OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume VI/The Harmony of the Gospels/Book III/Chapter 15

Chapter XV.—Of the Consistency of the Accounts Given by Matthew, Mark, and Luke on the Subject of the Parties Who Insulted the Lord.
52. Matthew goes on in the following strain: “And they that passed by reviled Him, wagging their heads, and saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself: if thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.” Mark’s statement agrees with this almost to the letter. Then Matthew continues thus: “Likewise also the chief priests, mocking Him, with the scribes and elders, said, He saved others; himself he cannot save: if he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him. He trusted in God; let Him deliver him now, if He will: for he said, I am the Son of God.” Mark and Luke, although they report the words differently, nevertheless agree in conveying the same meaning, although the one passes without notice something which the other mentions. For they are both really at one on the subject of the chief priests, giving us to understand that they insulted the Lord when He was crucified. The only difference is, that Mark does not specify the elders, while Luke, who has instanced the rulers, has not added the designation “of the priests,” and thus has rather comprehended the whole body of the leading men under the general designation; so that we may fairly take both the scribes and the elders to be included in his description.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xxvii. 39, 40.
* ↑ Matt. xxvii. 41–43.
* ↑ Mark xv. 29–32; Luke xxiii. 35–37.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume VI/The Harmony of the Gospels/Book III/Chapter 12

Chapter XII.—Of the Concord Preserved Among All the Four Evangelists on the Subject of the Parting of His Raiment.
39. Matthew goes on thus: “And after they crucified Him, they parted His garments, casting lots: and sitting down, they watched Him.” Mark reports the same incident, as follows: “And crucifying Him, they parted His garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take.” In like manner Luke says: “And they parted His raiment, and cast lots. And the people stood beholding.” The occurrence is thus recorded briefly by the first three. But John gives us a more detailed narrative of the method in which the act was gone about. His version runs thus: “Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also His coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the Scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my garments, and for my vesture they did cast lots.”

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xxvii. 35, 36. The words, “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots,” are omitted. [So the Greek text, according to the best authorities. Comp. Revised Version.—R.]
* ↑ Mark xv. 24.
* ↑ Luke xxiii. 34, 35.
* ↑ John xix. 23, 24.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume VI/The Harmony of the Gospels/Book III/Chapter 18

Chapter XVIII.—Of the Lord’s Successive Utterances When He Was About to Die; And of the Question Whether Matthew and Mark are in Harmony with Luke in Their Reports of These Sayings, and Also Whether These Three Evangelists are in Harmony with John.
55. Matthew proceeds as follows: “And Jesus, crying again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.” In like manner, Mark says, “And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.” Luke, again, has told us what He said when that loud voice was uttered. For his version is thus: “And Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, Father, into Thy hands I commend my spirit: and saying this, He gave up the ghost.” John, on the other hand, as he has left unnoticed the first voice, which Matthew and Mark have reported—namely, “Eli, Eli”—has also passed over in silence the one which has been recited only by Luke, while the other two have referred to it under the designation of the “loud voice.” I allude to the cry, “Father, into Thy hands I commend my spirit.” Luke has also attested the fact that this exclamation was uttered with a loud voice; and hence we may understand this particular cry to be identified with the loud voice which Matthew and Mark have specified. But John has stated a fact which is noticed by none of the other three, namely, that He said “It is finished,” after He had received the vinegar. This cry we take to have been uttered previous to the loud voice referred to. For these are John’s words: “When Jesus, therefore, had received the vinegar, He said, It is finished; and He bowed His head, and gave up the ghost.” In the interval elapsing between this cry, “It is finished,” and what is referred to in the subsequent sentence, “and He bowed His head and gave up the ghost,” the voice was uttered which John himself has passed over without record, but which the other three have noticed. For the precise succession appears to be this, namely, that He said first “It is finished,” when what had been prophesied regarding Him was fulfilled in Him, and that thereafter—as if He had been waiting for this, like one, indeed, who died when He willed it to be so—He commended His spirit [to His Father], and resigned it. But, whatever the order may be in which a person may consider it likely that these words were spoken, he ought above all things to guard against entertaining the notion that any one of the evangelists is in antagonism with another, when one leaves unmentioned something which another has repeated, or particularizes something which another has passed by in silence.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xxvii. 50.
* ↑ Mark xv. 37.
* ↑ Luke xxiii. 46.
* ↑ John xix. 30.
* ↑ [This view of the order is altogether the more probable one. See commentaries.—R.]
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume VI/The Harmony of the Gospels/Book III/Chapter 10

Chapter X.—Of the Method in Which We Can Reconcile the Statement Which is Made by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, to the Effect that Another Person Was Pressed into the Service of Carrying the Cross of Jesus, with that Given by John, Who Says that Jesus Bore It Himself.
37. Matthew, accordingly, goes on with his narrative in these terms: “And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear His cross.” In like manner, Mark says: “And they led Him out to be crucified. And they compelled one Simon, a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear His cross.” Luke’s version is also to this effect: “And as they led Him away, they laid hold upon one Simon a Cyrenian, coming out of the country; and on him they laid the cross, that he might bear it after Jesus.” On the other hand, John records the matter as follows: “And they took Jesus, and led Him away. And He bearing His cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew, Golgotha; where they crucified Him.” From all this we understand that Jesus was carrying the cross Himself as He went forth into the place mentioned. But on the way the said Simon, who is named by the other three evangelists, was pressed into the service, and got the cross to carry for the rest of the course until the spot was reached. Thus we find that both circumstances really took place; namely, first the one noticed by John, and thereafter the one instanced by the other three.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xxvii. 32.
* ↑ Mark xv. 20, 21.
* ↑ Luke xxiii. 26. [This probably implies that the afterpart of the cross was laid upon Simon, not the whole of it. This obviates the necessity for the explanation given by Augustin.—R.]
* ↑ John xix. 16–18.
# North Korea's Missile Launch

Press statement published on September 14, 2017
North Korea's provocative missile launch represents the second time the people of Japan, a treaty ally of the United States, have been directly threatened in recent weeks.
These continued provocations only deepen North Korea's diplomatic and economic isolation.
United Nations Security Council resolutions, including the most recent unanimous sanctions resolution, represent the floor, not the ceiling, of the actions we should take. We call on all nations to take new measures against the Kim regime.
China supplies North Korea with most of its oil. Russia is the largest employer of North Korean forced labor.
China and Russia must indicate their intolerance for these reckless missile launches by taking direct actions of their own.
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# North Devon

* "North Devon (A European Summer, III)" in The Nation (8 August 1872)
    — First publication in any form.
* "North Devon" in Transatlantic Sketches (Boston: James R. Osgood & Co., 1875): 33–43. (transcription project)
    — First American book edition.
* "North Devon" in Foreign Parts (Leipzig: Bernhard Tauchnitz, 1883)
    — First Continental book edition.
* "North Devon" in English Hours (London: William Heinemann, 1905)
    — First English book edition
* "North Devon" in English Hours (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1905): 93–105.
    — Second American book edition
* "North Devon" in English Hours (Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1905): 93–105.
    — "Large Paper Edition" reprint of second American book edition.
# North German Lloyd v. Guaranty Trust Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
244 U.S. 12
North German Lloyd v. Guaranty Trust Company
Argued: April 16 and 17, 1917. --- Decided: May 7, 1917
[Syllabus from pages 13-14 intentionally omitted]
Messrs.Joseph Larocque, Walter C. Noyes, and Joseph D. Bedle for petitioner.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Official Journal of the European Union, Vol. 59, No. 65/Information relating to EU–Swiss Confederation agreement

II
(Non-legislative acts)
INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS
Information relating to the entry into force of the Arrangement between the European Union
and the Swiss Confederation on the modalities of its participation in the European Asylum
Support Office
The Arrangement between the European Union and the Swiss Confederation on the modalities of its participation in the European Asylum Support Office entered into force on 1 March 2016, the procedure provided for in Article 13(2) of the Arrangement having been completed on 26 February 2016.
© European Union, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/, 1998-2024
According to the European Union Commission Decision of 12 December 2011 as provided here, it is permitted to reuse this legislation so long as it is accompanied by the preceding notice.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
© European Union, 1998-2024
According to the European Union Commission Decision of 12 December 2011 as provided here, it is permitted to reuse this European Commission document so long as it is accompanied by the preceding notice.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Official Languages (Local Authorities) Amendment Act, 1956

* related portals: Constitutional documents of South Africa, Acts of the Parliament of South Africa.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Act No. 10 of 1956. First published on 9 March 1956 in Government Gazette Extraordinary No. 5647, and came into force upon publication. Repealed on 31 May 1961 by the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, 1961.
Act
To amend the South Africa Act Amendment Act, 1955.
(English text signed by the Governor-General.) (Assented to 5th March, 1956.)
Be it enacted by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, the Senate and the House of Assembly of the Union of South Africa, as follows:―
1. Section two of the South Africa Act Amendment Act, 1955, is hereby amended by the substitution in sub-section (1) for the figures “1956” of the figures “1957”.
2. This Act shall be called the Official Languages (Local Authorities) Amendment Act, 1956.
This work is in the public domain because it was created and first published in South Africa and it is an official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or an official translation of such a text.
According to the Copyright Act, 1978, § 12 (8) (a), "No copyright shall subsist in official texts of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or in official translations of such texts."
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Official Languages (Local Authorities) Amendment Act, 1957

* related portals: Constitutional documents of South Africa, Acts of the Parliament of South Africa.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Act No. 24 of 1957. First published on 12 April 1957 in Government Gazette Extraordinary No. 5853, and came into force upon publication. Repealed on 31 May 1961 by the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, 1961.
Act
To amend the South Africa Act Amendment Act, 1955.
Be it enacted by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, the Senate and the House of Assembly of the Union of South Africa, as follows:―
1. Section two of the South Africa Act Amendment Act, 1955, is hereby amended by the substitution in sub-section (1) for the figures “1957” of the figures “1958”.
2. This Act shall be called the Official Languages (Local Authorities) Amendment Act, 1957.
This work is in the public domain because it was created and first published in South Africa and it is an official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or an official translation of such a text.
According to the Copyright Act, 1978, § 12 (8) (a), "No copyright shall subsist in official texts of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or in official translations of such texts."
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Official Languages Act

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Official Languages Act."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* Official Languages Act, 1963 (Act 19 of 1963), an Indian Act that declares Hindi and English as the official languages of India
* Official Languages Act 2003 (No. 32 of 2003), an Irish Act that declares Irish and English as the official languages of Ireland
# Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies

A 30-volume set of American Civil War naval records. See also Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies in the War of the Rebellion.

## Series 1

* Volume 1 (1894) (transcription project)
* Volume 2 (1895) IA
* Volume 3 (1896) IA
* Volume 4 (1896) IA
* Volume 5 (1897) IA
* Volume 6 (1897) IA
* Volume 7 (1898) IA
* Volume 8 (1899) IA
* Volume 9 (1899) IA
* Volume 10 (1900) IA
* Volume 11 (1900) IA
* Volume 12 (1901) IA
* Volume 13 (1901) IA
* Volume 14 (1902) IA
* Volume 15 (1902) IA
* Volume 16 (1903) IA
* Volume 17 (1903) IA
* Volume 18 (1904) IA
* Volume 19 (1905) IA
* Volume 20 (1905) IA
* Volume 21 (1906) IA
* Volume 22 (1908) IA
* Volume 23 (1910) IA
* Volume 24 (1911) IA
* Volume 25 (1912) IA
* Volume 26 (1914) IA
* Volume 27 (1917) IA

## Series 2

* Volume 1 (1921) IA
* Volume 2 (1921) IA
* Volume 3 (1922) (transcription project)
** Proclamations, Appointments, etc., of President Davis.
** State Department Correspondence with Diplomatic Agents, etc.

## Office Memoranda

* Number 9: Index, Series 1, Volumes 1–13 IA
# Official Languages of the Union Act, 1925

* related portals: Constitutional documents of South Africa, Acts of the Parliament of South Africa.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
Act No. 8 of 1925. First published on 27 May 1925 in Government Gazette Extraordinary No. 1477, and came into force upon publication. Repealed on 31 May 1961 by the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act, 1961.
Act
To remove doubts as to the meaning of the word “Dutch” in Section one hundred and thirty-seven of the South Africa Act, 1909, and wheresoever else that word occurs in the said Act.
(Assented to 22nd May, 1925.) (Signed by the Governor-General in Dutch.)
Preamble.Whereas doubts have arisen as to the meaning of the word “Dutch” in the South Africa Act, 1909;
And whereas it is expedient to remove such doubts;
Be it enacted by the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, the Senate and the House of Assembly of the Union of South Africa, as follows:―
1. The word “Dutch” in section one hundred and thirty-seven of the South Africa Act, 1909, and wheresoever else that word occurs in the said Act, is hereby declared to include Afrikaans.
2. This Act may be cited for all purposes as the Official Languages of the Union Act, 1925, and shall be deemed to have been in operation from the thirty-first day of May, 1910.
This work is in the public domain because it was created and first published in South Africa and it is an official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or an official translation of such a text.
According to the Copyright Act, 1978, § 12 (8) (a), "No copyright shall subsist in official texts of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or in official translations of such texts."
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies/Series 2/Volume 3

OFFICIAL RECORDS
OF THE
UNION AND CONFEDERATE NAVIES
IN THE
WAR OF THE REBELLION.
PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF
The Hon. EDWIN DENBY, Secretary of the Navy,
BY
Colonel HARRY KIDDER WHITE, U. S. M. C, Superintendent, Office Naval Records and Library.
SERIES II—VOLUME 3.
Proclamations, Appointments, etc., of President Davis. State Department Correspondence with Diplomatic Agents, etc.
Washington: 1922.
* Contents of Preceding Volumes
* Calendar
* Confederate Commissioners and Agents to Foreign Countries
* Consuls and Agents from Foreign Countries to the Confederate States, 1861-1865
* List of Illustrations
* Preface
* List of Papers (by source)
** A: List of Confederate Documents, Papers, and Logs Lent to the Office of Naval Records and Library by Individuals
** B: Papers of the Confederate State Department ("Pickett Papers")
** C: Confederate State Department correspondence from and to J. M. Mason
** D: Confederate State Department correspondence from and to John Slidell
** E: Confederate State Department correspondence from and to Henry Hotze
** F: Confederate State Department correspondence from and to C. J. Helm
** G: Confederate State Department correspondence from and to Yancey, Rost, and Mann
** H: Confederate State Department correspondence from and to A. Dudley Mann
* List of Papers (chronological)
** Proclamations, appointments, etc., of President Davis, February 12, 1861, to January 28, 1865
** State Department correspondence with diplomatic agents, etc.
*** 1861
*** 1862
*** 1863
*** 1864
*** 1865
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/Sulpitius Severus/Sacred History/Book II/Chapter 12

Chapter XII.
At this period of time we think Esther and Judith lived, but I confess that I cannot easily perceive with what kings especially I should connect the actions of their lives. For, while Esther is said to have lived under King Artaxerxes, I find that there were two Persian kings of that name, and there is much hesitation in concluding to which of these her date is to be assigned. However, it has seemed preferable to me to connect the history of Esther with that Artaxerxes under whom Jerusalem was restored, because it is not likely that, if she had lived under the former Artaxerxes, whose times Esdras has given an account of, he would have made no mention of such an illustrious woman. This is all the more convincing since we know
that the building of the temple was (as we have related above) prohibited by that Artaxerxes and Esther would not have allowed that had she then been united with him in marriage. But I will now repeat what things she accomplished. There was at that time a certain Vastis connected with the king in marriage, a woman of marvelous beauty. Being accustomed to extol her loveliness to all, he one day, when he was giving a public entertainment, ordered the queen to attend for the purpose of exhibiting her beauty. But she, more prudent than the foolish king, and being too modest to make a show of her person before the eyes of men, refused compliance with his orders. His savage mind was enraged by this insult, and he drove her forth, both from her condition of marriage with him and from the palace. Consequently, when a young woman was sought after to take her place as the wife of the king, Esther was found to excel all others in beauty. She being a Jewess of the tribe of Benjamin, and an orphan, without father or mother, had been brought up by her cousin-german, Mardochæus. On being espoused to the king, she, by the instructions of him who had brought her up, concealed her nation and fatherland, and was also admonished by him not to become forgetful of her ancestral traditions, nor, though as a captive she had entered into marriage with a foreigner, to take part in the food of the heathen. Thus, then, being united to the king, she, in a short time, as was to be expected, easily captivated his whole mind by the power of her beauty, so that, equalizing her with himself in the emblem of sovereign power, he presented her with a purple robe.

## Footnotes

* ↑ “patruele patre”: words which have much perplexed the editors.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume XI/Sulpitius Severus/Sacred History/Book II/Chapter 18

Chapter XVIII.
For, first of all, under king Seleucus, the son of Antiochus the great, a certain man called Simon accused to the king on false charges Onias the priest, a holy and uncorrupted man, and thus tried, but in vain, to overthrow him. Then, after an interval of time, Jason, the brother of Onias, went to Antiochus the king, who had succeeded his brother Seleucus, and promised him an increase of tribute, if the high-priesthood were transferred to him. And although it was an unusual, and indeed, until now, an unpermitted thing for a man to enjoy the high-priesthood year after year, still the eager mind of the king, diseased with avarice, was easily persuaded. Accordingly, Onias was driven from office, and the priesthood bestowed on Jason. He harassed his countrymen and his country in the most shameful manner. Then, as he had sent through a certain Menelaus (the brother of that Simon who has been mentioned) the money he had promised to the king, a way being once laid open to his ambition, Menelaus obtained the priesthood by the same arts which Jason had employed before. But not long after, as he had not furnished the promised amount of money, he was driven from his position, and Lysimachus substituted in his stead. Then there arose disgraceful conflicts between Jason and Menelaus, until Jason, as an exile, left the country. By examples like these, the morals of the people became corrupted to such an extent, that numbers of the natives begged permission from Antiochus to live after the fashion of the Gentiles. And when the king granted their request, all the most worthless vied with each other in their endeavors to construct temples, to sacrifice to idols, and to profane the law. In the meantime, Antiochus returned from Alexandria (for he had then made war upon the king of Egypt, which, however, he gave up by the orders of the senate and Roman people, when Paulus and Crassus were consuls), and went to Jerusalem. Finding the people at variance from the diverse superstitions they had adopted, he destroyed the law of God, and showed favor to those who followed impious courses, while he carried off all the ornaments of the temple, and wasted it with much destruction. That came to pass in the hundred and fiftieth year after the death of Alexander, Paulus and Crassus being, as we have said, consuls, about five years after Antiochus began to reign.