 52   III          (120)|     bearing of this on the date of Macarius.~ ~
 53   III          (124)|               1 It is curious that Macarius offers examples from the
 54   III          (130)|           interesting to find that Macarius falls into the same mistake
 55   III          (131)|                                  1 Macarius here uses the fourth-century
 56   III          (139)|                                  1 Macarius follows his opponent in
 57   III          (149)|           and "always" is omitted. Macarius gives it correctly in his
 58   III          (153)|                                  1 Macarius speaks of His death as o9
 59   III          (160)|        rmakon into the text, which Macarius accepts without comment.
 60   III          (161)|                                  1 Macarius, as belonging to the East
 61   III          (165)|          quoted from memory, which Macarius in his answer accepts as
 62   III          (171)|           to his custom elsewhere, Macarius does not deal separately
 63   III          (171)|       chapter xxi.), may have made Macarius postpone mention of it until
 64   III          (172)|                                  1 Macarius echoes the word which his
 65   III          (173)|        between pe/troj and pe/tra, Macarius supports the view that Peter
 66   III          (174)|       reasonable explanation which Macarius gives of this highly controversial
 67   III          (175)|          of the whole paragraph by Macarius is a valuable contribution
 68   III          (177)|         into two, a division which Macarius has quite obscured. He does
 69   III          (181)|            the cross and impaled." Macarius in his answer accepts the
 70   III          (182)|          states it unhesitatingly. Macarius tacitly refutes it by saying
 71   III          (186)|            Peter from all charges, Macarius here may be said to overstate
 72   III          (189)|        claimed for the theory that Macarius is merely borrowing from
 73   III          (192)|          in the previous answer of Macarius (ch. xxix. p. 122, 1. 2,
 74   III          (197)|            It will be noticed that Macarius makes no attempt to argue
 75   III          (202)|          patristic interpretation. Macarius does not seem to have grasped
 76   III          (203)|         clause of v. 7 is wanting. Macarius, however, makes use of the
 77   III          (204)|        from I Cor. ix. 7, but here Macarius plainly refers to it.~ ~
 78   III          (206)|           comes from James ii. 10. Macarius accepts the quotation as
 79   III          (209)|                                  1 Macarius had ignored this part of
 80   III          (211)|            rather than "sting," as Macarius develops the idea of a goad
 81   III          (223)|                                  1 Macarius reflects the attitude of
 82   III          (231)|      disciple of John the Baptist. Macarius is alone in mentioning him (
 83   III          (231)|           suggested, D.C.B., art. "Macarius."~ ~
 84    IV               |     Introduction to the answers of Macarius to the objections of Chapters
 85    IV          (237)|          the word "this," in which Macarius follows him.~ ~
 86    IV          (242)|         history to the opponent of Macarius, if he dates from the beginning
 87    IV          (248)|   quotation is tacitly accepted by Macarius in his answer.~ ~
 88    IV          (250)|      therefore an exaggeration, as Macarius shows in his answer. But
 89    IV          (253)|          is curious that elsewhere Macarius ignores 2 Peter when its
 90    IV          (263)|                                  1 Macarius in chapter xvi. combines
 91    IV          (265)|     quoting the Old Testament, but Macarius passes over the reference
 92    IV          (270)|          With this cursory mention Macarius passes on from the words
 93    IV          (277)|             1 All the answer which Macarius gives to this objection
 94    IV          (281)|          this last brief paragraph Macarius answers a further objection,
 95    IV          (282)|                        1 Thus does Macarius run away from the point,
 96    IV          (285)|             2 It is only here that Macarius plainly refers to his method
 97    IV          (286)|                                  1 Macarius refers elsewhere to the
 98    IV          (286)|          event which occurred when Macarius was writing his book ; but
 99    IV          (287)|   reconcile with an early date for Macarius. See Introd., pp. xviii
100    IV          (289)|           to assign a late date to Macarius. But see Introd., p. xviii.
101    IV          (289)|          the next objection. Could Macarius have chosen anything more
102    IV          (295)|   mentioned there, and answered by Macarius, whereas his answer to this
103    IV          (302)|           had garbled the words of Macarius to suit their purpose, taking
104    IV          (302)|            cit. p. 322) shows that Macarius is only speaking from the
105    IV          (312)|           example of the fact that Macarius does not ordinarily use
106     V          (321)|           with that of the rest of Macarius by the use of his favourite
107     V          (323)|      uncertain what form of attack Macarius is here answering. It does