# Beza's comment on Acts 4:4, where?



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 2, 2013)

I'm having a tough time with this reference. In the debate between the Independents and Presbyterians at the Westminster Assembly, the discussion of the 5000 in Acts 4:4 is addressed and the Independent divines reference Beza and Calvin to show the 5000 in Acts 4:4 was inclusive of the 3000 mentioned earlier. The margin reference says to see Calvin in loco (as expected), but Beza on 1 Cor. 1:13. But the margin is shaved in all the examples I can find so it may not be chapter 1 of 1 Corinthians (if that is even right), and the verse could be a typo. The link here is to Beza's _Novum Testamentum_. I am assuming that is the work referenced (simply "Beza on 1 Cor. etc). Would help if I read Latin but I usually do okay finding these things except for the odd one like this. Any help is much appreciated. Below is the context (from the WD's Grand Debate) if that helps. At one point I have added a note that maybe 1 Cor. 14:23 was intended but I cannot recall why now, so that may be a place to check? 
And Beza and Calvin and many other of our Protestant writers judge this number not to be of this new accession of converts, but the total number including the former; and the _andron_ although translated men, is when put alone (as there) all one with _anthropon_, females as well as males; which especially may be so taken, because it is spoken of such a promiscuous auditory. And if any should affirm it meant of males only, and then now converted, it would make a greater miracle than any other recorded, especially when the people are said to be converted (verse 2), that did alike run to see the miracle.​


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 4, 2013)

Okay; so it's a tough one.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 4, 2013)

This was the only thing I found last night Chris.

Historical Memorials Relating to the Independents Or Congregations Lists ... - Benjamin Hanbury - Google Books


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 4, 2013)

Right; that's a volume that reprints the first portion of the Independents case; it confirms the text, but it could still be a typo in the original.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 5, 2013)

Here is an edition of just the NT with only modest notes and one note at Acts 4:4 not in the 1642 edition with the Annotations linked above (considered the best fullest edition). The note reads:
Volentes diminuerre numerum auxerunt
I'm not sure that gets me to what I need or not.


----------

