OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book I/Chapter 13

Chapter 13 [XI.]—Meaning of the Apostle’s Phrase “The Reign of Death.”
“Nevertheless,” says he, “death reigned from Adam even unto Moses,”—that is to say, from the first man even to the very law which was promulged by the divine authority, because even it was unable to abolish the reign of death. Now death must be understood “to reign,” whenever the guilt of sin so dominates in men that it prevents their attainment of that eternal life which is the only true life, and drags them down even to the second death which is penally eternal. This reign of death is only destroyed in any man by the Saviour’s grace, which wrought even in the saints of the olden time, all of whom, though previous to the coming of Christ in the flesh, yet lived in relation to His assisting grace, not to the letter of the law, which only knew how to command, but not to help them. In the Old Testament, indeed, that was hidden (conformably to the perfectly just dispensation of the times) which is now revealed in the New Testament. Therefore “death reigned from Adam unto Moses,” in all who were not assisted by the grace of Christ, that in them the kingdom of death might be destroyed, “even in those who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression,” that is, who had not yet sinned of their own individual will, as Adam did, but had drawn from him original sin, “who is the figure of him that was to come,” because in him was constituted the form of condemnation to his future progeny, who should spring from him by natural descent; so that from one all men were born to a condemnation, from which there is no deliverance but in the Saviour’s grace. I am quite aware, indeed, that several Latin copies of the Scriptures read the passage thus: “Death reigned from Adam to Moses over them who have sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression;” but even this version is referred by those who so read it to the very same purport, for they understood those who have sinned in him to have sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression; so that they are created in his likeness, not only as men born of a man, but as sinners born of a sinner, dying ones of a dying one, and condemned ones to a condemned one. However, the Greek copies from which the Latin version was made, have all, without exception or nearly so, the reading which I first adduced.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Rom. v. 14.
* ↑ Reatus peccati.
* ↑ Rom. v. 14.
* ↑ Rom. v. 14.
* ↑ Comp. Epist. 157, n. 19. [Some few Greek copies have come down to us (e.g. 67**) which omit the “not,” but no Latin copy (unless d* be an exception), although other Latin writers (e.g. Ambrosiaster) testify to their former existence.—W.]
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book I/Chapter 14

Chapter 14.—Superabundance of Grace.
“But,” says he, “not as the offence so also is the free gift. For if, through the offence of one, many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by One Man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.” Not many more, that is, many more men, for there are not more persons justified than condemned; but it runs, much more hath abounded; inasmuch as, while Adam produced sinners from his one sin, Christ has by His grace procured free forgiveness even for the sins which men have of their own accord added by actual transgression to the original sin in which they were born. This he states more clearly still in the sequel.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Rom. v. 15.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume V/On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants/Book I/Chapter 15

Chapter 15 [XII.]—The One Sin Common to All Men.
But observe more attentively what he says, that “through the offence of one, many are dead.” For why should it be on account of the sin of one, and not rather on account of their own sins, if this passage is to be understood of imitation, and not of propagation? But mark what follows: “And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift; for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the grace is of many offences unto justification.” Now let them tell us, where there is room in these words for imitation. “By one,” says he, “to condemnation.” By one what except one sin? This, indeed, he clearly implies in the words which he adds: “But the grace is of many offences unto justification.” Why, indeed, is the judgment from one offence to condemnation, while the grace is from many offences to justification? If original sin is a nullity, would it not follow, that not only grace withdraws men from many offences to justification, but judgment leads them to condemnation from many offences likewise? For assuredly grace does not condone many offences, without judgment in like manner having many offences to condemn. Else, if men are involved in condemnation because of one offence, on the ground that all the offences which are condemned were committed in imitation of that one offence; there is the same reason why men should also be regarded as withdrawn from one offence unto justification, inasmuch as all the offences which are remitted to the justified were committed in imitation of that one offence. But this most certainly was not the apostle’s meaning, when he said: “The judgment, indeed, was from one offence unto condemnation, but the grace was from many offences unto justification.” We on our side, indeed, can understand the apostle, and see that judgment is predicated of one offence unto condemnation entirely on the ground that, even if there were in men nothing but original sin, it would be sufficient for their condemnation. For however much heavier will be their condemnation who have added their own sins to the original offence (and it will be the more severe in individual cases, in proportion to the sins of individuals); still, even that sin alone which was originally derived unto men not only excludes from the kingdom of God, which infants are unable to enter (as they themselves allow), unless they have received the grace of Christ before they die, but also alienates from salvation and everlasting life, which cannot be anything else than the kingdom of God, to which fellowship with Christ alone introduces us.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See note to last word of ch. 11.
* ↑ Rom. v. 16.
# Nash v. United States (398 U.S. 1)

United States Supreme Court
398 U.S. 1
James G. Nash v. United States
No. 678. Argued: April 21, 1970. --- Decided: May 18, 1970.
Harold I. Apolinsky, Birmingham, Ala., for petitioners.
Matthew J. Zinn, office Sol. Gen., Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## 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
# Nash v. Illinois/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Dissenting Opinion Fortas
United States Supreme Court
389 U.S. 906
Nash v. Illinois
Denied.
Mr. Justice FORTAS, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE and Mr. Justice DOUGLAS join, dissenting.

## 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
# Nash v. United States (229 U.S. 373)

United States Supreme Court
229 U.S. 373
Nash v. United States
Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
No. 197. Argued: March 18, 19, 1913. --- Decided: June 9, 1913.
Statement of the Case.
In many instances a man's fate depends upon his rightly estimating, that is as the jury subsequently estimates it, some matter of degree, and there is no constitutional difficulty in the way of enforcing the criminal provisions of the Sherman Anti Trust Act on the ground of uncertainty as to the prohibitions.
The Sherman Act punishes the conspiracies at which it is aimed on the common law footing and does not make the doing of any act other than the act of conspiring a condition of liability. In this respect it differs from § 5440 and the indictment need not aver overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy. Brown v. Elliott, 225 U. S. 392, distinguished.
This court can see no reason for reading into the Sherman Act more than it finds there.
It is not necessary for an indictment under the Sherman Act to allege or prove that all the conspirators proceeded against are traders. Loewe v. Lawlor, 208 U. S. 274.
Where the indictment under the Sherman Act alleges numerous methods employed by the defendants to accomplish the purpose to restrain trade, it is not necessary, in order to convict, to prove every means alleged but it is error to charge that a verdict may be permitted on any one of them when some of them would not warrant a finding of conspiracy.
186 Fed. Rep. 489, reversed.
The facts, which involve the validity of a verdict and sentence for alleged violations of the Sherman Anti Trust Act, are stated in the opinion.
Counsel for Parties.
Mr. Samuel B. Adams and Mr. John C. Spooner, with whom Mr. George Rublee was on the brief, for petitioners.
Mr. Assistant to the Attorney General Fowler, with whom Mr. Alexander Akerman, United States Attorney, was on the brief, for the United States.
Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court:

## 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
# Nash v. Towne

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
72 U.S. 689
Nash v. Towne

## 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
# Nash v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Nash v. United States."
* sister projects: 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.
* Nash v. United States (229 U.S. 373)
* Nash v. United States (398 U.S. 1)
# National and Community Service Act of 1990/Title V
## TITLE V — AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
### Sec. 501. Authorization of Appropriations.

    (a) TITLE I.—
          (1) IN GENERAL.—
             There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out title I, $56,000,000 for fiscal year 1991, $95,500,000 for fiscal year 1992, and $105,000,000 for fiscal year 1993.
          (2) EARMARKS.—
             Of the aggregate amount appropriated under paragraph (1) for title I for each fiscal year—
                (A) $2,000,000 shall be made available to carry out subtitle G of such title in each such fiscal year;
                (B) not less than 30 percent shall be available to carry out subtitle B of such title in each such fiscal year;
                (C) not less than 30 percent shall be available to carry out subtitle C of such title in each such fiscal year; and
                (D) not less than 30 percent shall be available to carry out subtitle D of such title in each such fiscal year.
    (b) TITLE III.—
       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out title III, $5,000,000 for fiscal year 1991, $7,500,000 for fiscal year 1992, and $10,000,000 for fiscal year 1993.
# National Woodwork Manufacturers Association v. National Labor Relations Board

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
386 U.S. 612
National Woodwork Manufacturers Association v. National Labor Relations Board
Argued: Jan. 18, 19, 1967. --- Decided: April 17, 1967
See 387 U.S. 926, 87 S.Ct. 2026.
[Syllabus from pages 612-614 intentionally omitted]
Charles B. Mahin, Chicago, Ill., for petitioners in No. 110 and respondents in No. 111.
Dominick L., Manoli, Washington, D.C., for respondent in No. 110 and petitioner in No. 111.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion of the Court.

## 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
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book I/Chapter 32

Chapter XXXII.—How Constantine received Instruction, and read the Sacred Scriptures.
These things were done shortly afterwards. But at the time above specified, being struck with amazement at the extraordinary vision, and resolving to worship no other God save Him who had appeared to him, he sent for those who were acquainted with the mysteries of His doctrines, and enquired who that God was, and what was intended by the sign of the vision he had seen. They affirmed that He was God, the only begotten Son of the one and only God: that the sign which had appeared was the symbol of immortality, and the trophy of that victory over death which He had gained in time past when sojourning on earth. They taught him also the causes of His advent, and explained to him the true account of His incarnation. Thus he was instructed in these matters, and was impressed with wonder at the divine manifestation which had been presented to his sight. Comparing, therefore, the heavenly vision with the interpretation given, he found his judgment confirmed; and, in the persuasion that the knowledge of these things had been imparted to him by Divine teaching, he determined thenceforth to devote himself to the reading of the Inspired writings.
Moreover, he made the priests of God his counselors, and deemed it incumbent on him to honor the God who had appeared to him with all devotion. And after this, being fortified by well-grounded hopes in Him, he hastened to quench the threatening fire of tyranny.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Both Socrates (5. 17) and Sozomen (7. 15) relate that symbols of the cross found in a temple of Serapis, on its destruction by Theodosius, were explained by the Christians of the time as symbols of immortality. Cf. also Suidas (ed. Gasiford, 2 (1834), 3398), s. v. Σταυροί; Valesius on Socrates and Sozomen; Jablonski, Opuscula, 1, p. 156– . The study of the pre-christian use of the cross is most suggestive. It suggests at least that in some way the passion of our Lord was the realization of some world-principle or “natural Law.”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book I/Chapter 35

Chapter XXXV.—Massacre of the Roman People by Maxentius.
All men, therefore, both people and magistrates, whether of high or low degree, trembled through fear of him whose daring wickedness was such as I have described, and were oppressed by his grievous tyranny. Nay, though they submitted quietly, and endured this bitter servitude, still there was no escape from the tyrant’s sanguinary cruelty. For at one time, on some trifling pretense, he exposed the populace to be slaughtered by his own body-guard; and countless multitudes of the Roman people were slain in the very midst of the city by the lances and weapons, not of Scythians or barbarians, but of their own fellow-citizens. And besides this, it is impossible to calculate the number of senators whose blood was shed with a view to the seizure of their respective estates, for at different times and on various fictitious charges, multitudes of them suffered death.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book I/Chapter 37

Chapter XXXVII.—Defeat of Maxentius’s Armies in Italy.
Constantine, however, filled with compassion on account of all these miseries, began to arm himself with all warlike preparation against the tyranny. Assuming therefore the Supreme God as his patron, and invoking His Christ to be his preserver and aid, and setting the victorious trophy, the salutary symbol, in front of his soldiers and body-guard, he marched with his whole forces, trying to obtain again for the Romans the freedom they had inherited from their ancestors.
And whereas, Maxentius, trusting more in his magic arts than in the affection of his subjects, dared not even advance outside the city gates, but had guarded every place and district and city subject to his tyranny, with large bodies of soldiers, the emperor, confiding in the help of God, advanced against the first and second and third divisions of the tyrant’s forces, defeated them all with ease at the first assault, and made his way into the very interior of Italy.

## Footnotes

* ↑ “Because the soothsayers had foretold that if he went out of it, he should perish.” Lact. De M. P.
* ↑ Bag.adds “and numberless ambuscades,” following Valesius and 1709. The word so rendered is the word for “companies of soldiers.” The rather awkward “multitude of heavy-armed soldiers and myriads of companies of soldiers” may be rendered as above, although “larger bodies of soldiers and limitless supplies” suggested by the translation is perhaps the real meaning. He had both “men and means.”
* ↑ At Sigusium, Turin, Brescia, and Verona.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book I/Chapter 30

Chapter XXX.—The Making of the Standard of the Cross.
At dawn of day he arose, and communicated the marvel to his friends: and then, calling together the workers in gold and precious stones, he sat in the midst of them, and described to them the figure of the sign he had seen, bidding them represent it in gold and precious stones. And this representation I myself have had an opportunity of seeing.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book I/Chapter 36

Chapter XXXVI.—Magic Arts of Maxentius against Constantine; and Famine at Rome.
But the crowning point of the tyrant’s wickedness was his having recourse to sorcery: sometimes for magic purposes ripping up women with child, at other times searching into the bowels of new-born infants. He slew lions also, and practiced certain horrid arts for evoking demons, and averting the approaching war, hoping by these means to get the victory. In short, it is impossible to describe the manifold acts of oppression by which this tyrant of Rome enslaved his subjects: so that by this time they were reduced to the most extreme penury and want of necessary food, a scarcity such as our contemporaries do not remember ever before to have existed at Rome.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 1709, Molz. &c., add “nor anywhere else,” but Bag. is undoubtedly right in translating simply “ever before.” The chapter is found substantially and in part word for word in the Church History, 8. 14.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book I/Chapter 39

Chapter XXXIX.—Constantine’s Entry into Rome.
Having then at this time sung these and suchlike praises to God, the Ruler of all and the Author of victory, after the example of his great servant Moses, Constantine entered the imperial city in triumph. And here the whole body of the senate, and others of rank and distinction in the city, freed as it were from the restraint of a prison, along with the whole Roman populace, their countenances expressive of the gladness of their hearts, received him with acclamations and abounding joy; men, women, and children, with countless multitudes of servants, greeting him as deliverer, preserver, and benefactor, with incessant shouts. But he, being possessed of inward piety toward God, was neither rendered arrogant by these plaudits, nor uplifted by the praises he heard: but, being sensible that he had received help from God, he immediately rendered a thanksgiving to him as the Author of his victory.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Compare Prolegomena under Character, and also for other accounts of the universal joy under Life.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book I/Chapter 33

Chapter XXXIII.—Of the Adulterous Conduct of Maxentius at Rome.
For he who had tyrannically possessed himself of the imperial city, had proceeded to great lengths in impiety and wickedness, so as to venture without hesitation on every vile and impure action.
For example: he would separate women from their husbands, and after a time send them back to them again, and these insults he offered not to men of mean or obscure condition, but to those who held the first places in the Roman senate. Moreover, though he shamefully dishonored almost numberless free women, he was unable to satisfy his ungoverned and intemperate desires. But when he assayed to corrupt Christian women also, he could no longer secure success to his designs, since they chose rather to submit their lives to death than yield their persons to be defiled by him.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Compare the Church History, 8. 14.
* ↑ Maxentius, made emperor by an uprising of the Prætorian Guards in 306.
* ↑ “For” seems to express the author’s real meaning, but both punctuation of editors and renderings of translators insist on “but.”
* ↑ Various readings of text add “lawfully married” women, and send them back again “grievously dishonored,” and so Bag., but Heinichen has this reading. Compare note of Heinichen.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Constantine/The Life of Constantine/Book I/Chapter 34

Chapter XXXIV.—How the Wife of a Prefect slew herself for Chastity’s Sake.
Now a certain woman, wife of one of the senators who held the authority of prefect, when she understood that those who ministered to the tyrant in such matters were standing before her house (she was a Christian), and knew that her husband through fear had bidden them take her and lead her away, begged a short space of time for arraying herself in her usual dress, and entered her chamber. There, being left alone, she sheathed a sword in her own breast, and immediately expired, leaving indeed her dead body to the procurers, but declaring to all mankind, both to present and future generations, by an act which spoke louder than any words, that the chastity for which Christians are famed is the only thing which is invincible and indestructible. Such was the conduct displayed by this woman.

## Footnotes

* ↑ This chapter is found almost word for word in the Church History, 8. 14.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/On Christian Doctrine/Book I/Chapter 37

Chapter 37.—Dangers of Mistaken Interpretation.
For if he takes up rashly a meaning which the author whom he is reading did not intend, he often falls in with other statements which he cannot harmonize with this meaning. And if he admits that these statements are true and certain, then it follows that the meaning he had put upon the former passage cannot be the true one: and so it comes to pass, one can hardly tell how, that, out of love for his own opinion, he begins to feel more angry with Scripture than he is with himself.  And if he should once permit that evil to creep in, it will utterly destroy him. “For we walk by faith, not by sight.” Now faith will totter if the authority of Scripture begin to shake.  And then, if faith totter, love itself will grow cold. For if a man has fallen from faith, he must necessarily also fall from love; for he cannot love what he does not believe to exist. But if he both believes and loves, then through good works, and through diligent attention to the precepts of morality, he comes to hope also that he shall attain the object of his love. And so these are the three things to which all knowledge and all prophecy are subservient: faith, hope, love.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 2 Cor. v. 7.