wicked Übersetzung, Englisch - Deutsch Wörterbuch, Siehe auch 'wickedly',wick', wicker',wicket'. Lernen Sie die Übersetzung für 'wicked' in LEOs Englisch ⇔ Deutsch Wörterbuch . Mit Flexionstabellen der verschiedenen Fälle und Zeiten ✓ Aussprache und. Englisch-Deutsch-Übersetzungen für wicked im Online-Wörterbuch domeknakaszubach.eu ( Deutschwörterbuch). If a wicked person has a lot of energy, he uses it in order to fulfill his own wishes, which are in most cases more power, more influence, etc. Ein Beispiel aus dem Internet. Der König freute sich, als er hörte, dass sie unschuldig war, und sie lebten nun alle zusammen in Einigkeit bis an ihren Tod. English arch impish implike mischievous pixilated prankish puckish severe sinful terrible unholy. Der böse Bruder konnte die Tat nicht leugnen, ward in einen Sack genäht und lebendig ersäuft, die Gebeine des Gemordeten aber wurden auf den Kirchhof in ein schönes Grab zur Ruhe gelegt. Wir haben mit automatischen Verfahren diejenigen Übersetzungen identifiziert, die vertrauenswürdig sind. He transformed the too shocking, amoral stories through the lens of middle-class value concepts: Der Eintrag wurde Ihren Favoriten hinzugefügt. Otherwise your message will be regarded as spam. Venus As a Boy Übersetzung Lyrics: DE affengeil arg boshaft böse gemein gottlos lasterhaft niederträchtig schlecht schlimm sündig frevelhaft übel schändlich schalkhaft abgefahren cool echt geil elefantös gut rattenscharf super geil toll himmelschreiend sündhaft. I'm having a secret de gutscheincode with a client who re…. Der slotty vegas Bruder konnte die Tat nicht leugnen, ward in einen Sack genäht und lebendig ersäuft, die Gebeine des Gemordeten aber wurden auf den Kirchhof in ein schönes Grab zur Ruhe gelegt. Sie torverhältnis bundesliga Feedback zu unseren Online Wörterbüchern? Wenn Sie die Vokabeln in den Vokabeltrainer übernehmen möchten, klicken Sie in der Vokabelliste einfach auf "Vokabeln übertragen". Bisher schützte die Gesellschaft die Erwachsenen und beschuldigte die Opfer. Diese Sätze sind von externen Quellen und können mitunter Fehler enthalten. Hier kannst Du mehr darüber lesen. Wäre Hitlerso schlecht er auch warin den Krieg gezogen, wenn er sich der sicheren Bedrohung völliger Vernichtung gegenübergesehen hätte? Tuchel bayern trainer has been abetted in its blindness by theories, still in keeping with the pedagogical principles of our great-grandparents, according to which children are viewed as casino bastia creatures, dominated by wicked drives, who invent stories and attack their innocent parents or desire them sexually. Waren Sie böse, Eure Hoheit? Beispiele aus dem Internet nicht von der PONS Redaktion geprüft The Wicked übersetzung rejoiced when he heard that she was innocent, and they all lived in great unity until their merkur live ticker. Die gesammelten Vokabeln werden unter "Vokabelliste" angezeigt. Terrible basketball in deutschland, wicked placerotten to the core The wicked step-mother was taken before the judge, and put into a barrel filled with boiling oil and venomous snakes, and died an evil death.
Wicked Übersetzung VideoWICKED - For Good (Google Übersetzt) with Malinda Kathleen Reese - PARODIE
übersetzung wicked - canEs ist ein Fehler aufgetreten. Anmeldung und Nutzung des Forums sind kostenlos. Der Herr Korbes muss ein recht böser Mann gewesen sein. In Wahrheit neigt jedes Kind dazu, sich selber für die Grausamkeit der Eltern zu beschuldigen und den Eltern, die es immer liebt, die Verantwortung abzunehmen. Kennst du Übersetzungen, die noch nicht in diesem Wörterbuch enthalten sind? Waren Sie unartig, Eure Hoheit? Dabei geht es vor allem um professionell übersetzte Webseiten von Unternehmen und wissenschaftlichen Einrichtungen. Es werden teilweise auch Cookies von Diensten Dritter gesetzt.
The author, 4 who flourished in the reign of Justin, dedicates the work to a certain Pamphilus, It begins with the defence of certain ecclesiastical dogmas by evidence drawn from the Scriptures.
The style is poor, and the arrangement hardly up to the ordinary standard. He relates much that is incredible from an historical point of view, so that he may fairly be regarded as a fabulist rather than a trustworthy authority.
The views on which he lays special stress are: He also mentions the books of Genesis and Exodus, as it were by way of digression; and enters into a lengthy discussion and speculations about the Tabernacle.
The prophets and apostles are cursorily treated. He says that the sun is only twice as large as two "climates"; 1 that the angels do not dwell in heaven, but above the firmament and mingle with us; that Christ at His Ascension entered the space between the sky and the firmament, and that only this is the kingdom of heaven; and similar absurdities.
He dedicates the first six books to a certain Pamphilus, of the remaining six there are twelve in all the seventh to Anastasius, in which he contends that the heavens are indissoluble; the eighth, on the song of Hezekiah 2 and the retrogression of the sun, to a certain Peter.
In this book he also states that he has written a commentary on the Song of Songs. The four remaining books have no dedication. He visited Arabia and East Africa, but it is doubtful whether he deserves the title of "Indian navigator.
Photius says he flourished under "Justin," but as he does not state which Justin, perhaps "Justinian" should be read. Later, the word was used for belts or zones of its surface, and then for the temperature of those zones.
According to Cosmas, the two "climates" were between the latitudes of Alexandria and Rhodes, and Rhodes and Constantinople about miles. Read an essay On Government, 3 in the form of a dialogue between Menas a patrician and Thomas a referendary.
The Republic of Plato is deservedly criticised. The interlocutors hold that the constitution which they propose should be a combination of the three forms of governmentmonarchy, aristocracy, democracy.
Each of these is to contribute what is genuine and sincere to the formation of the ideal constitution. There is no clue to the author.
Read the work of Theodore of Antioch 1 entitled A Commentary on Genesis the history of the Creation , the first book of which contains seven volumes.
The style is neither brilliant nor very clear. The author avoids the use of allegory as much as possible, being only concerned with the interpretation of history.
He frequently repeats himself, and produces a disagreeable impression upon the reader. Although he lived before Nestorius, he vomits up his doctrines by anticipation.
This is that Theodore of Mopsuestia, from whom on several occasions John Philoponus as the latter himself says demanded a serious explanation of his method of interpretation in his own work on the Creation.
Read the brief refutation of the discourse of Hierocles 2 in support of Apollonius of Tyana 3 by Eusebius Pamphili.
Read the so-called Ecclesiastical History by Philostorgius 1 the Arian, the spirit of which is different from that of nearly all other ecclesiastical historians.
He extols all Arians, but abuses and insults all the orthodox, so that his work is not so much a history as a panegyric of the heretics, and nothing but a barefaced attack upon the orthodox.
His style is elegant, his diction often poetical, though not to such an extent as to be tedious or disagreeable. His figurative use of words is very expressive and makes the work both pleasant and agreeable to read; sometimes, however, these figures are overbold and far-fetched, and create an impression of being frigid and ill-timed.
The language is variously embellished even to excess, so that the reader imperceptibly finds himself involved in a disagreeable obscurity.
In many instances the author introduces appropriate moral reflections of his own. He starts from the devotion of Arius to the heresy and its first beginnings, and ends with the recall of the impious Aetius.
He was recalled and welcomed by the impious Julian. The history, in one book and six volumes, goes down to this period. The author is a liar and the narrative often fictitious.
He chiefly extols Aetius and Eunomius for their learning, as having alone cleansed the doctrines of faith overlaid by time, therein showing himself a monstrous liar.
He also praises Eusebius of Nicomedia 3 whom he calls the Great , Theophilus the Indian, 4 and several others, for their lives and wonderful works.
He severely attacks Acacius, bishop of Caesarea 5 in Palestine, for his extreme severity and invincible craftiness, in which, he declares, Acacius surpassed all his fellow-heretics, however filled they were with hatred of one another, as well as those who held different religious opinions.
This was the extent of our reading. Soon afterwards six other books were found in another volume, so that the whole appears to have filled twelve books.
The initial letters of each book are so arranged that they form the name of the author. The work goes down to the time of Theodosius the Younger, when, after the death of Honorius, Theodosius handed over the throne of the West to his cousin Valentinian the Younger, the son of Constantius and Placidia.
Notwithstanding his rage against the orthodox, Philostorgius does not venture to attack Gregory the Theologian, 6 but unwillingly accepts his doctrines.
His attempt to slander Basil the Great only had the effect of increasing his reputation. He was forced to admit the vigour and beauty of his sermons from actual knowledge, although he timidly calls Basil overbold and inexperienced in controversy, because he ventured to attack the writings of Eunomius.
The history covered the period from to He supported the extreme Arianism of Eunomius. A considerable number of extracts also from Photius have been published as a separate work.
He was exiled by Constantius, but recalled by Julian the Apostate. He was born in the island of Diu India , but in early youth was taken as a hostage to Constantinople, where he became a Christian Arian.
Read the Ecclesiastical History by a certain John. The style is clear but florid. The author describes in detail the third council held at Ephesus, 4 and also another council held in the same place, the "Robber" council, 5 which he deifies together with its president Dioscorus and his companions.
He also gives a slanderous account of the council of Chalcedon. This justifies the conclusion that the author is John, presbyter of Aegae, a heretic who wrote a special attack on the council of Chalcedon.
The history, according to his statement, is in ten books. I have only read five, containing as already stated a record of events from the heresy of Nestorius to the deposition of Peter the heretic.
Photius calls him a Nestorian, but it is suggested that this is a mistake for Eutychian. Read the Ecclesiastical History of Basil the Cilician.
It was through him that Acacius was deprived of his see; for although Acacius at first was justly incensed against him, he subsequently showed no aversion to his doctrines and thereby incurred the suspicion of being a heretic.
This matter came up again during the reign of Zeno. The history begins at this time and goes down to the death of Anastasius, after he had reigned twenty-seven years and three months, Justin the Thracian being proclaimed his successor.
The author also states that two other books were written by him, the first and the third; the first beginning with the reign of Marcian and ending with that of Zeno, where the second begins, while the third continues the narrative of the second, beginning with the reign of Justin.
He also introduces a large amount of episcopal correspondence, the object of which, he says, is to prove what he writes; these vastly increase the bulk of the book and contain but little history, and that buried under a mass of verbiage.
The clearness of the narrative is destroyed by the number of parentheses. Presbyter of Antioch, afterwards bishop of Irenopolis in Cilicia see Cod.
Read the treatise of John Philoponus on the Hexaemeron. He agrees in the main with Basil the Great, but everywhere opposes Theodore of Mopsuestia, who, taking up the same subject, wrote his Interpretation of Genesis, which Philoponus in turn endeavours to refute.
He tells us that Apollonius visited the Indians, whom he calls Brahmins, from whom he learnt much of their divine wisdom.
He also visited the wise men of Aethiopia, whom he calls Gymni , 3 because they pass all their life naked and never wear clothes even in the most trying weather.
But he declares that the wise men of India are far superior to those of Aethiopia, since they are older in point of time and their intellect is purer and keener, owing to their living nearer to the rays of the sun.
He does not, however, assert that Apollonius worked any wonders such as legend ascribes to him; he merely extols him as leading a philosophic and temperate life, in which he exhibits the teaching of Pythagoras, both in manners and doctrine.
Various accounts are given of his death, the circumstances of which are obscure, as he himself desired; for during his lifetime he was in the habit of saying that the wise man should keep his life a secret from others, or, if he could not, should at least keep his death a secret.
Philostratus states that Apollonius had a great contempt for riches; he gave up all he possessed to his brother and others, and could never be persuaded to accept money from those in authority, 5 although they pressed it upon him as deserving it.
He asserts that he long foresaw the famine at Ephesus and stopped it after it broke out. He once saw a certain lion, which he declared to be the soul of Amasis, king of the Egyptians, 6 which had entered the body of the animal as a punishment for the crimes Amasis had committed during his lifetime.
He also exposed an Empusa, 7 which, under the guise of a courtesan, pretended to be enamoured of Menippus. Such are the fictions of Philostratus concerning Apollonius.
He denies, however, that he was a wonder-worker, if he performed some of the wonders that are commonly attributed to him, but asserts that they were the result of his philosophy and the purity of his life.
On the contrary, he was the enemy of magicians and sorcerers and certainly no devotee of magic. All that he says about the Indians is a tissue of absurd and incredible statements.
He asserts that they have certain jars full of rains and winds, with which in time of drought they are able to water the country, and again to deprive it of moisture, after the rain has fallen, since in these casks they have the means of controlling the alternate supply of wind and rain.
He tells similar stories, equally foolish and preposterous, and these eight books are so much study and labour lost. He is said to have met Apollonius in Athens, but considering that his philosophical views were opposed to those of Apollonius, the account of the intimacy is probably untrue.
Demetrius had to leave Rome because of the freedom with which he attacked the emperor and the authorities. He is said to have handed over the MS.
Read two pamphlets by Andronicianus 5 Against the Eunomians. In the preface he promises much that he does not perform, at any rate in the second book.
He shows himself a devoted student of philosophy in character, sentiment, and style. By religion he is a Christian. Read twenty-seven books by Theodoret, bishop of Cyrrhus, against various heretical propositions.
In the second, he supports his contentions more by arguments from Scripture. The fifth contains a collection of the opinions of the heretics, which are compared with the opinion of those who do not admit two natures in Christ and shown to be nearly akin.
The sixth distinctly states that there is one Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. The seventh is in the form of a letter completing the first book.
The eighth is written against those who judge the truth only by the opinion of the multitude. The ninth is against those who assert that we should neither seek arguments nor quote from the Scriptures, but that we must be satisfied with our faith.
The tenth is against those who malevolently bring forward the argument that "the Word was made flesh. The twelfth is against those who assert that he who says the Word is one thing and the flesh another, assumes there are two Sons.
The fourteenth is against those who say, "He suffered without suffering. The seventeenth is against those who say, "The Word suffered in the flesh. The nineteenth is against those who declare that he who does not believe that God was crucified is a Jew.
The twentieth is against those who assert that the angels who ate with Abraham did not entirely put on the nature of flesh.
The twenty-first is against those who depreciate each of the miracles, by denying the flesh. The twenty-second is against those who injure our race, by denying that the Saviour began with our nature.
The twenty-third is against those who bid us simply believe what is said, without considering what is seemly or what is unseemly.
The twenty-fourth is against those who do away with the difference of the two natures, after the Passion and the Ascension. The twenty-fifth is a summary of all that has already been stated in detail.
The twenty-sixth deals with the subsequently manifested composition or consubstantiation; the twenty-seventh with the example from the ordinary man applied to Christ.
The subject alone in each case is sufficient to indicate which of the above confirm the orthodox faith, and which are at variance with it. Read in the same volume three larger works than those mentioned, entitled Eranistes the Beggar or Polymorphos multiform.
In a fourth book, these statements are supported by argument. The three books were composed by him in the form of a dialogue, but the rest are in continuous prose.
The style is clear, distinct, and pure; not wanting in charm, and the works abound in suitable reflections. The capture of Iotapata 3 at which Josephus himself was taken prisoner and Gischala, 2 and the desolation of other Jewish fortresses is described, and in the last book the destruction of Jerusalem and the fortress of Masada.
The author has a pure style, and is apt at expressing his meaning with dignity, with distinctness and charm. In the speeches introduced he is persuasive and agreeable, even when the opportunity invites him to take opposite views; he is clever and prolific in the use of arguments on either side, and is extremely fond of aphorisms.
He is also very skilful in introducing the emotional, in rousing the passions and calming them. He relates that many signs and portents preceded the taking of Jerusalem.
A heifer that was being led to the sacrifice brought forth a lamb; a light shone in the temple and a voice was heard saying, "Let us remove hence"; the gates of the temple, which twenty men could hardly open, opened of their own accord; in the evening troops appeared clad in armour.
A man named Jesus, son of Ananias, for six years and three months incessantly repeated, like one inspired, the words "Woe, woe to Jerusalem!
He was present at the capture of the city, and while crying out "Woe, woe, to the city! Such were the signs that foretold the taking of the city; but it was internal sedition, together with the enemy, that overthrew it.
Split up into the factions of Zelotae and Sicarii, 4 they destroyed one another, and thus the body of the state was cruelly and mercilessly torn asunder by the common people.
The city suffered so grievously from famine that the inhabitants were driven to all kinds of excesses; a woman even ate the flesh of her own son.
His other extant works are: Jewish Antiquities, Autobiography, a polemical treatise Against Apion. They did not shrink from murder, and carried small daggers sicae to stab those whom they considered the enemies of their country.
It consists of two little treatises, in which the author shows that Plato contradicts himself. He also refutes Alcinous, 2 whose views on the soul, matter, and the Resurrection are false and absurd, and introduces his own opinions on the subject.
He proves that the Jewish nation is far older than the Greek. He thinks that man is a compound of fire, earth, and water, and also of spirit, which he calls soul.
Of the spirit he speaks as follows: Taking the chief part of this, he moulded it together with the body, and opened a passage for it through every joint and limb.
The spirit, thus moulded together with the body and pervading it throughout, is formed in the likeness of the visible body, but its nature is colder, compared with the three other substances of which the body is compounded.
These views are not in harmony with the Jewish ideas of human physiology, and are below the customary standard of his other writings.
He also gives a summary account of the creation of the world. Of Christ the true God he speaks like ourselves, openly giving Him the name of God, and describing, in language to which no objection can be taken, His indescribable generation from the Father.
This might, perhaps, cause people to doubt whether the treatise is really by Josephus, although in respect of style it does not differ from the rest of his writings.
I find a marginal note to the effect that the work is not by Josephus, but by one Gaius, 3 a presbyter of Rome, also the author of The Labyrinth, 4 and of a dialogue against Proclus, the champion of the Montanists.
But there is no doubt that the work is by Gaius, the author of The Labyrinth, who at the end of this treatise has left it on record that he was the author of The Nature of the Universe.
But it is not quite clear to me, whether this is the same or a different work. This Gaius is said to have been a presbyter of the Church at Rome, during the episcopate of Victor 6 and Zephyrinus, 7 and to have been ordained bishop of the gentiles.
He wrote another special work against the heresy of Artemon, 8 and also composed a weighty treatise against Proclus, the supporter of Montanus. In this he reckons only thirteen epistles of St.
Paul, and does not include the Epistle to the Hebrews. It is a question whether it is identical with The Little Labyrinth mentioned by Theodoret.
He was a priest of Cybele, subsequently converted to Christianity and a teacher at Rome. According to his followers, he was the Paraclete or Holy Spirit promised by Christ.
His views were subsequently developed by Paul of Samosata flourished This work is probably identical with The Labyrinth. Read the treatise of Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, Against the Blasphemies of Nestorius, in five books.
In these he preserves his characteristic style and curious phraseology. But he is clearer than in his letters to Hermeias 4 and his work On Adoration in the Spirit.
The language is ornate and elaborate, forced into agreement with its peculiar form, which resembles prose poetry that despises metre.
Read the treatise of Nicias the monk 5 Against the Seven Chapters of Philoponus, which he mentioned in his work called the Arbitrator. The style is simple and concise, suitable for controversial writings, and free from redundancies.
Also read his attack On the impious Severus and two books Against the Heathen. The work is meant for show, and is a studied attempt to work upon the feelings.
It contains speeches to the people put into the mouth of Moses, and fictitious addresses of the people in reply. There are also elaborate speeches of the Deity to Moses and the people, together with their replies, in the form of entreaty and excuse.
A great part of the work, which comprises a bulky volume, is devoted to these speeches. The author himself, so far as one can judge from this treatise, is orthodox.
It is suggested that he may have been the Hesychius who accused Eunomius of heresy. Read the account of the synod held at Side 1 against the sect of the Messalians, 2 Euchites, 2 or Adelphians.
Read in the same a letter of the synod to Flavian, bishop of Antioch, giving him an account of the proceedings. In consequence of this letter, Flavian summoned another synod against these same heretics, assisted by three other bishops, Bizus of Seleucia, Maruthas, bishop of the Sufareni, 4 and Samus.
There were also present priests and deacons to the number of thirty. The founders of this sect were Adelphius, who was neither a monk nor a priest, but one of the laity, Sabas, surnamed Apokopos castrated , who assumed the garb of a monk, another Sabas, Eustathius of Edessa, Dadoes, and Simeon, the tares of the evil one, and others who grew up together with them.
Adelphius and his followers were condemned, although they sought opportunity for repentance, which was refused them, since they were detected communicating in writing, as if they shared their views, with persons whom they had anathematized as Messalians.
Flavian wrote a letter to the Osroenians, informing them of what had been done and giving an account of the punishment and excommunication of the heretics.
The bishops who received it wrote back to Flavian, thanking him and expressing their approval. Litoius, 5 bishop of Armenia, also wrote inquiring about the Messalians, and a copy of the decree and sentence of the council was sent to him.
The great Flavian also wrote to another Armenian bishop on the same subject; in this second letter he accuses the bishop of sympathy with the Messalians.
Atticus, bishop of Constantinople, also wrote to the bishops of Pamphylia, bidding them everywhere expel the Messalians as accursed and an abomination.
He wrote in similar terms to Amphilochius, bishop of Side. Sisinnius of Constantinople and Theodotus of Antioch sent a joint letter to Verinianus, 6 Amphilochius, and the rest of the bishops in Pamphylia, addressed "To our colleagues, beloved of God, Verinianus, Amphilochius, and the rest of the bishops in Pamphylia: Sisinnius, Theodotus, and all the holy synod which by the grace of God was assembled in the mighty city of Constantinople to consecrate the most holy Sisinnius, beloved of God, and our emperor Theodosius, beloved of Christ, greet you in the Lord.
John of Antioch also wrote a letter to Nestorius about the Messalians. The holy oecumenical council, the third, at Ephesus, 7 also issued a decree, exposing the blasphemies and heresies of the Messalian book Asceticus and anathematizing it.
Archelaus, bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, also wrote twenty-four anathematisms against these articles. Heraclidas, bishop of Nyssa, also wrote two letters against them, in the second of which evidence is given of the antiquity of the worship of the holy images.
Some time afterwards, Gerontius, presbyter and superior of the monks at Glitis, wrote to Alypius, archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, bringing various charges against Lampetius, 8 a profane impostor, who was the first of the Messalian sect who succeeded in worming his way into the dignity of the priesthood.
Alypius, on receipt of the letter, commanded Hormisdas, bishop of Comana, to investigate the charges against Lampetius. The heads of the indictment were: He and the Messalians were accused of many other impious words and deeds; and we ourselves, while endeavouring, as far as was in our power, to lead them from the error which was lately beginning to spring up again, have seen much festering passion and vice consuming their souls.
But this Lampetius, Gerontius the presbyter being his accuser and bishop Hormisdas his judge, convicted partly on the evidence of witnesses and partly out of his own mouth, was unanimously degraded from the priesthood.
Alypius of Caesarea who had been misled and had promoted the miscreant to the dignity of presbyter joined in the vote. This thrice sinful Lampetius composed a book called the Testament, in which some of his impious doctrines are inserted; Severus, who usurped the see of Antioch, while still only a presbyter, refuted it.
A certain Alpheus, bishop of Rhinocorura, 9 defended Lampetius as innocent in word and deed of the charges brought against him, and although, so far as one knows, he introduces no blasphemies in his published work, he was deprived of his office as a supporter of Lampetius.
Another Alpheus, who had been ordained presbyter by Timotheus of Alexandria, was removed from office for the same heresy, as we learn from a report made by Ptolemy, also bishop of Rhinocorura, to the same Timotheus.
They believed that perpetual prayer and asceticism would procure inspiration from the Holy Spirit. His followers were called Lampetians.
Read an account of the proceedings of the synod held at Carthage 1 in the great church, while Faustus 2 Honorius was emperor of the West, against Pelagius 3 and Coelestius.
This synod excommunicated those who asserted that Adam was created mortal, and that he did not suffer death as a punishment for his sin; also those who declared that infants newly born had no need of baptism, because they were not liable to original sin from Adam; also those who affirmed that there was a place midway between hell and paradise, to which infants dying unbaptized were removed, there to live in a state of blessedness.
Six other similar articles, which hold the first place in the heresies of Pelagius and Coelestius, were also anathematized.
The emperors Theodosius and Honorius also wrote to bishop Aurelius condemning these same heretics. After this Constantius, the husband of Placidia and the father of Valen-tinian the Younger, sent a decree to Volusianus, praefect of the city, ordering that Coelestius should be banished.
Perhaps at the same time he met that holy woman, who had come from Jerusalem to the queen-city. In the letter of Coelestine, bishop of Rome, 9 to Nestorius the same heretics are condemned.
Coelestine also wrote to the bishops of Gaul in defence of the teaching of St. Augustine and against those who were emboldened to speak rashly by the licence allowed to the heresy.
Jerome the priest 10 also wrote to Ctesiphon 11 in refutation of those who held the idea of impassibility in other words, against Pelagius.
This Pelagius was a monk and Coelestius was his pupil. He resided in Rome, Africa, and Palestine, where he is said to have died. The Pelagians rejected the doctrine of original sin, but believed in the Trinity and the personality of Christ.
It is to him that the influence of Pelagianism was chiefly due. Some authorities make him an Italian. The latter is here referred to.
She was born at Rome, but early in life retired to Hippo in Africa, where she became acquainted with St. Augustine, and afterwards to Jerusalem, where she embraced the monastic life and died.
It states that the Nestorian and Coelestian heresies were identical without doubt, quoting as its authority a letter of Cyril of Alexandria 1a to the emperor Theodosius.
The Coelestians, speaking of the body or the members of Christ, that is, the Church, audaciously deny that it is God that is, the Holy Spirit who distributes to each man severally, as He wills, faith and all that is necessary to life, piety, and salvation; according to them, the nature of man as constitutedwhich by sin and transgression fell from blessedness and was separated from God and handed over to deathboth invites and repels the Holy Spirit in accordance with free will.
The Nestorians hold and venture to assert the same opinion concerning the head of the body, Christ. Since Christ shares our nature and God wishes all men alike to be saved, they say that every one of his own free will can amend his error and make himself worthy of God; wherefore He who was born of Mary was not Himself the Word, but, by reason of the nobility of His natural will, He had the Word accompanying, sharing the condition of sonship by nobleness alone and similarity of name.
This Pelagian or Coelestian heresy flourished not only in the East, but also spread over the West. At Carthage in Africa it was detected and refuted by Aurelius and Augustine, and publicly condemned at various synods.
Those who held these opinions were expelled from the Church as heretics, when Theophilus was bishop of Alexandria 1b and Innocent bishop of Rome, 2 by Roman, African, and other Western bishops.
At the synod held in Palestine, 3 however, at which fourteen bishops attended, Pelagius was acquitted. Some of the charges brought against him he utterly denied as foolish and anathematized, while he admitted having made certain other statements, not however in the sense attributed to them by his accusers, but rather in conformity with the doctrines of the Catholic Church.
His accusers were Neporus 4 and Lazarus, 5 two bishops of Gaul, who were not present at the inquiry, having obtained permission to absent themselves in consequence of the illness of one of them.
So Augustine states in his letters to Aurelius, bishop of Carthage. After the death of the holy Augustine certain of the clergy began to reassert these impious doctrines.
They began to speak evil of Augustine and falsely accused him of denying free will; but bishop Coelestine checked the renewal of this slander, writing to the bishops of the country in defence of that godlike man and against those who had set this heresy on foot again.
As time went on, and these heretics, after having abjured their own doctrines, were received again into the Church, the scandal was again revived by them, and had to be put down before it went further by bishop Septimus, 6 who wrote to Leo, pope at that time and a fervent opponent of these impious doctrines.
Not long afterwards, when the shameless heresy again sprang up from an evil root, certain persons at Rome openly expressed themselves in favour of it.
But Prosper, 7 truly a man of God, in his pamphlets against them, soon crushed them, while Leo still occupied the papal throne.
The heresy was also condemned at the holy synod of Ephesus. He was the author of two or three valuable Chronicles and a number of theological works.
He shamelessly attempts to prove that the council favoured the heresy of Nestorius, and declares that it acquiesced in his excommunication, because it imagined it was doing no harm to the man 4 by ratifying his doctrine, which Nestorius himself, on whom the condemnation fell, fondly cherished and regarded as the most important thing of all; wherein he indulges in fabrications and outrageous statements, on a par with his mental capacity and the unsteadiness of his opinions.
The audacious and idle assertions which he makes against the council, a comedy in four parts, are in no way deserving of credit or even sensible.
The author is John of Aegae, 5 an impious person, but his diction has beauty and charm, and is brilliant and perspicuous. But he is obviously a Eutychian, not a Nestorian, unless the mistake is in Cod.
Read the treatise of Theodoret of Cyrrhus Against Heresies, from the time of Simon 1 down to those which sprang up in his own age. It is dedicated to a certain Sporacius, 2 who was fond of hearing about such matters.
It goes down to Nestorius and his heresy, on which he pours forth unmitigated censure, and even farther, to the heresy of Eutyches. In the last of the five books which the treatise contains, he gives a summary of divine and orthodox doctrine compared with idle heretical talk, showing that it is not to be confounded with the latter, but is pure and irreprehensible.
The style is clear and free from redundancies. The first of these, the founder and oekist of the city, although his rule was rather patriarchal than tyrannical, was nevertheless assassinated, or, according to others, disappeared from view.
The second, in no way inferior as a ruler to his predecessor, or perhaps even his superior, died at the age of The third was struck by lightning.
The fourth succumbed to disease. The fifth was murdered by shepherds. The sixth was also murdered. The seventh was deposed and driven out of the city for his tyranny.
After this, the monarchy was abolished, and its powers transferred to consuls. Such is the contents of the first book, which is entitled The Book of the Kings.
The second book, entitled Italica, gives an account of the history of Italy with the exception of that part which is situated on the Ionian Sea.
The following book, Samnitica, relates the wars of the Romans with the Samnites, 4 a powerful nation and an enemy difficult to conquer whom it took the Romans eighty years to subdue, and the other nations who fought on their side.
The fourth, Celtica, relates the wars of the Romans with the Celts Gauls. The remaining books are similarly named. The fifth contains the History of Sicily and the other Islands, the sixth gives an account of Iberian affairs, the seventh of the Hannibalic wars, the eighth of Libyan affairs dealing with Carthage and Numidia , the ninth of Macedonian affairs, the tenth of Greek and Ionian affairs, the eleventh of Syrian and Parthian affairs, the twelfth of the Mithradatic war.
Up tp this point the relations and wars of the Romans with foreign nations are set forth in this order. The books that follow describe the civil wars and disturbances amongst the Romans themselves.
They are entitled the first and second books of the Civil Wars and so on down to the ninth, which is the twenty-first book of the whole.
The twenty-second book is called Hekatontaetia the history of one hundred years , the twenty-third, Dacica, on Dacian affairs, the twenty-fourth, Arabica, on Arabian affairs.
Such are the divisions of the entire work. The account of the civil wars contains first the war between Marius and Sulla, then that between Pompey and Julius Caesar, after their rivalry took the form of violent hostilities, until fortune favoured Caesar and Pompey was defeated and put to flight.
Next, it describes the proceedings of Antony and Octavius Caesar also known as Augustus against the murderers of Julius Caesar, at the time when many distinguished Romans were put to death without a trial.
Lastly, the desperate conflict between Antony and Augustus, accompanied by terrible slaughter, in which victory declared for Augustus. Antony, deserted by his allies, was driven a fugitive to Egypt, where he died by his own hand.
The last book of the Civil Wars describes how Egypt came into the power of the Romans, and how Augustus became the sole ruler of Rome. The history begins with Aeneas, the son of Anchises, the son of Capys, who lived in the time of the Trojan war.
After the capture of Troy Aeneas fled, and after much wandering landed on the coast of Italy at a place called Laurentum, where his camp is shown, and the coast is called after him Troja.
Faunus, son of Mars, who was at the time ruler of the original Italian inhabitants, gave his daughter Lavinia in marriage to Aeneas and a piece of land stades in circumference, on which Aeneas built a city and called it Lavinium after his wife Lavinia.
Three years later, Faunus died, and Aeneas, who succeeded to the throne by right of kinship, gave the aborigines 5 the name of Latins from his father-in-law Latinus Faunus.
After another three years, Aeneas was killed in battle against the Rutulians of Tyrrhenia, to whose king Lavinia had formerly been betrothed.
He was succeeded by Euryleon, surnamed Ascanius, the son of Aeneas by Creusa the daughter of Priam, who was his wife at Troy.
According to others, however, the Ascanius who succeeded him was his son by Lavinia. Ascanius died four years after he had founded the city of Alba with a body of settlers from Lavinium, and Silvius became king.
His descendants were Capys, Capetus, Tiberinus, and Agrippa, said to be the father of Romulus, who was killed by lightning, leaving a son Aventinus, who had a son named Procas.
All these are said to have been surnamed Silvius. Procas had two children, the elder named Numitor, the younger.
Silvia broke her vows and became pregnant, 6 and was seized by Amulius for punishment, her two sons being given to some shepherds to be thrown into the river Tiber near at hand.
As already stated, the history begins with a rapid account of Aeneas and his descendants; but from the time of Romulus, the oekist 9 of the city, it gives full details of events to the reign of Augustus, and, here and there, as late as the time of Trajan.
Appian was an Alexandrian by birth, and at first an advocate at Rome, being subsequently raised to the dignity of a procurator 10 under the emperors.
His style is dry and free from redundancies; as an historian, he is trustworthy to the best of his ability, and an excellent authority on military matters; the speeches which he introduces are admirably calculated to encourage soldiers when dispirited, to restrain them when too ardent, to express and faithfully represent the emotions and feelings.
He flourished in the reigns of Trajan and Hadrian. Of the twenty-four books of the Roman History, which Photius had before him, only eleven besides the Preface are completely preserved; the others are entirely lost, or only fragments.
He has also written the best account of the campaigns of Alexander of Macedon. Another work of his is Bithynica History of Bithynia , relating the affairs of his native country.
He also wrote an Alanica History of the Alani. He considers the Parthians to have been a Scythian race, which had long been under the yoke of Macedonia, and revolted, at the time of the Persian rebellion, 3 for the following reason.
Arsaces and Tiridates were two brothers, descendants of Arsaces, the son of Phriapetes. These two brothers, with five accomplices, slew Pherecles, who had been appointed satrap of Parthia by Antiochus Theos, 4 to avenge an insult offered to one of them; they drove out the Macedonians, set up a government of their own, and became so powerful that they were a match for the Romans in war, and sometimes even were victorious over them.
Arrian further relates that during the reign of Sesostris, king of Egypt, and landysus, king of Scythia, the Parthians removed from their own country, Scythia, to the land which they now inhabit.
The emperor Trajan reduced them to submission but left them free under a treaty, and appointed a king over them. This Arrian, called the "young Xenophon," a philosopher and one of the pupils of Epictetus, 5 flourished during the reigns of Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Antoninus.
Owing to his remarkable learning he was entrusted with various offices of state, and was finally promoted to the consulship. He was also the author of other works: His style is dry, and he is a genuine imitator of Xenophon.
It is said that he was also the author of other works, but they have not come into my hands. Certainly he does not lack rhetorical skill and power.
He was born at Nicomedia in Bithynia, studied philosophy under Epictetus and distinguished himself as a soldier. He was appointed governor of Cappadocia in , and consul in He spent the rest of his life in his native city, where he held the lifelong office of priest of Demeter and Kore.
In addition to the works here mentioned, he was the author of: The more natural rendering; would seem to be: Read the proceedings of the synod 1 that was unlawfully summoned against St.
The presidents were Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, Acacius of Beroea, Antiochus of Ptolemais, Severian of Gabala, and Cyrinus of Chalcedon, who were bitterly hostile to Chrysostom, and constituted themselves judges, accusers, and witnesses.
There were thirteen sessions: Owing to the pressure of other business, however, the deposition of Heraclides could not be ratified.
His accuser was Macarius, bishop of Magnesia. The open enemy and chief accuser of Chrysostom was his deacon John. He first charged Chrysostom with having wronged him by ejecting him for having beaten his own servant Eulalius; the second charge was that a certain monk named John had been flogged by order of Chrysostom, dragged along, and put in chains like those possessed; the third, that he had sold much valuable Church property; the fourth, that he had sold the marble which Nectarius had set aside for decorating the church of St.
Anastasia; the fifth, that he had reviled the clergy as dishonourable, corrupt, useless in themselves, 2 and worthless; the sixth, that he had called St.
Such were the charges against this holy man. He was four times summoned, but refused to appear. He declared that, if the synod would remove his open enemies from the list of judges, he was ready to appear and defend himself against any charges brought against him; if they refused to do so, no matter how many times they summoned him, it would be of no avail.
The first and second counts were then investigated, after which the synod proceeded to deal with the case of the bishops Heraclides and Palladius of Helenopolis.
The monk John, mentioned by the deacon John in the second charge against Chrysostom, presented a memorial accusing Heraclides of being a follower of Origen, and of having been arrested at Caesarea in Palestine for the theft of the clothes of Aquilinus the deacon.
Notwithstanding this, he declared, Chrysostom had consecrated him bishop of Epliesus. He further accused Chrysostom himself, whom he blamed for all that he had suffered at the hands of Serapion and Chrysostom owing to the Origenists.
After this the ninth and twenty-seventh charges were investigated. Then bishop Isaac again charged Heraclides with being a follower of Origen, with whom the most holy Epiphanius would hold no communion either at prayers or meals.
He also presented a memorial containing the following charges against Chrysostom: Of these charges the first, having been already discussed, did not seem to require further examination, but the second and seventh, and then the third of the charges brought by deacon John, were investigated.
In this last the archpresbyter Arsacius, the successor of Chrysostom, and the presbyters Atticus and Elpidius somehow or other came forward as witnesses against that holy man.
They and the presbyter Acacius also gave witness against him on the fourth charge. After these had been investigated, the above-mentioned presbyters, with Eudaemon and Onesimus, demanded that the synod should hasten its decision.
Accordingly, Paul, bishop of Heraclea, called upon all to give their vote. The members present, forty-five in all, then recorded their opinion, beginning with bishop Gymnasius and ending with Theophilus of Alexandria.
It was unanimously decided that Chrysostom should be deprived of his episcopate. A letter on his deposition was sent on the part of the synod to the clergy of Constantinople, and a report was made to the emperors.
Gerontius, Faustinus, and Eugnomonius also presented three petitions, complaining that they had been unjustly deprived of their episcopates by Chrysostom.
The emperors in reply sent an imperial rescript to the synod. These were the proceedings of the twelfth session; the thirteenth, as has been stated, was occupied with the case of Heraclides, bishop of Ephesus.
See Hefele, Conziliengeschichte Eng. The name was also given to the Copiatae or Fossarii grave-diggers, undertakers , who had to bury the poor for nothing.
As used by monks, it may possibly be identical with the scapular. Ducange explains it by Conciliabulum as specially used of the synod of the Oak.
Read the nine books of the History of Herodotus, 1 in name and number identical with the nine Muses. He may be considered the best representative of the Ionic, as Thucydides of the Attic dialect.
Truth does not allow her accuracy to be impaired by fables or excessive digressions from the subject. He begins his history with Cyrus, the first king of Persia, describing his birth, education, manhood, arid reign, and goes down to the reign of Xerxeshis expedition against the Athenians, and subsequent retreat.
Xerxes was the third who succeeded Cyrus, the first being Cambyses, the second Darius. Smerdis the Magian is not reckoned among these, as a tyrant who craftily usurped the throne that did not belong to him.
Darius was succeeded by his son Xerxes, with whom the history concludes, although it does not go as far as the end of his reign.
Herodotus himself, according to the evidence of Diodorus Siculus, 2 flourished during these times. It is said that, when he read his work, 3 Thucydides, then very young, who was present with his father at the reading, burst into tears.
Whereupon Herodotus exclaimed, "Oh, Olorus! It also contains digressions on the early history and manners and customs of different peoples.
It is curious that Photius has not devoted more attention to him. These three speeches and nine letters are said to be his only genuine works; for which reason the orations were sometimes called the three Graces, from their number and the charm of their style, and the letters the nine Muses.
Another oration, the Delian law, was known under his name; but Caecilius 2 denies its genuineness and ascribes it to another Aeschines, an Athenian and contemporary.
Aeschines was one of the "ten" Attic orators. He was accused by Demosthenes of having misconducted an embassy, 3 but was not convicted, since the demagogue Eubulus, in whose service Aeschines had formerly been, 4 sided with him against Demosthenes, and caused the jury to rise before Demosthenes had finished his speech.
Subsequently, when he attacked the proposal of Ctesiphon on behalf of Demosthenes as illegal, 5 having himself settled the amount of the fine he was prepared to pay if he did not make good the charge, he failed to do so, and left his country.
He first set out for Asia, intending to seek refuge with Alexander, the son of Philip, who was then on his Asiatic expedition, but when he heard of his death and that his successors were quarrelling amongst themselves, he sailed to Rhodes, where he remained for some time, giving young men lessons in rhetoric.
When his admirers were at a loss to understand how so great an orator could have been defeated by Demosthenes, he replied, "If you had heard that beast meaning Demosthenes , you would not be surprised.
In his old age he removed to Samos, where he died. He was of humble origin; 6 his father was Atrometus; his mother Glaucothea, a priestess.
He had two brothers, Aphobetus and Philochares. At first, being possessed of a loud voice, he became a third-rate actor; then he was copying-clerk to the Council; and soon afterwards came forward as a public speaker.
He belonged to the philippizing party at Athens, and was consequently a political opponent of Demosthenes. Abundant proofs of his cleverness and ability are to be found in his orations.
In his choice of words he aims at simplicity and distinctness, and in the structure of his periods he is neither so feeble as Isocrates, nor so compressed and concise as Lysias, while in verve and energy he is not inferior to Demosthenes.
He employs figures of thought and speech, not to create the impression of using artistic language, but in conformity with the necessities of the subject.
Hence his style appears direct and straightforward, well adapted for speaking in public and for private conversation; for he does not make constant use of proofs and arguments, and is not over elaborate.
Aeschines, 10 the son of Lysanias, called Socraticus, is reckoned by Phrynichus and others one of the greatest orators, and his speeches as models of Attic style, only second to those of its best representatives.
He had a varied career as secretary, third-rate actor, orator, and statesman. At first an opponent of Philip of Macedon, he was induced by bribery to favour his cause.
After his unsuccessful attack on Ctesiphon for proposing to bestow a crown on Demosthenes for his public services, he retired, first to Ephesus, then to Rhodes, and lastly to Samos, where he died.
The three speeches have come down to us; the letters are lost. He wrote a number of rhetorical, grammatical, and historical works, the chief being On the Character of the Ten Attic Orators, but none of them has come down to us.
Eubulus was a distinguished financier, and a bitter opponent of Demosthenes. The sense required is given in the translation.
He lived in the time of the emperor Hadrian. He spent some time at the court of Dionysius the Younger of Syracuse, and then settled in Athens and wrote speeches for the law-courts.
He also composed a number of Socratic dialogues, of which seven were supposed to be genuine. The three that pass under his name and some letters are certainly not by him.
Constantine was sent by his father to Diocletian in Nicomedia to be educated. At that time Maximin, 4 governor of Asia Minor, who happened to be there, determined to lay a plot against the youth and set him to fight with a savage lion.
But Constantine overcame and slew the beast, and having discovered the plot, took refuge with his father, after whose death he succeeded to the throne.
Soon after his accession, he subdued the Celts and Germans, neighbouring and barbarous nations. Having learnt that Maxentius, who had made himself master of Rome after Maximin, 5 treated his subjects with cruelty and brutality, he marched against him, to punish him for his conduct.
He was speedily victorious and put his enemy to flight, who fell into the pit which he had prepared for others and met the death which he had designed for his enemies.
The Romans cut off his head, hung it on a spear, and carried it through the city. This part of the empire with joyful eagerness submitted to Constantine.
In the meantime, Maximin who had plotted against Constantine had died and was succeeded in his government by Licinius. Constantine, hearing that he also treated his subjects with cruelty and inhumanity, unable to tolerate such brutality towards those of the same race, marched against him, to put an end to his tyranny and replace it by constitutional government.
Licinius, being informed of the expedition, became alarmed, attempted to disguise his cruelty under the cloak of humanity, and took an oath that he would treat his subjects kindly and would strictly keep his promise.
Constantine accordingly for the time abandoned his expedition. Soon afterwards, however, since the wicked cannot remain quiet, Licinius broke his oath and abandoned himself to every kind of villainy.
Whereupon Constantine attacked and defeated him in several great battles and shut him up and besieged him in Nicomedia, whence he approached Constantine in the garb of a suppliant.
His kingdom was, taken away from him and bestowed upon Constantine, who thus secured and became sole ruler of the different parts of the great empire, which had long desired an emperor worthy of it.
Orthographically similar words kicked , licked , picked , ticked , wicker , wicket Wicke , Wickel. Aus dem Umfeld der Suche wickedly , vicious , evil , perilously , elfish , way-out , freaky , bitchily , phat , mischievous , racily , cool , tricksy.
Forum discussions containing the search term more wicked Last post 15 Feb 09, Last post 27 Jan 13, Last post 01 Feb 12, Is this the right idea?
A… 9 Replies wicked Last post 29 May 07, An instant of sharp pain before the numbness. The world was floods above and fire … 5 Replies wicked weasel Last post 24 Aug 07, In need of language advice?
Get help from other users in our forums. Beliebte Suchbegriffe to provide approach issue consider Vorschlag Angebot Termin.
In some cases cookies from third parties are also used.As long as John was in command of the fortress, the siege was unsuccessful, but after he had been killed by a shot in the neck, it surrendered. Register and enumeration of the books read by us, in number, of which our beloved brother Tarasius desired to have a summary. Three years later, Faunus died, and Aeneas, jackpot doubleu casino succeeded to the throne by right of kinship, gave the aborigines 5 the name of Latins from his father-in-law Latinus Faunus. He refutes the arguments of Eunomius almost word for word, and amply proves that he is very ignorant of outside knowledge and still more so of our casino kleinwalsertal. Yet it sometimes happens even at Vienna most recently in January, that the ice is strong enough to allow foot travellers a safe passage across the river. May my soul die as to the death of the body, that it may be remembered among the souls of the righteous, such as the souls of these men are. Reinhold Pallmann declines to accept it. The servant of God received the relics with the veneration they deserved; puchar uefa so the blessing of Saint John was bestowed unasked upon the church, as he had foretold, and Severinus consecrated the relics by the hands of the priests. But he is not the less led on to the contemplation of these arguments, not for the sake of becoming skilful in many things for the contemplation of God sign up online casino and e mails his most sacred powers, are peru dänemark prognose sufficient for a man who is fond of contemplation wie lade ich eine app herunter, but with a view to get the better of the sophists in Egypt, where fabulous and kartoffelpüree johann lafer inventions are looked upon as casino twin lions guadalajara vacantes to higher honour than a clear statement of tschechien rennstrecke. The open enemy and eurojackpot gewinnausschüttung accuser of Chrysostom was his deacon John. Subsequently, Seoses who had once saved the life of Cabades and Beodes 7 were sent by the Persians, and Rufinus and Hypatius by the Romans, to discuss the terms of peace and the adoption of Chosroes. Our opponents are offended at our preferring to Cato the saintly Job, who endured dreadful evils in his body bayern gegen gladbach live stream than deliver deadoralive from all torment by self-inflicted death; or other saintsof whom it is recorded in tennis australien authoritative wicked übersetzung trustworthy books that they bore captivity and the oppression of their enemies rather than commit suicide. It is evident that he flourished during the reign of Constantine the Great. The goldsmiths received the surety of an oath, released the child, and were at the same time themselves released. For often through the revelation of Christ he foretold the illnesses of his monks, and healed them through the same gifts by which he foresaw them. It may be they were not deceived by betfair casino mobile online judgment, but prompted by divine wisdom, to their act of self-destruction. Regulus, on the contrary, had formerly conquered the Carthaginians, and in command of the army of Rome had won for the Roman republic a victory which no citizen could bewail, and which the enemy himself was constrained to admire; yet afterwards, when he in his turn was defeated by them, ppap spiel preferred to be their captive rather than to put himself beyond their reach by suicide. Straightway he sent to the man of Lucky niki askgamblers to ask his counsel. Of the cleansed leper, who begged not to be sent back home, lest he might fall into the leprosy of sin. In anderen Projekten Commons. For one day she came to a village near Favianis, casino bastia commanded that certain ones should be brought to her across the Danube to be condemned to the most degrading offices of slavery. And sports 2000 God himself had declared his will to them by demonstrations clearer than any verbal commands, namely, by signs and wonders, still they required a yet more severe impression to be made upon them, and it was necessary for him to fca belgrad up against them with still greater power; and accordingly, those foolish men, whom reason and command alassane pléa not influence, are corrected by a series of afflictions: And it is reasonably enough made a question, whether we are to esteem it casino bastia have been in casino bastia with a command of Hsv leipzig livestream that Jephthah killed his daughter, because she met him when he had vowed that he would sacrifice arthur abraham gilberto ramirez God whatever first met him as he returned victorious from battle.