Book VI. (Cont.)
Chap. XXIV. – Valentinus Convicted of Plagiarisms from the Platonic and Pythagoric Philosophy; the Valentinian Theory of Emanation by Duads.
Of some such nature, as I who have accurately examined their systems (have attempted) to state compendiously, is the opinion of Pythagoras and Plato. And from this (system), not from the Gospels, Valentinus, as we have proved, has collected the (materials of) heresy – I mean his own (heresy) – and may (therefore) justly be reckoned a Pythagorean and Platonist, not a Christian. Valentinus, therefore, and Heracleon, and Ptolemaeus, and the entire school of these (heretics), as disciples of Pythagoras and Plato, (and) following these guides, have laid down as e fundamental principle of their doctrine the arithmetical system. For, likewise, according to these (Valentinians), the originating cause of the universe is a Monad, unbegotten, imperishable, incomprehensible, inconceivable, productive, and a cause of the generation of all existent things. And the aforesaid Monad is styled by them Father. There is, however, discoverable among them some considerable diversity of opinion. For some of them, in order that the Pythagorean doctrine of Valentinus may be altogether free from admixture (with other tenets), suppose that the Father is unfeminine, and unwedded, and solitary. But others, imagining it to be impossible that from a male only there could proceed a generation at all of any of those things that have been made to exist, necessarily reckon along with the Father of the universe, in order that he may be a father, Sige as a spouse. But as to Sige, whether at any time she is united in marriage (to the Father) or not, this is a point which we leave them to wrangle about among themselves. We at present, keeping to the Pythagorean principle, which is one, and unwedded, unfeminine, (and) deficient in nothing, shall proceed to give an account of their doctrines, as they themselves inculcate them. There is, says (Valentinus), not anything at all begotten, but the Father is alone unbegotten, not subject to the condition of place, not (subject to the condition of) time, having no counsellor, (and) not being any other substance that could be realized according to the ordinary methods of perception. (The Father,) however, was solitary, subsisting, as they say, in a state of quietude, and Himself reposing in isolation within Himself. When, however, He became productive,50 it seemed to Him expedient at one time to generate and lead forth the most beautiful and perfect (of those germs of existence) which He possessed within Himself, for (the Father) was not fond of solitariness. For, says he, He was all love, but love is not love except there may be some object of affection. The Father Himself, then, as He was solitary, projected and produced Nous and Aletheia, that is, a duad which became mistress,51 and origin, and mother of all the Aeons computed by them (as existing) within the Pleroma. Nous and Aletheia being projected from the Father,52 one capable of continuing generation, deriving existence from a productive being, (Nous) himself likewise, in imitation of the Father, projected Logos and Zoe; and Logos and Zoe project Anthropos and Ecclesia. But Nous and Aletheia, when they beheld that their own offspring had been born productive, returned thanks to the Father of the universe, and offer unto Him a perfect number, viz., ten Aeons. For, he says, Nous and Aletheia could not offer unto the Father a more perfect (one) than this number. For the Father, who is perfect, ought to be celebrated by a perfect number, and ten is a perfect number, because this is first of those (numbers) that are formed by plurality, (and therefore) perfect.53 The Father, however, being more perfect, because being alone unbegotten, by means of the one primary conjugal union of Nous and Aletheia, found means of projecting all the roots of existent things.
Chap. XXV. – The Tenet of the Duad Made the Foundation of Valentinus’ System of the Emanation of Aeons.
Logos himself also, and Zoe, then saw that Nous and Aletheia had celebrated the Father of the universe by a perfect number; and Logos himselflikewise with Zoe wished to magnify their own father and mother, Nous and Aletheia. Since, however, Nous and Aletheia were begotten, and did not possess paternal (and) perfect uncreatedness, Logos and Zoe do not glorify Nous their father with a perfect number, but far from it, with an imperfect one.54 For Logos and Zoe offer twelve Aeons unto Nous and Aletheia. For, according to Valentinus, these – namely, Nous and Aletheia, Logos and Zoe, Anthropos and Ecclesia – have been the primary roots of the Aeons. But there are ten the Aeons proceeding from Nous and Aletheia, and twelve from Logos and Zoe – twenty and eight in all.55 And to these (ten) they give these following denominations:56 Bythus and Mixis, Ageratus and Henosis, Autophyes and Hedone, Acinetus and Syncrasis, Monogenes and Macaria.57 These are ten Aeons whom some say (have been projected) by Nous and Aletheia, but some by Logos and Zoe. Others, however, affirm that the twelve (Aeons have been projected) by Anthropos and Ecclesia, while others by Logos and Zoe. And upon these they bestow these following names:58 Paracletus and Pistis, Patricus and Elpis, Metricus and Agape, Aeinous and Synesis, Ecclesiasticus and Macariotes, Theletus and Sophia. But of the twelve, the twelfth and youngest of all the twenty-eight Aeons, being a female, and called Sophia, observed the multitude and power of the besetting Aeons, and hurried back into the depth of the Father. And she perceived that all the rest of the Aeons, as being begotten, generate by conjugal intercourse. The Father, on the other hand, alone, without copulation, has produced (an offspring). She wished to emulate the Father,59 and to produce (offspring) of herself without a marital partner, that she might achieve a work in no wise inferior60 to (that of) the Father. (Sophia, however,) was ignorant that the Unbegotten One, being an originating principle of the universe, as well as root and depth and abyss, alone possesses the power of self-generation. But Sophia, being begotten, and born after many more (Aeons), is not able to acquire possession of the power inherent in the Unbegotten One. For in the Unbegotten One, he says, all things exist simultaneously, but in the begotten (Aeons) the female is projective of substance, and the male is formative of the substance which is projected by the female. Sophia, therefore, prepared to project that only which she was capable (of projecting), viz., a formless and undigested substance.61 And this, he says, is what Moses asserts: “The earth was invisible, and unfashioned.” This (substance) is, he says, the good (and) the heavenly Jerusalem, into which God has promised to conduct the children of Israel, saying, “I will bring you into a land flowing with milk and honey.”
Chap. XXVI. – Valentinus’ Explanation of the Existence of Christ and the Spirit.
Ignorance, therefore, having arisen within the Pleroma in consequence of Sophia, and shapelessness in consequence of the offspring of Sophia, confusion arose in the Pleroma. (For all) the Aeons that were begotten (became overwhelmed with apprehension, imagining) that in like manner formless and incomplete progenies of the Aeons should be generated; and that some destruction, at no distant period, should l at length seize upon the Aeons. All the Aeons, then, betook themselves to supplication of the Father, that he would tranquillize the sorrowing Sophia; for she continued weeping and bewailing on account of the abortion produced by her, – for so they, term it. The Father, then, compassionating the tears of Sophia, and accepting the supplication of the Aeons, orders a further projection. For he did not, (Valentinus) says, himself project, but Nous and Aletheia (projected) Christ and the Holy Spirit for the restoration of Form, and the destruction of the abortion, and (for) the consolation and cessation of the groans of Sophia. And thirty Aeons came into existence along with Christ and the Holy Spirit. Some of these (Valentinians) wish that this should be a triacontad of Aeons, whereas others desire that Sige should exist along with the Father, and that the Aeons should be reckoned along with them.
Christ, therefore, being additionally projected, and the Holy Spirit, by Nous and Aletheia, immediately this abortion of Sophia, (which was) shapeless, (and) born of herself only, and generated without conjugal intercourse, separates from the entire of the Aeons, lest the perfect Aeons, beholding this (abortion), should be disturbed by reason of its shapelessness. In order, then, that the shapelessness of the abortion might not at all manifest itself to the perfect Aeons, the Father also again projects additionally one Aeon, viz., Staurus. And he being begotten great, as from a mighty and perfect father, and being projected for the guardianship and defence of the Aeons, becomes a limit of the Pleroma, having within itself all the thirty Aeons together, for these are they that had been projected. Now this (Aeon) is styled Horos, because he separates from the Pleroma the Hysterema that is outside. And (he is called) Metocheus, because he shares also in the Hysterema. And (he is denominated) Staurus, because he is fixed inflexibly and inexorably, so that nothing of the Hysterema can come near the Aeons who are within the Pleroma. Outside, then, Horos, (or) Metocheus,62 (or) Staurus, is the Ogdoad, as it is called, according to them, and is that Sophia which is outside the Pleroma, which (Sophia) Christ, who was additionally projected by Nous and Aletheia, formed and made a perfect Aeon so that in no respect she should be inferior in power to any of the Aeons within the Pleroma.63 Since, however, Sophia was formed outside, and it was not possible and equitable that Christ and the Holy Spirit, who were projected from Nous and Aletheia, should remain outside the Pleroma, Christ hurried away, and the Holy Spirit, from her who had had shape imparted to her, unto Nous and Aletheia within the Limit, in order that with the rest of the Aeons they might glorify the Father.
Chap. XXVII. – Valentinus’ Explanation of the Existence of Jesus; Power of Jesus over Humanity.
After, then, there ensued some one (treaty of) peace and harmony between all the Aeons within the Pleroma, it appeared expedient to them not only by a conjugal union to have magnified the Son, but also that by an offering of ripe fruits they should glorify the Father. Then all the thirty Aeons consented to project one Aeons, joint fruit of the Pleroma, that he might be (an earnest) of their union,64 and unanimity, and peace. And he alone was projected by all the Aeons in honour of the Father. This (one) is styled among them “Joint Fruit of the Pleroma.” These (matters), then, took place within the Pleroma in this way. And the “Joint Fruit of the Pleroma” was projected, (that is,) Jesus, – for this is his name, – the great High Priest. Sophia, however, who was outside the Pleroma in search of Christ, who had given her form, and of the Holy Spirit, became involved in great terror that she would perish, if he should separate from her, who had given her form and consistency. And she was seized with grief, and fell into a state of considerable perplexity, (while) reflecting who was he who had given her form, what the Holy Spirit was, whither he had departed, who it was that had hindered them from being present, who it was that had been envious of that glorious and blessed spectacle. While involved in sufferings such as these, she turns herself to prayer and supplication of him who had deserted her. During the utterance of her entreaties, Christ, who is within the Pleroma, had mercy upon (her), and all the rest of the Aeons (were similarly affected); and they send forth beyond the Pleroma “the Joint Fruit of the Pleroma” as a spouse for Sophia, who was outside, and as a rectifier of those sufferings which she underwent in searching after Christ.
“The Fruit,” then, arriving outside the Pleroma, and discovering (Sophia) in the midst of those four primary passions, both fear and sorrow, and perplexity and entreaty he rectified her affections. While, however, correcting them, he observed that it would not be proper to destroy these, inasmuch as they are (in their nature) eternal, and peculiar to Sophia; and yet that neither was it seemly that Sophia should exist in the midst of such passions, in fear and sorrow, supplication (and) perplexity. He therefore, as an Aeons so great, and (as) offspring of the entire Pleroma, caused the passions to depart from her, and he made these substantially-existent essences.65 He altered fear into animal desire,66 and (made) grief material, and (rendered) perplexity (the passion) of demons. But conversion,67 and entreaty, and supplication, he constituted as a path to repentance and power over the animal essence, which is denominated right.68 The Creator69 (acted) from fear; (and) that is what, he says, Scripture affirms: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” (Psa_111:10; Pro_1:7, Pro_9:10) For this is the beginning of the affections of Sophia, for she was seized with fear, next with grief, then with perplexity, and so she sought refuge in entreaty and supplication. And the animal essence is, he says, of a fiery nature, and is also termed by them the super-celestial Topos, and Hebdomad,70 and “Ancient of Days.” (Dan_7:9, Dan_7:13, Dan_7:22) And whatever other such statements they advance respecting this (Aeon), these they allege to hold good of the animalish (one), whom they assert to be creator of the world. Now he is of the appearance of fire. Moses also, he says, expresses himself thus: “The Lord thy God is a burning and consuming fire.” (Deu_9:3; Psa_50:3; Heb_12:29) For he, likewise, wishes (to think) that it has been so written. There is, however, he says, a twofold power of the fire; for fire is all-consuming, (and) cannot he quenched. According, therefore, to this division, there exists, subject to death, a certain soul which is a sort of mediator, for it is a Hebdomad and Cessation. (Gen_2:2) For underneath the Ogdoad, where Sophia is, but above Matter, which is the Creator, a day has been formed,71 and the “Joint Fruit of the Pleroma.” If the soul has been fashioned in the image of those above, that is, the Ogdoad, it became immortal and repaired to the Ogdoad, which is, he says, heavenly Jerusalem. If, however, it has been fashioned in the image of Matter, that is, the corporeal passions, the soul is of a perishable nature, and is (accordingly) destroyed.
Chap. XXVIII. – The Valentinian Origin of the Creation.
As, therefore, the primary and greatest power72 of the animal essence came into existence, an image (of the only begotten Son); so also the devil, who is the ruler of this world, constitutes the power of the material essence, as Beelzebub is of the essence of demons which emanates from anxiety. (In consequence of this,) Sophia from above exerted her energy from the Ogdoad to the Hebdomad. For the Demiurge, they say, knows nothing at all, but is, according to them, devoid of understanding, and silly, and is not conscious of what he is doing or working at. But in him, while thus in a state of ignorance that even he is producing, Sophia wrought all sorts of energy, and infused vigour (into him). And (although Sophia) was really the operating cause, he himself imagines that he evolves the creation of the world out of himself: whence he commenced, saying, “I am God, and beside me there is no other.” (Deu_4:35; Isa_45:5, Isa_45:14, Isa_45:18, Isa_45:21, Isa_45:22)
Chap. XXIX. – The Other Valentinian Emanations in Conformity with the Pythagorean System of Numbers.
The quaternion, then, advocated by Valentinus, is “a source of the everlasting nature having roots;”73 and Sophia (is the power) from whom the animal and material creation has derived its present condition. But Sophia is called “Spirit,” and the Demiurge “Soul,” and the Devil “the ruler of this world,” and Beelzebub “the (ruler) of demons.” These are the statements which they put forward. But further, in addition to these, rendering, as I have previously mentioned, their entire system of doctrine (akin to the) arithmetical (art), (they determine) that the thirty Aeons within the Pleroma have again, in addition to these, projected other Aeons, according to the (numerical) proportion (adopted by the Pythagoreans), in order that the Pleroma might be formed into an aggregate, according to a perfect number. For how the Pythagoreans divided (the celestial sphere) into twelve and thirty and sixty parts, and how they have minute parts of diminutive portions, has been made evident.
In this manner these (followers of Valentinus) subdivide the parts within the Pleroma. Now likewise the parts in the Ogdoad have been subdivided, and there has been projected Sophia, which is, according to them, mother of all living creatures, and the “Joint Fruit of the Pleroma,” (who is) the Logos,74 (and other Aeons,) who are celestial angels that have their citizenship in Jerusalem which is above, which is in heaven. For this Jerusalem is Sophia, she (that is) outside (the Pleroma), and her spouse is the “Joint Fruit of the Pleroma.” And the Demiurge projected souls; for this (Sophia) is the essence of souls. This (Demiurge), according to them, is Abraham, and these (souls) the children of Abraham. From the material and devilish essence the Demiurge fashioned bodies for the souls. This is what has been declared: “And God formed man, taking clay from the earth, and breathed upon his face the breath of life, and man was made into a living soul.” (Gen_2:7) This, according to them, is the inner man, the natural (man), residing in the material body: Now a material (man) is perishable, incomplete, (and) formed out of the devilish essence. And this is the material man, as it were, according to them an inn75 or domicile, at one time of soul only, at another time of soul and demons, at another time of soul and Logoi.76 And these are the Logoi that have been dispersed from above, from the “Joint Fruit of the Pleroma” and (from) Sophia, into this world. And they dwell in an earthly body, with a soul, when demons do not take up their abode with that soul. This, he says, is what has been written in Scripture: “On this account I bend my knees to the God and Father and Lord of our Lord Jesus Christ, that God would grant you to have Christ dwelling in the inner man,” (Eph_3:14-18) – that is, the natural (man), not the corporeal (one), – “that you may be able to understand what is the depth,” which is the Father of the universe, “and what is the breadth,” which is Staurus, the limit of the Pleroma, “or what is the length,” that is, the Pleroma of the Aeons. Wherefore, he says, “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him;” (1Co_2:14) but folly, he says, is the power of the Demiurge, for he was foolish and devoid of understanding, and imagined himself to be fabricating the world. He was, however, ignorant that Sophia, the Mother, the Ogdoad, was really the cause of all the operations performed by him who had no consciousness in reference to the creation of the world.
Chap. XXX. – Valentinus’ Explanation of the Birth of Jesus; Twofold Doctrine on the Nature of Jesus’ Body; Opinion of the Italians, That Is, Heracleon and Ptolemaeus; Opinion of the Orientals, That Is, Axionicus and Bardesanes.
All the prophets, therefore, and the law spoke by means of the Demiurge, – a silly god,77 he says, (and themselves) fools, who knew nothing. On account of this, he says, the Saviour observes: “All that came before me are thieves and robbers.” (Joh_10:8) And the apostle (uses these words) “The mystery which was not made known to former generations.” (Col_1:26) For none of the prophets, he says, said anything concerning the things of which we speak; for (a prophet) could not but be ignorant of all (these) things, inasmuch as they certainly had been uttered by the Demiurge only. When, therefore, the creation received completion, and when after (this) there ought to have been the revelation of the sons of God – that is, of the Demiurge, which up to this had been concealed, and in which obscurity the natural man was hid, and had a veil upon the heart; – when (it was time), then, that the veil should be taken away, and that these mysteries should be seen, Jesus was born of Mary the virgin, according to the declaration (in Scripture), “The Holy Ghost will come upon thee” – Sophia is the Spirit – “and the power of the Highest will overshadow thee” – the Highest is the Demiurge, – “wherefore that which shall be born of thee shall be called holy.” (Luk_1:35) For he has been generated not from the highest alone, as those created in (the likeness of) Adam have been created from the highest alone – that is, (from) Sophia and the Demiurge. Jesus, however, the new man, (has been generated) from the Holy Spirit – that is, Sophia and the Demiurge – in order that the Demiurge may complete the conformation and constitution of his body, and that the Holy Spirit may supply his essence, and that a celestial Logos may proceed from the Ogdoad being born of Mary.
Concerning this (Logos) they have a great question amongst them – an occasion both of divisions and dissension. And hence the doctrine of these has become divided: and one doctrine, according to them, is termed Oriental, and the other Italian. They from Italy, of whom is Heracleon and Ptolemaeus, say that the body of Jesus was (an) animal (one). And on account of this, (they maintain) that at his baptism the Holy Spirit as a dove came down – that is, the Logos of the mother above, (I mean Sophia) – and became (a voice) to the animal (man), and raised him from the dead. This, he says, is what has been declared: “He who raised Christ from the dead will also quicken your mortal and natural bodies.” (Rom_8:11-12) For loam has come under a curse; “for,” says he, “dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” (Gen_3:19) The Orientals, on the other hand, of whom is Axionicus78 and Bardesianes,79 assert that the body of the Saviour was spiritual; for there came upon Mary the Holy Spirit – that is, Sophia and the power of the highest. This is the creative art, (and was vouchsafed) in order that what was given to Mary by the Spirit might be fashioned.
Chap. XXXI. – Further Doctrines of Valentinus Respecting the Aeons; Reasons for the Incarnation.
Let, then, those (heretics) pursue these inquiries among themselves, (and let others do so likewise,) if it should prove agreeable to anybody else to investigate (such points. Valentinus) subjoins, however, the following statement: That the trespasses appertaining to the Aeons within (the Pleroma) had been corrected; and likewise had been rectified the trespasses appertaining to the Ogdoad, (that is,) Sophia, outside (the Pleroma); and also (the trespasses) appertaining to the Hebdomad (had been rectified). For the Demiurge had been taught by Sophia that He is not Himself God alone, as He imagined, and that except Himself there is not another (Deity). But when taught by Sophia, He was made to recognise the superior (Deity). For He was instructed80 by her, and initiated and indoctrinated into the great mystery of the Father and of the Aeons, and divulged this to none. This is, as he says, what (God) declares to Moses: “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and my name I have not announced to them;” (Exo_6:2, Exo_6:3) that is, I have not declared the mystery, nor explained who is God, but I have preserved the mystery which I have heard from Sophia in secrecy with myself. When, then, the trespasses of those above had been rectified, it was necessary, according to the same consequence, that the (transgressions) here likewise should obtain rectification. On this account Jesus the Saviour was born of Mary that he might rectify (the trespasses committed) here; as the Christ who, having been projected additionally from above by Nous and Aletheia, had corrected the passions of Sophia – that is, the abortion (who was) outside (the Pleroma). And, again, the Saviour who was born of Mary came to rectify the passions81 of the soul. There are therefore, according to these (heretics), three Christs: (the first the) one additionally projected by Nous and Aletheia, along with the Holy Spirit; and (the second) the “Joint Fruit of the Pleroma,” spouse of Sophia, who was outside (the Pleroma). And she herself is likewise styled Holy Spirit, but one inferior to the first (projection). And the third (Christ is) He who was born of Mary for the restoration of this world of ours.
Chap. XXXII. – Valentinus Convicted of Plagiarisms from Plato.
I think that the heresy of Valentinus which is of Pythagorean (origin), has been sufficiently, indeed more than sufficiently, delineated. It therefore seems also expedient, that having explained his opinions, we should desist from (further) refutation (of his system). Plato, then, in expounding mysteries concerning the universe, writes to Dionysius expressing himself after some such manner82 as this: “I must speak to you by riddles,83 in order that if the letter may meet with any accident in its leaves by either sea or land, he who reads (what falls into his hands) may not understand it. For so it is. All things are about the King of all, and on his account are all things, and he is cause of all the glorious (objects of creation). The second is about the second, and the third about the third. But pertaining to the King there is none of those things of which I have spoken. But after this the soul earnestly desires to learn what sort these are, looking upon those things that are akin to itself, and not one of these is (in itself) sufficient. This is, O son of Dionysius and Doris, the question (of yours) which is a cause of all evil things. Nay, but rather the solicitude concerning this is innate in the soul; and if one does not remove this, he will never really attain truth.84 But what is astonishing in this matter, listen. For there are men who have heard these things – (men) furnished with capacities for learning, and furnished with capacities of memory, and persons who altogether in every way are endued with an aptitude for investigation with a view to inference. (These are) at present aged speculators.85 And they assert that opinions which at one time were credible are now incredible, and that things once incredible are now the contrary. While, therefore, turning the eye of examination towards these (inquiries), exercise caution, lest at any time you should have reason to repent in regard of those things should they happen in a manner unbecoming to your dignity. On this account I have written nothing concerning these (points); nor is there any treatise of Plato’s (upon them), nor ever shall there be. The observations, however, now made are those of Socrates, conspicuous for virtue even while he was a young man.”
Valentinus, falling in with these (remarks), has made a fundamental principle in his system “the King of all,” whom Plato mentioned, and whom this heretic styles Pater, and Bythos, and Proarche86 over the rest of the Aeons. And when Plato uses the words, “what is second about things that are second,” Valentinus supposes to be second all the Aeons that are within the limit (of the Pleroma, as well as) the limit (itself). And when Plato uses the words, what is third about what is third,” he has (constituted as third) the entire of the arrangement (existing) outside the limit87 and the Pleroma. And Valentinus has elucidated this (arrangement) very succinctly, in a psalm commencing from below, not as Plato does, from above, expressing himself thus: “I behold88 all things suspended in air by spirit, and I perceive all things wafted by spirit; the flesh (I see) suspended from soul, but the soul shining out from air, and air depending from aether, and fruits produced from Bythus, and the foetus borne from the womb.” Thus (Valentinus) formed his opinion on such (points). Flesh, according to these (heretics), is matter which is suspended from the soul of the Demiurge. And soul shines out from air; that is, the Demiurge emerges from the spirit, (which is) outside the Pleroma. But air springs forth from aether; that is, Sophia, which is outside (the Pleroma, is projected from the Pleroma) which is within the limit, and (from) the entire Pleroma (generally). And from Bythus fruits are produced; (that is,) the entire projection of the Aeons is made from the Father. The opinions, then, advanced by Valentinus have been sufficiently declared. It remains for us to explain the tenets of those who have emanated from-his school, though each adherent (of Valentinus) entertains different opinions.89
Chap. XXXIII. – Secundus’ System of Aeons; Epiphanes; Ptolemaeus.
A certain (heretic) Secundus,90 born about the same time with Ptolemaeus, expresses himself thus: (he says) that there is a right tetrad and a left tetrad, – namely, light and darkness. And he affirms that the power which withdrew and laboured under deficiency, was not produced from the thirty Aeons, but from the fruits of these. Some other (heretic), however – Epiphanes, a teacher among them – expresses himself thus: “The earliest originating principle was inconceivable, ineffable, and unnameable;” and he calls this Monotes. And (he maintains) that there co-exists with this (principle) a power which he denominates Henotes. This Henotes and this Monotes, not by projection (from themselves), sent forth a principle (that should preside) over all intelligibles; (and this was) both unbegotten and invisible, and he styles it a Monad. “With this power co-exists a power of the same essence, which very (power) I call Unity. These four powers sent forth the remainder of the projections of the Aeons.” But others, again, denominate the chief and originating Ogdoad, (which is) fourth (and) invisible, by the following names: first, Proarche; next, Anennoetus; third, Arrhetus; and fourth, Aoratus. And that from the first, Proarche, was projected by a first and fifth place, Arche; and from Anennoetus, by a second and sixth place, Acataleptus; and from Arrhetus, by a third and seventh place, Anonomastus; and from Aoratus, Agennetus, a complement of the first Ogdoad. They wish that these powers should exist before Bythus and Sige. Concerning, however, Bythus himself, there are many different opinions. Some affirm him to be unwedded, neither male nor female; but others (maintain) that Sige, who is a female, is present with him, and that this constitutes the first conjugal union.
But the followers of Ptolemaeus91 assert that (Bythus) has two spouses, which they call likewise dispositions, viz., Ennoia and Thelesis (conception and volition). For first the notion was conceived of projecting anything; next followed, as they say, the will to do so. Wherefore also these two dispositions and powers – namely, Ennoia and Thelesis – being, as it were, mingled one with the other, there ensued a projection of Monogenes and Aletheia by means of a conjugal union. And the consequence was, that visible types and images of those two dispositions of the Father came forth from the invisible (Aeons), viz., from Thelema, Nous, and from Ennoia, Aletheia. And on this account the image of the subsequently generated Thelema is (that of a) male; but (the image) of the unbegotten Ennoia is (that of a) female, since volition is, as it were, a power of conception. For conception always cherished the idea of a projection, yet was not of itself at least able to project itself, but cherished the idea (of doing so). When, however, the power of volition (would be present), then it projects the idea which had been conceived.
Chap. XXXIV. – System of Marcus; a Mere Impostor; His Wicked Devices upon the Eucharistic Cup.
A certain other teacher among them, Marcus,92 an adept in sorcery, carrying on operations93 partly by sleight of hand and partly by demons, deceived many from time to time. This (heretic) alleged that there resided in him the mightiest power from invisible and unnameable places. And very often, taking the Cup, as if offering up the Eucharistic prayer, and prolonging to a greater length than usual the word of invocation, he would cause the appearance of a purple, and sometimes of a red mixture, so that his dupes imagined that a certain Grace descended and communicated to the potion a blood-red potency. The knave, however, at that time succeeded in escaping detection from many; but now, being convicted (of the imposture), he will be forced to desist from it. For, infusing secretly into the mixture some drug that possessed the power of imparting such a colour (as that alluded to above), uttering for a, considerable time nonsensical expressions, he was in the habit of waiting, (in expectation) that the (drug), obtaining a supply of moisture, might be dissolved, and, being intermingled with the potion, might impart its colour to it. The drugs, however, that possess the quality of furnishing this effect we have previously mentioned in the book on magicians.94 And here we have taken occasion to explain how they make dupes of many, and thoroughly ruin them. And if it should prove agreeable to them to apply their attention with greater accuracy to the statement made by us, they will become aware of the deceit of Marcus.
Chap. XXXV. – Further Acts of Jugglery on the Part of Marcus.
And this (Marcus), infusing (the aforesaid) mixture into a smaller cup, was in the habit of delivering it to a woman to offer up the Eucharistic prayer, while he himself stood by, and held (in his hand) another empty (chalice) larger than that. And after his female dupe had pronounced the sentence of Consecration,95 having received (the cup from her), he proceeded to infuse (its contents) into the larger (chalice), and, pouring them frequently from one cup to the other, was accustomed at the same time to utter the following invocation: “Grant that the inconceivable and ineffable Grace which existed prior to the universe, may fill thine inner man, and make to abound in thee the knowledge of this (grace), as She disseminates the seed of the mustard-tree upon the good soil.” And simultaneously pronouncing some such words as these, and astonishing both his female dupe and those that are present, he was regarded as one performing a miracle; while the larger was being filled from the smaller chalice, in such a way as that (the contents), being superabundant, flowed over. And the contrivance of this (juggler) we have likewise explained in the aforesaid (fourth) book, where we have proved that very many drugs, when mingled in this way with liquid substances, are endued with the quality of yielding augmentation, more particularly when diluted in wine. Now, when (one of these impostors) previously smears, in a clandestine manner, an empty cup with any one of these drugs, and shows it (to the spectators) as if it contained nothing, by infusing into it (the contents) from the other cup, and pouring them back again, the drug, as it is of a flatulent nature, is dissolved96 by being blended with the moist substance. And the effect of this was, that a superabundance of the mixture ensued, and was so far augmented, that what was infused was put in motion, such being the nature of the drug. And if one stow away (the chalice) when it has been filled, (what has been poured into it) will after no long time return to its natural dimensions, inasmuch as the potency of the drug becomes extinct by reason of the continuance of moisture. Wherefore he was in the habit of hurriedly presenting the cup to those present, to drink; but they, horrified at the same time, and eager (to taste the contents of the cup), proceeded to drink (the mixture), as if it were something divine, and devised by the Deity.97
Chap. XXXVI. – The Heretical Practices of the Marcites in Regard of Baptism.
Such and other (tricks) this impostor attempted to perform. And so it was that he was magnified by his dupes, and sometimes he was supposed to utter predictions. But sometimes he tried to make others (prophesy), partly by demons carrying on these operations, and partly by practising sleight of hand, as we have previously stated. Hoodwinking therefore multitudes, he led on (into enormities) many (dupes) of this description who had become his disciples, by teaching them that they were prone, no doubt, to sin, but beyond the reach of danger, from the fact of their belonging to the perfect power, and of their being participators in the inconceivable potency. And subsequent to the (first) baptism, to these they promise another, which they call Redemption. And by this (other baptism) they wickedly subvert those that remain with them in expectation of redemption, as if persons, after they had once been baptized, could again obtain remission. Now, it is by means of such knavery as this that they seem to retain their hearers. And when they consider that these have been tested, and are able to keep (secret the mysteries) committed unto them, they then admit them to this (baptism). They, however, do not rest satisfied with this alone, but promise (their votaries) some other (boon) for the purpose of confirming them in hope, in order that they may be inseparable (adherents of their sect). For they utter something in an inexpressible (tone of) voice, after having laid hands on him who is receiving the redemption. And they allege that they could not easily declare (to another) what is thus spoken unless one were highly tested, or one were at the hour of death, (when) the bishop comes and whispers (it) into the (expiring one’s) ear. And this knavish device (is undertaken) for the purpose of securing the constant attendance upon the bishop of (Marcus’) disciples, as individuals eagerly panting to learn what that may be which is spoken at the last, by (the knowledge of) which the learner will be advanced to the rank of those admitted into the higher mysteries. And in regard of these I have maintained a silence for this reason, lest at any time one should suppose that I was guilty of disparaging these (heretics). For this does not come within the scope of our present work, only so far as it may contribute to prove from what source (the heretics) have derived the standing-point from which they have taken occasion to introduce the opinions advanced by them.98
Chap. XXXVII. – Marcus’ System Explained by Irenaeus; Marcus’ Vision; the Vision of Valentinus Revealing to Him His System.
For also the blessed presbyter Irenaeus, having approached the subject of a refutation in a more unconstrained spirit, has explained such washings and redemptions, stating more in the way of a rough digest99 what are their practices. (And it appears that some of the Marcosians,) on meeting with (Irenaeus’ work), deny that they have so received (the secret word just alluded to), but they have learned that always they should deny. Wherefore our anxiety has been more accurately to investigate, and to discover minutely what are the (instructions) which they deliver in the case of the first bath, styling it by some such name; and in the case of the second, which they denominate Redemption. But not even has this secret of theirs escaped (our scrutiny). For these opinions, however, we consent to pardon Valentinus and his school.
But Marcus, imitating his teacher, himself also feigns a vision, imagining that in this way he would be magnified. For Valentinus likewise alleges that he had seen an infant child lately born; and questioning (this child), he proceeded to inquire who it might be. And (the child) replied, saying that he himself is the Logos, and then subjoined a sort of tragic legend; and out of this (Valentinus) wishes the heresy attempted by him to consist. Marcus, making a similar attempt100 with this (heretic), asserts that the Telrad came to him in the form of a woman, – since the world could not bear, he says, the male (form) of this Tetrad, and that she revealed herself who she was, and explained to this (Marcus) alone the generation of the universe, which she never had revealed to any, either of gods or of men, expressing herself after this mode: When first the self-existent Father, He who is inconceivable and without substance, He who is neither male nor female, willed that His own ineffability should become realized in something spoken, and that His invisibility should become realized in form, He opened His mouth, and sent forth similar to Himself a Logos. And this (Logos) stood by Him, and showed unto Him who he was, viz., that he himself had been manifested as a (realization in) form of the Invisible One. And the pronunciation of the name was of the following description. He was accustomed to utter the first word of the name itself, which was Arche, and the syllable of this was (composed) of four101 letters. Then he subjoined the second (syllable), and this was also (composed) of four letters. Next he uttered the third (syllable), which was (composed) of ten letters; and he uttered the fourth (syllable), and this was (composed) of twelve letters. Then ensued the pronunciation of the entire name, (composed) of thirty letters, but of four syllables. And each of the elements had its own peculiar letters, and its own peculiar form, and its own peculiar pronunciation, as well as figures and images. And not one of these was there that beholds the form of that (letter) of which this was an element. And of course none of them could know the pronunciation of the (letter) next to this, but (only) as he himself pronounces it, (and that in such a way) as that, in pronouncing the whole (word), he supposed that he was uttering the entire (name). For each of these (elements), being part of the entire (name), he denominates (according to) its own peculiar sound, as if the whole (of the word). And he does not intermit sounding until he arrived at the last letter of the last element, and uttered it in a single articulation. Then he said, that the restoration of the entire ensued when all the (elements), coming down into the one letter, sounded one and the same pronunciation, and an image of the pronunciation he supposed to exist when we simultaneously utter the word Amen.102 And that these sounds are those which gave form to the insubstantial and unbegotten Aeon, and that those forms are what the Lord declared to be angels – the (forms) that uninterruptedly behold the face of the Father.
Chap. XXXVIII. – Marcus’ System of Letters.
But the generic and expressed names of the elements he called Aeons, and Logoi, and Roots, and Seeds, and Pleromas, and Fruits. (And he maintains) that every one of these, and what was peculiar to each, is perceived as being contained in the name of “Ecclesia.” And the final letter of the last element sent forth its own peculiar articulation. And the sound of this (letter) came forth and produced, in accordance with images of the elements, its own peculiar elements. And from these he says that things existing here were garnished, and the things antecedent to these were produced. The letter itself certainly, of which the sound was concomitant with the sound below, he says, was received up by its own syllable into the complement of the entire (name); but that the sound, as if cast outside, remained below. And that the element itself, from which the letter along with its own pronunciation descended below, he says, is (composed) of thirty letters, and that each one of the thirty letters contains in itself other letters, by means of which the title of the letter is named. And again, that the other (letters) are named by different letters, and the rest by different (ones still). So that by writing down the letters individually, the number would eventuate in infinity. In this way one may more clearly understand what is spoken. The element Delta, (he says,) has five letters in itself, (viz.), Delta, and Epsilon, and Lambda, and Tau, and Alpha; and these very letters are (written) by means of other letters. If, therefore, the entire substance of the Delta eventuates in infinity, (and if) different letters invariably produce different letters, and succeed one another, by how much greater than that element is the more enormous sea103 of the letters? And if one letter is thus infinite, behold the entire name’s depth of the letters out of which the patient industry, nay, rather (I should say,) the vain toil of Marcus wishes that the Progenitor (of things) should consist! Wherefore also (he maintains) that the Father, who knew that He was inseparable from Himself, gave (this depth) to the elements, which he likewise denominates Aeons. And he uttered aloud to each one of them its own peculiar pronunciation, from the fact that one could not pronounce the entire.
Chap. XXXIX. – The Quaternion Exhibits “Truth.”
And (Marcus alleged) that the Quaternion, after having explained these things, spoke as follows: “Now, I wish also to exhibit to you Truth herself, for I have brought her down from the mansions above, in order that you may behold her naked, and become acquainted with her beauty; nay, also that you may hear her speak, and may marvel at her wisdom. Observe,” says the Quaternion, “then, first, the head above, Alpha (and long) O; the neck, B and P[si]; shoulders, along with hands, G and C[hi]; breasts, Delta and P[hi]; diaphragm,104 Eu; belly, Z and T; pudenda, Eta and S; thighs, T[h] and R; knees, Ip; calves, Ko; ankles, Lx[si]; feet, M and N.” This is in the body of Truth, according to Marcus. This is the figure of the element; this the character of the letter. And he styles this element Man, and affirms it to be the source of every word, and the originating principle of every sound, and the realization in speech of everything that is ineffable, and a mouth of taciturn silence. And this is the body of (Truth) herself. But do you, raising aloft the conceiving power of the understanding, hear from the mouths of Truth (of) the Logos, who is Self-generator105 and Progenitor.106
Chap. XL. – The Name of Christ Jesus.
But, after uttering these words, (Marcus details) that Truth, gazing upon him, and opening her mouth, spoke the discourse (just-alluded to). And (he tells us) that the discourse became a name, and that the name was that which we know and utter, viz., Christ Jesus, and that as soon as she had named this (name) she remained silent. While Marcus, however, was expecting that she was about to say more, the Quaternion, again advancing into the midst, speaks as follows: “Thou didst regard as contemptible107 this discourse which you have heard from the mouth of Truth. And yet this which you know and seem long since to possess is not the name; for you have merely the sound of it, but are ignorant of the power. For Jesus is a remarkable name, having six letters,108 invoked109 by all belonging to the called (of Christ); whereas the other (name, that is, Christ,) consists of many parts, and is among the (five) Aeons of the Pleroma. (This name) is of another form and a different type, and is recognised by those existences who are connate with him, and whose magnitudes subsist with him continually.
Chap. XLI. – Marcus’ Mystic Interpretation of the Alphabet.
Know, (therefore,) that these letters which with you are (reckoned at) twenty-four, are emanations from the three powers, and are representative110 of those (powers) which embrace even the entire number of the elements. For suppose that there are some letters that are mute – nine of them – of Pater and Aletheia, from the fact that these are mute – that is, ineffable and unutterable. And (again, assume) that there are other (letters that are) semi-vowels – eight of them – of the Logos and of Zoe, from the fact that these are intermediate between consonants and vowels, and receive the emanation111 of the (letters) above them, but the reflux of those below them.112 And (likewise take for granted) that there are vowels – and these are seven – of Anthropos and Ecclesia, inasmuch as the voice of Anthropos proceeded forth, and imparted form to the (objects of the) universe. For the sound of the voice produced figure, and invested them with it. From this it follows that there are Logos and Zoe, which have eight (semi-vowels); and Anthropos and Ecclesia, which have seven (vowels); and Pater and Aletheia, which have nine (mutes). But from the fact that Logos wanted113 (one of being an ogdoad), he who is in the Father was removed (from his seat on God’s right hand), and came down (to earth). And he was sent forth (by the Father) to him from whom he was separated, for the rectification of actions that had been committed. (And his descent took place) in order that the unifying process, which is inherent in Agathos, of the Pleromas might produce in all the single power that emanates from all. And thus he who is of the seven (vowels) acquired the power of the eight114 (semi-vowels); and there were produced three topoi, corresponding with the (three) numbers (nine, seven, and eight), – (these topoi) being ogdoads. And these three being added one to the other, exhibited the number of the twenty-four (letters). And (he maintains), of course, that the three elements, – (which he himself affirms to be (allied) with the three powers by conjugal union, and which (by this state of duality) become six, and from which have emanated the twenty-four elements, – being rendered fourfold by the Quaternion’s ineffable word, produce the same number (twenty-four) with these. And these, he says, belong to Anonomastus. And (he asserts) that these are conveyed by the six powers into a similarity with Aoratus. And (he says) that there are six double letters of these elements, images of images, which, being reckoned along with the twenty-four letters, produce, by an analogical power, the number thirty.
Chap. XLII. – His System Applied to Explain Our Lord’s Life and Death.
And he says, as the result of this computation and that proportion,115 that in the similitude of an image He appeared who after the six days Himself ascended the mountain a fourth person, and became the sixth.116 And (he asserts) that He (likewise) descended and was detained by the Hebdomad, and thus became an illustrious Ogdoad. And He contains in Himself of the elements the entire number which He manifested, as He came to His baptism. (And the symbol of manifestation was) the descent of the dove, which is O[mega] and Alpha, and which by the number manifested (by these is) 801.117 And for this reason (he maintains) that Moses says that man was created on the sixth day. And (he asserts) that the dispensation of suffering (took place) on the sixth day, which is the preparation; (and so it was) that on this (day) appeared the last man for the regeneration of the first man. And that the beginning and end of this dispensation is the sixth hour, at which He was nailed to the (accursed) tree. For (he says) that perfect Nous, knowing the sixfold number to be possessed of the power of production and regeneration, manifested to the sons of light the regeneration that had been introduced into this number by that illustrious one who had appeared. Whence also he says that the double letters118 involve the remarkable number. For the illustrious number, being intermingled with the twenty-four elements, produced the name (consisting) of the thirty letters.
50 Valentinus’ system, if purged of the glosses put upon it by his disciples, appears to have been constructed out of a grand conception of Deity, and evidences much power of abstraction. Between the essence of God, dwelling in the midst of isolation prior to an exercise of the creative energy, and the material worlds, Valentinus interposes an ideal world. Through the latter, the soul – of a kindred nature – is enabled to mount up to God. This is the import of the terms Bythus (depth) and Sige (silence, i.e., solitariness) afterwards used.
51 κυρία: instead of this has been suggested the reading καὶ ῥίζα, i.e., “which is both the root,” etc.
52 In all this Valentinus intends to delineate the progress from absolute to phenomenal being. There are three developments in this transition. Absolute being (Bythus and Sige) is the same as the eternal thought and consciousness of God’s own essence. Here we have the primary emanation, viz., Nous, i.e., Truth. Next comes the ideal manifestation through the Logos, i.e., Word (obviously borrowed from the prologue to St. John’s Gospel), and Zoe, i.e., Life (taken from the same source). We have then the passage from the ideal to the actual in Anthropos, i.e., Man, and Ecclesia, i.e., Church. These last are the phenomenal manifestations of the divine mind.
53 τέλειος: Bunsen would read τέλος, which Cruice objects to on account of the word τελειότεροςoccurring in the next sentence.
54 This follows the text as emended by Bernays.
55 The number properly should be thirty, as there were two tetrads: (1) Bythus, Sige, Nous, and Aletheia; (2) Logos, Zoe, Ecclesia, and Anthropos. Some, as we learn from Hippolytus, made up the number to thirty, by the addition of Christ and the Holy Ghost, – a fact which Bunsen thinks conclusively proves that the alleged generation of Aeons was a subsequent addition to Valentinus’ system.
56 There is some confusion in Hippolytus’ text, which is, however, removable by reference to Irenaeus (i. 1.).
57 We subjoin the meanings of these names: –
Ten Aeons from Nous and Aletheia, (or) Logos and Zoe, viz.: –
1. Bythus = Profundity.
2. Mixis = Mixture.
3. Ageratos = Ever-young.
4. Henosis = Unification.
5. Autophyes = Self-grown.
6. Hedone = Voluptuousness.
7. Acinetus = Motionless.
8. Syncrasis = Composition.
9. Monogenes = Only-begotten.
10. Macaria = Blessedness.
58 The following are the meanings of these names: –
Twelve Aeons from Anthropos and Ecclesia, (or) Logos and Zoe: –
1. Paracletus = Comforter.
2. Pistis = Faith.
3. Patricus = Paternal.
4. Elpis = Paternal.
5. Metricus = Temperate.
6. Agape = Love.
7. Aeinous = Ever-thinking.
8. Synesis = Intelligence.
9. Ecclesiasticus = Ecclesiastical.
10. Makariotes = Felicity.
11. Theletus = Volition.
12. Sophia = Wisdom.
59 [Rev_2:24. It belongs to the “depths of Satan” to create mythologies the caricature the divine mysteries. Cf. 2Co_2:11.]
60 This Sophia was, so to speak, the bridge which spanned the abyss between God and reality. Under an aspect of this kind Solomon (Pro_8:1-36) views Wisdom; and Valentinus introduces it into his system, according to the Judaistic interpretation of Sophia, as the instrument for God’s creative energy. But Sophia thought to pass beyond her function as the connecting link between limited and illimitable existence, by an attempt to evolve the infinite from herself. She fails, and an abortive image of the true Wisdom is procreated, while Sophia herself sinks into this nether world.
61 Miller’s text has, “a well-formed and properly-digested substance.” This reading is, however, obviously wrong, as is proved by a reference to what Epiphanius states (Haer., xxxi.) concerning Valentinus.
62 Or, “Metagogeus” (see Irenaeus, i. 1, 2, iii. 1).
63 Bunsen corrects the passage, “So that she should not be inferior to any of the Aeons, or unequal (in power) to any (of them).”
64 ὲνότητος: Miller has νεότητος, i.e., youth. The former is the emendation of Bernays.
65 This is Bunsen’s text, ὑποστάτους. Duncker reads ὑποστατικὰς, hypostatic.
66 Some read οὐσίαν (see Theodoret, Haer., c. vii.).
67 ἐπιστροφὴν; or it may be rendered “solicitude.” Literally, it means a turning towards, as in this instance, for the purpose of prayer (see Irenaeus, i. 5).
68 Valentinus denominates what is psychical (natural) right, and what is pathematic left (see Irenaeus, i. 5).
69 Cruice renders the passage thus: “which is denominated right, or Demiurge, while fear it is that accomplishes this transformation.” The Demiurge is of course called “right,” as being the power of the psychical essence (see Clemens Alexandrinus, Hypot. excerpta e Theod., c. 43.).
70 Schneidewin fills up the hiatus thus: “Place of Meditation.” The above translation adopts the emendation of Cruice (see Irenaeus, i. 5).
71 See Epistle of Barnabas, chap. xv. vol. 1. p. 146, and Ignatius’ Letter to the Magnesians, chap. ix. p. 63, this series.
72 The opening sentence in this chapter is confused in Miller’s text. The sense, however, as given above, is deductible from a reference to a corresponding passage in Irenaeus (i. 5).
73 These words are a line out of Pythagoras’ Golden Verses: – Πηγή τις ἀενάου φύσεως ῥιζώματ ̓ ἔχουσα – (48).
74 The Abbe Cruice thinks that a comparison of this passage with the corresponding one in Irenaeus suggests the addition of οὶ δορυφόροι after Λόγος, i.e., the Logos and his satellites. [Vol. 1. p. 381, this series.]
75 Or, “subterranean” (Cruice).
76 Epiphanius, Haer., xxxi. sec. 7.
77 Epiphanius, Haer., xxxi. 22.
78 Axionicus is mentioned by Tertullian only (see Tertullian, Contr. Valent., c. iv).
79 Bardesianes (or Ardesianes, as Miller’s text has it) is evidently the same with Bardesanes, mentioned by Eusebius and St. Jerome.
80 κατηχήθη. Miller’s text has κατήχθη, which is properly corrected by Bunsen into the word translated above.
81 Or, “the multitudes.”
82 Cruice thinks that the following extract from Plato’s epistles has been added by a second hand. [Cf. vol. 3. p. 181, this series.]
83 There are some verbal diversities between the texts of Plato and Hippolytus, with a reference to show (see Plat., Epist., t. ix. p. 76, ed. Bekker).
84 Some forty lines that follow in Plato’s letter are omitted here.
85 Here likewise there is another deficiency as compared with the original letter.
86 Miller’s text is, καὶ πᾶσι γῆν, etc. In the German and French edition of Hippolytus we have, instead of this, καὶ Προαρχὴν. The latter word is introduced on the authority of Epiphanius and Theodoret. Bernays proposes Σιγὴν, and Scott Πλάστην. The Abbe Cruice considers Πλάστην an incongruous word as applied to the creation of spiritual beings.
87 The word “limit” occurs twice in this sentence, and Bunsen alters the second into “Pleroma,” so that the words may be rendered thus: “Valentinus supposes to be second all the Aeons that are within the Pleroma.”
88 This is a Gnostic hymn, and is arranged metrically by Cruice, of which the following is a translation: –
All things whirled on by spirit I see,
Flesh from soul depending,
And soul from air forth flashing,
And air from aether hanging,
And fruits from Bythus streaming,
And from womb the infant growing.
89 The text here is corrupt, but the above rendering follows the Abbe Cruice’s version. Bunsen’s emendation would, however, seem untenable.
90 Concerning Secundus and Epiphanes, see Irenaeus, i. 11; Theodoret, Haer. Fab., i. 5-9; Epiphanius, xxxii. 1, 3, 4; Tertullian, Adv. Valent., c. xxxviii.; and St. Augustine, Haer., xi. Hippolytus, in his remarks on Secundus and Epiphanes, borrows from St. Irenaeus.
91 Concerning Ptolemaeus, see Irenaeus, i. 12; Tertullian, De Praescript., c. xlix.; and Advers. Valent., c. viii.; Epiphanius, Haer., xxxiii. 3-7; and Theodoret, Haeret. Fab., i. 9; St. Augustine, Haer., c. xiv.; and St. Jerome’s 29th Epistle.
92 Concerning Marcus, see Irenaeus, i. 12-18; Tertullian, Praescript., c. l.; Epiphanius, Haer., c. xxxiv.; Theodoret, Haeret. Fab., i. 9; St. Augustine, Haer., c. xiv.; and St. Jerome’s 29th Epistle.
93 ἐνεργῶν; Bunsen reads δρῶν, which has the same meaning. Cruice reads αἰωρῶν, but makes no attempt at translation. Miller’s reading is δώρων, which is obviously corrupt, but for which δόλων has been suggested, and with good show of reason.
94 [The lost book upon the Witch of Endor, possibly. “Against the Magi” is the title of the text, and is taken to refer to book iv. cap. xxviii. p. 35, supra: the more probable opinion.]
95 Or, “had given thanks.”
96 ἀναλυομένου: some read ἀναδυομένου, which is obviously untenable.
97 [Here was an awful travesty of the heresy of a later day which introduced “the miracle of Bolsena” and the Corpus-Christi celebration. See Robertson, Hist., vol. iii. p. 604.]
98 [Bunsen (vol. i. p. 72-75) makes useful comments.]
99 Hippolytus has already employed this word, ἁδομέστερον, in the Proaemuim. It literally means, of strong or compact parts. Hippolytus, however, uses it in contrast to the expression λεπτομέρης, in reference to his Summary of Heresies. Bunsen thinks that Hippolytus means to say that Irenaeus expressed himself rather too strongly, and that the Marcosians, on meeting with Irenaeus’ assertions, indignantly repudiated them. Dr. Wordsworth translates ἁδρομερῶς (in the Proaemuim), “with rude generality,” – a rendering scarcely in keeping with the passage above.
100 The largest extract from Irenaeus is that which follows – the explanation of the heresy of Marcus. From this to the end of book vi. occurs in Irenaeus likewise. Hippolytus’ text does not accurately correspond with that of his master. The divergence, however, is inconsiderable, and may sometimes be traceable to the error of the transcriber.
101 Hippolytus uses two words to signify letters, στοιχεῖον and γράμμα. The former strictly means an articulate sound as the basis of language or of written words, and the latter the sound itself when represented by a particular symbol or sign.
102 [Rev_3:14. A name of Christ. This word is travestied as the name Logos also, most profanely.]
103 This is Duncker’s emendation, suggested by Irenaeus’ text, Miller reads τὸν τόπον, which yields scarcely any meaning.
104 Hippolytus’ text has been here corrected from that of Irenaeus.
105 This is a correction from Progenitor, on the authority of Irenaeus and Epiphanius.
106 Προπάτορα: Irenaeus reads Πατρόδορα, which is adopted by Schneidewin, and translated patrium.
107 The reading is doubtful. The translator adopts Scott’s emendation.
108 [See note 102, p. 94 supra, on “Amen.” Comp. Irenaeus, vol. 1. p. 393, this series. This name of Jesus does, indeed, run through all Scripture, in verbal and other forms; Gen_49:18 and in Joshua, as a foreshadowing.]
109 Irenaeus has “known.”
110 εἰκονικὰς. This is Irenaeus’ reading. Miller has εἰκόνας (representations).
111 ἀπόῤῥοιαν; some read ἀπορίαν, which is obviously erroneous.
112 ὑπ ̓ αὐτὰ: Irenaeus reads ὑπὲρ αὐτὴν, and Massuet ὑπένερθεν.
113 The deficiency consisted in there not being three ogdoads. The sum total was twenty-four, but there was only one ogdoad – Logos and Zoe. The other two – Pater and Aletheia, and Anthropos and Ecclesia – had one above and one below an ogdoad.
114 τῶν ὀκτὼhas been substituted for τῷ νοητῷ, an obviously corrupt reading. The correction is supplied by Irenaeus.
115 Or, “economy.”
116 Christ went up with the three apostles, and was therefore the fourth Himself; by the presence of Moses and Elias, He became the sixth: Mat_17:1; Mar_9:2.
117 The Greek word for dove is περίστερα, the letters of which represent 801, as may be seen thus: –
π = 80
ε = 5
ρ = 100
ι = 10
σ = 200
τ = 300
ε = 5
ρ = 100
α = 1
This, therefore, is equipollent with Alpha and Omega, as α is equal to 1, and ω to 800. [Stuff! Bunsen, very naturally, exclaims.]
118 γράμματα; some read πράγματα.