(NOTE: The electronic text obtained from The Electronic Bible Society was
not completely corrected. EWTN has corrected all discovered errors.)
Transliteration of Greek words: All phonetical except: w = omega; h serves
three puposes: 1. = Eta; 2. = rough breathing, when appearing intially
before a vowel; 3. = in the aspirated letters theta = th, phi = ph, chi =
ch. Accents are given immediately after their corresponding vowels: acute =
' , grave = `, circumflex = ^. The character ' doubles as an apostrophe,
when necessary.
IRENAEUS OF LYONS
AGAINST HERESIES
BOOK II
PREFACE.
1. IN the first book, which immediately precedes this, exposing
"knowledge falsely so called,"(1) I showed thee, my very dear friend, that
the whole system devised, in many and opposite ways, by those who are of
the school of Valentinus, was false and baseless. I also set forth the
tenets of their predecessors, proving that they not only differed among
themselves, but had long previously swerved from the truth itself. I
further explained, with all diligence, the doctrine as well as practice of
Marcus the magician, since he, too, belongs to these persons; and I
carefully noticed(2) the passages which they garble from the Scriptures,
with the view of adapting them to their own fictions. Moreover, I minutely
narrated the manner in which, by means of numbers, and by the twenty-four
letters of the alphabet, they boldly endeavour to establish [what they
regard as] truth. I have also related how they think and teach that
creation at large was formed after the image of their invisible Pleroma,
and what they hold respecting the Demiurge, declaring at the same time the
doctrine of Simon Magus of Samaria, their progenitor, and of all those who
succeeded him. I mentioned, too, the multitude of those Gnostics who are
sprung from him, and noticed(2) the points of difference between them,
their several doctrines, and the order of their succession, while I set
forth all those heresies which have been originated by them. I showed,
moreover, that all these heretics, taking their rise from Simon, have
introduced impious and irreligious doctrines into this life; and I
explained the nature of their "redemption," and their method of initiating
those who are rendered "perfect," along with their invocations and their
mysteries. I proved also that there is one God, the Creator, and that He is
not the fruit of any defect, nor is there anything either above Him, or
after Him.
2. In the present book, I shall establish those points which fit in
with my design, so far as time permits, and overthrow, by means of
lengthened treatment under distinct heads, their whole system; for which
reason, since it is an exposure and subversion of their opinions, I have so
entitled the composition of this work. For it is fitting, by a plain
revelation and overthrow of their conjunctions, to put an end to these
hidden alliances,(3) and to Bythus himself, and thus to obtain a
demonstration that he never existed at any previous time, nor now has any
existence.
CHAP. I.--THERE IS BUT ONE GOD: THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF ITS BEING OTHERWISE.
1. IT is proper, then, that I should begin with the first and most
important head, that is, God the Creator, who made the heaven and the
earth, and all things that are therein (whom these men blasphemously style
the fruit of a defect), and to demonstrate that there is nothing either
above Him or after Him; nor that, influenced by any one, but of His own
free will, He created all things, since He is the only God, the only Lord,
the only Creator, the only Father, alone containing all things, and Himself
commanding all things into existence.
2. For how can there be any other Fulness, or Principle, or Power, or
God, above Him, since it is matter of necessity that God, the Pleroma
(Fulness) of all these, should contain all things in His immensity, and
should be contained by no one? But if there is anything beyond Him, He is
not then the Pleroma of all, nor does He contain all. For that which they
declare to be beyond Him will be wanting to the Pleroma, or, [in other
words,] to that God who is above all things. But that which is wanting, and
falls in any way short, is not the Pleroma of all things. In such a case,
He would have both beginning, middle, and end, with respect to those who
are beyond Him. And if He has an end in regard to those things which are
below, He has also a beginning with respect to those things which are
above. In like manner, there is an absolute necessity that He should
experience the very same thing at all other points, and should be held in,
bounded, and enclosed by those existences that are outside of Him. For that
being who is the end downwards, necessarily circumscribes and surrounds him
who finds his end in it. And thus, according to them, the Father of all
(that is, He whom they call Proon and Proarche), with their Pleroma, and
the good God of Marcion, is established and enclosed in some other, and is
surrounded from without by another mighty Being, who must of necessity be
greater, inasmuch as that which contains is greater than that which is
contained. But then that which is greater is also stronger, and in a
greater degree Lord; and that which is greater, and stronger, and in a
greater degree Lord--must be God.
3. Now, since there exists, according to them, also something else
which they declare to be outside of the Pleroma, into which they further
hold there descended that higher power who went astray, it is in every way
necessary that the Pleroma either contains that which is beyond, yet is
contained (for otherwise, it will not be beyond the Pleroma; for if there
is anything beyond the Pleroma, there will be a Pleroma within this very
Pleroma which they declare to be outside of the Pleroma, and the Pleroma
will be contained by that which is beyond: and with the Pleroma is
understood also the first God); or, again, they must be an infinite
distance separated from each other--the Pleroma [I mean], and that which is
beyond it. But if they maintain this, there will then be a third kind of
existence, which separates by immensity the Pleroma and that which is
beyond it. This third kind of existence will therefore bound and contain
both the others, and will be greater both than the Pleroma, and than that
which is beyond it, inasmuch as it contains both in its bosom. In this way,
talk might go on for ever concerning those things which are contained, and
those which contain. For if this third existence has its beginning above,
and its end beneath, there is an absolute necessity that it be also bounded
on the sides, either beginning or ceasing at certain other points, [where
new existences begin.] These, again, and others which are above and below,
will have their beginnings at certain other points, and so on ad infinitum;
so that their thoughts would never rest in one God, but, in consequence of
seeking after more than exists, would wander away to that which has no
existence, and depart from the true God.
4. These remarks are, in like manner, applicable against the followers
of Marcion. For his two gods will also be contained and circumscribed by an
immense interval which separates them from one another. But then there is a
necessity to suppose a multitude of gods separated by an immense distance
from each other on every side, beginning with one another, and ending in
one another. Thus, by that very process of reasoning on which they depend
for teaching that there is a certain Pleroma or God above the Creator of
heaven and earth, any one who chooses to employ it may maintain that there
is another Pleroma above the Pleroma, above that again another, and above
Bythus another ocean of Deity, while in like manner the same successions
hold with respect to the sides; and thus, their doctrine flowing out into
immensity, there will always be a necessity to conceive of other Pleroma,
and other Bythi, so as never at any time to stop, but always to continue
seeking for others besides those already mentioned. Moreover, it will be
uncertain whether these which we conceive of are below, or are, in fact,
themselves the things which are above; and, in like manner, will be
doubtful] respecting those things which are said by them to be above,
whether they are really above or below; and thus our opinions will have no
fixed conclusion or certainty, but will of necessity wander forth after
worlds without limits, and gods that cannot be numbered.
5. These things, then, being so, each deity will be contented with his
own possessions, and will not be moved with any curiosity respecting the
affairs of others; otherwise he would be unjust, and rapacious, and would
cease to be what God is. Each creation, too, will glorify its own maker,
and will be contented with him, not knowing any other; otherwise it would
most justly be deemed an apostate by all the others, and would receive a
richly-deserved punishment. For it must be either that there is one Being
who contains all things, and formed in His own territory all those things
which have been created, according to His own will; or, again, that there
are numerous unlimited creators and gods, who begin from each other, and
end in each other on every side; and it will then be necessary to allow
that all the rest are contained from without by some one who is greater,
and that they are each of them shut up within their own territory, and
remain in it. No one of them all, therefore, is God. For there will be
[much] wanting to every one of them, possessing [as he will do] only a very
small part when compared with all the rest. The name of the Omnipotent will
thus be brought to an end, and such an opinion will of necessity fall to
impiety.
CHAP. II--THE WORLD WAS NOT FORMED BY ANGELS, OR BY ANY OTHER BEING,
CONTRARY TO THE WILL OF THE MOST HIGH GOD, BUT WAS MADE BY THE FATHER
THROUGH THE WORD.(1)
1. Those, moreover, who say that the world was formed by angels, or by
any other maker of it, contrary to the will of Him who is the Supreme
Father, err first of all in this very point, that they maintain that angels
formed such and so mighty a creation, contrary to the will of the Most High
God. This would imply that angels were more powerful than God; or if not
so, that He was either careless, or inferior, or paid no regard to those
things which took place among His own possessions, whether they turned out
ill or well, so that He might drive away and prevent the one, while He
praised and rejoiced over the other. But if one would not ascribe such
conduct even to a man of any ability, how much less to God
2. Next let them tell us whether these things have been formed within
the limits which are contained by Him, and in His proper territory, or in
regions belonging to others, and lying beyond Him? But if they say [that
these things were done] beyond Him, then all the absurdities already
mentioned will face them, and the Supreme God will be enclosed by that
which is beyond Him, in which also it will be necessary that He should find
His end. If, on the other hand, [these things were done] within His own
proper territory, it will be very idle to say that the world was thus
formed within His proper territory against His will by angels who are
themselves under His power, or by any other being, as if either He Himself
did not behold all things which take place among His own possessions, or(2)
was not aware of the things to be done by angels.
3. If, however, [the things referred to were done] not against His
will, but with His concurrence and knowledge, as some [of these men] think,
the angels, or the Former of the world [whoever that may have been], will
no longer be the causes of that formation, but the will of God. For if He
is the Former of the world, He too made the angels, or at least was the
cause of their creation; and He will be regarded as having made the world
who prepared the causes of its formation. Although they maintain that the
angels were made by a long succession downwards, or that the Former of the
world [sprang] from the Supreme Father, as Basilides asserts; nevertheless
that which is the cause of those things which have been made will still be
traced to Him who was the Author of such a succession. [The case stands]
just as regards success in war, which is ascribed to the king who prepared
those things which are the cause of victory; and, in like manner, the
creation of any state, or of any work, is referred to him who prepared
materials for the accomplishment of those results which were afterwards
brought about. Wherefore, we do not say that it was the axe which cut the
wood, or the saw which divided it; but one would very properly say that the
man cut and divided it who formed the axe and the saw for this purpose, and
[who also formed] at a much earlier date all the tools by which the axe and
the saw themselves were formed. With justice, therefore, according to an
analogous process of reasoning, the Father of all will be declared the
Former of this world, and not the angels, nor any other [so-called] former
of the world, other than He who was its Author, and had formerly(3) been
the cause of the preparation for a creation of this kind.
4. This manner of speech may perhaps be plausible or persuasive to
those who know not God, and who liken Him to needy human beings, and to
those who cannot immediately and without assistance form anything, but
require many instrumentalities to produce what they intend. But it will not
be regarded as at all probable by those who know that God stands in need of
nothing, and that He created and made all things by His Word, while He
neither required angels to assist Him in the production of those things
which are made, nor of any power greatly inferior to Himself, and ignorant
of the Father, nor of any defect or ignorance, in order that he who should
know Him might become man.(4) But He Himself in Himself, after a fashion
which we can neither describe nor conceive, predestinating all things,
formed them as He pleased, bestowing harmony on all things, and assigning
them their own place, and the beginning of their creation. In this way He
conferred on spiritual things a spiritual and invisible nature, on super-
celestial things a celestial, on angels an angelical, on animals an animal,
on beings that swim a nature suited to the water, and on those that live
on the land one fitted for the land--on all, in short, a nature suitable to
the character of the life assigned them--while He formed all things that
were made by His Word that never wearies.
5. For this is a peculiarity of the pre-eminence of God, not to stand
in need of other instruments for the creation of those things which are
summoned into existence. His own Word is both suitable and sufficient for
the formation of all things, even as John, the disciple of the Lord,
declares regarding Him: "All things were made by Him, and without Him was
nothing made."(1) Now, among the "all things" our world must be embraced.
It too, therefore, was made by His Word, as Scripture tells us in the book
of Genesis that He made all things connected with our world by His Word.
David also expresses the same truth [when he says] "For He spake, and they
were made; He commanded, and they were created."(2) Whom, therefore, shall
we believe as to the creation of the world--these heretics who have been
mentioned that prate so foolishly and inconsistently on the subject, or the
disciples of the Lord, and Moses, who was both a faithful servant of God
and a prophet? He at first narrated the formation of the world in these
words: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,"(3) and all
other things in succession; but neither gods nor angels [had any share in
the work].
Now, that this God is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Paul the
apostle also has declared, [saying,] "There is one God, the Father, who is
above all, and through all things, and in us all."(4) I have indeed proved
already that there is only one God; but I shall further demonstrate this
from the apostles themselves, and from the discourses of the Lord. For what
sort of conduct would it be, were we to forsake the utterances of the
prophets, of the Lord, and of the apostles, that we might give heed to
these persons, who speak not a word of sense?
CHAP. III.--THE BYTHUS AND PLEROMA OF THE VALENTINIANS, AS WELL AS THE GOD
OF MAR-CION, SHOWN TO BE ABSURD; THE WORLD WAS ACTUALLY CREATED BY THE SAME
BEING WHO HAD CONCEIVED THE IDEA OF IT, AND WAS NOT THE FRUIT OF DEFECT OR
IGNORANCE.
1. The Bythus, therefore, whom they conceive of with his Pleroma, and
the God of Marcion, are inconsistent. If indeed, as they affirm, he has
something subjacent and beyond himself, which they style vacuity and
shadow, this vacuum is then proved to be greater than their Pleroma. But it
is inconsistent even to make this statement, that while he contains all
things within himself, the creation was formed by some other. For it is
absolutely necessary that they acknowledge a certain void and chaotic kind
of existence (below the spiritual Pleroma) in which this universe was
formed, and that the Propator purposely left this chaos as it was,
either(5) knowing beforehand what things were to happen in it, or being
ignorant of them. If he was really ignorant, then God will not be prescient
of all things. But they will not even [in that case] be able to assign a
reason on what account He thus left this place void during so long a period
of time. If, again, He is prescient, and contemplated mentally that
creation which was about to have a being in that place, then He Himself
created it who also formed it beforehand [ideally] in Himself.
2. Let them cease, therefore, to affirm that the world was made by any
other; for as soon as God formed a conception in His mind, that was also
done which He had thus mentally conceived. For it was not possible that one
Being should mentally form the conception, and another actually produce the
things which had been conceived by Him in His mind. But God, according to
these heretics, mentally conceived either an eternal world or a temporal
one, both of which suppositions cannot be true. Yet if He had mentally
conceived of it as eternal, spiritual,(6) and visible, it would also have
been formed such. But if it was formed such as it really is, then He made
it such who had mentally conceived of it as such; or He willed it to exist
in the ideality(7) of the Father, according to the conception of His mind,
such as it now is, compound, mutable, and transient. Since, then, it is
just such as the Father had [ideally] formed in counsel with Himself, it
must be worthy of the Father. But to affirm that what was mentally
conceived and pre-created by the Father of all, just as it has been
actually formed, is the fruit of defect, and the production of ignorance,
is to be guilty of great blasphemy. For, according to them, the Father of
all will thus be [regarded as] generating in His breast, according to His
own mental conception, the emanations of defect and the fruits of
ignorance, since the things which He had conceived in His mind have
actually been produced.
CHAP. IV.--THE ABSURDITY OF THE SUPPOSED VACUUM AND DEFECT OF THE HERETICS
IS DEMONSTRATED.
1. The cause, then, of such a dispensation on the part of God, is to be
inquired after; but the formation of the world is not to be ascribed to any
other. And all things are to be spoken of as having been so prepared by God
beforehand, that they should be made as they have been made; but shadow and
vacuity are not to be conjured into existence. But whence, let me ask, came
this vacuity [of which they speak]? If it was indeed produced by Him who,
according to them, is the Father and Author of oil things, then it is both
equal in honour and related to the rest of the AEons, perchance even more
ancient than they are. Moreover, if it proceeded from the same source [as
they did], it must be similar in nature to Him who produced it, as well as
to those along with whom it was produced. There will therefore be an
absolute necessity, both that the Bythus of whom they speak, along with
Sige, be similar in nature to a vacuum, that is, that He really is a
vacuum; and that the rest of the AEons, since they are the brothers of
vacuity, should also be devoid(1) of substance. If, on the other hand, it
has not been thus produced, it must have sprang from and been generated by
itself, and in that case it will be equal in point of age to that Bythus
who is, according to them, the Father of oil; and thus vacuity will be of
the same nature and of the same honour with Him who is, according to them,
the universal Father. For it must of necessity have been either produced by
some one, or generated by itself, and sprung from itself. But if, in truth,
vacuity was produced, then its producer Valentinus is also a vacuum, as are
likewise his followers. If, again, it was not produced, but was generated
by itself, then that which is really a vacuum is similar to, and the
brother of, and of the same honour with, that Father who has been
proclaimed by Valentinus; while it is more ancient, and dating its
existence from a period greatly anterior, and more exalted in honour than
the remaining AEons of Ptolemy himself, and Heracleon, and all the rest(2)
who hold the same opinions.
2. But if, driven to despair in regard to these points, they confess
that the Father of all contains all things, and that there is nothing
whatever outside of the Heroma (for it is an absolute necessity that, [if
there be anything outside of it,] it should be bounded and circumscribed by
something greater than itself), and that they speak of what is without and
what within in reference to knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect
to local distance; but that, in the Pleroma, or in those things which are
contained by the Father, the whole creation which we know to have been
formed, having been made by the Demiurge, or by the angels, is contained by
the unspeakable greatness, as the centre is in a circle, or as a spot is in
a garment,--then, in the first place, what sort of a being must that Bythus
be, who allows a stain to have place in His own bosom, and permits another
one to create or produce within His territory, contrary to His own will?
Such a mode of acting would truly entail [the charge of] degeneracy upon
the entire Pleroma, since it might from the first have cut off that defect,
and those emanations which derived their origin from it,(3) and not have
agreed to permit the formation of creation either in ignorance, or passion,
or in defect. For he who can afterwards rectify a defect, and does, as it
were, wash away a stain,(4) could at a much earlier date have taken care
that no such stain should, even at first, be found among his possessions.
Or if at the first he allowed that the things which were made [should be as
they are], since they could not, in fact, be formed otherwise, then it
follows that they must always continue in the same condition. For how is it
possible, that those things which cannot at the first obtain rectification,
should subsequently receive it? Or how can men say that they are called to
perfection, when those very beings who are the causes from which men derive
their origin--either the Demiurge himself, or the angels --are declared to
exist in defect? And if, as is maintained, [the Supreme Being,] inasmuch as
He is benignant, did at last take pity upon men, and bestow on them
perfection, He ought at first to have pitied those who were the creators of
man, and to have conferred on them perfection. In this way, men too would
verily have shared in His compassion, being formed. perfect by those that
were perfect. For if He pitied the work of these beings, He ought long
before to have pitied themselves, and not to have allowed them to fall into
such awful blindness.
3. Their talk also about shadow and vacuity, in which they maintain
that the creation with which we are concerned was formed, will be brought
to nothing, if the things referred to were created within the territory
which is contained by the Father. For if they hold that the light of their
Father is such that it fills all things which are inside of Him, and
illuminates them all, how can any vacuum or shadow possibly exist within
that territory which is contained by the Pleroma, and by the light of the
Father? For, in that case, it behoves them to point out some place within
the Propator, or within the Pleroma, which is not illuminated, nor kept
possession of by any one, and in which either the angels or the Demiurge
formed whatever they pleased. Nor will it be a small amount of space in
which such and so great a creation can be conceived of as having been
formed. There will therefore be an absolute necessity that, within the
Pleroma, or within the Father of whom they speak, they should conceive(1)
of some place, void, formless, and full of darkness, in which those things
were formed which have been formed. By such a supposition, however, the
light of their Father would incur a reproach, as if He could not illuminate
and fill those things which are within Himself. Thus, then, when they
maintain that these things were the fruit of defect and the work of error,
they do moreover introduce defect and error within the Pleroma, and into
the bosom of the Father.
CHAP. V.--THIS WORLD WAS NOT FORMED BY ANY OTHER BEINGS WITHIN THE
TERRITORY WHICH IS CONTAINED BY THE FATHER.
1. The remarks, therefore, which I made a little while ago(2) are
suitable in answer to those who assert that this world was formed outside
of the Pleroma, or under a "good God; "and such persons, with the Father
they speak of, will be quite cut off from that which is outside the
Pleroma, in which, at the same time, it is necessary that they should
finally rest.(3) In answer to those, again, who maintain that this world
was formed by certain other beings within that territory which is contained
by the Father, all those points which have now(4) been noticed will present
themselves [as exhibiting their] absurdities and incoherencies; and they
will be compelled either to acknowledge all those things which are within
the Father, lucid, full, and energetic, or to accuse the light of the
Father as if He could not illuminate all things; or, as a portion of their
Pleroma [is so described], the whole of it must be confessed to be void,
chaotic, and full of darkness. And they accuse all other created things as
if these were merely temporal, or [at the best], if eternal,(5) yet
material. But(6) these (the AEons) ought to be regarded as beyond the reach
of such accusations, since they are within the Pleroma, or the charges in
question will equally fall against the entire Pleroma; and thus the Christ
of whom they speak is discovered to be the author of ignorance. For,
according to their statements, when He had given a form so far as substance
was concerned to the Mother they conceive of, He cast her outside of the
Pleroma; that is, He cut her off from knowledge. He, therefore, who
separated her from knowledge, did in reality produce ignorance in her. How
then could the very same person bestow the gift of knowledge on the rest of
the AEons, those who were anterior to Him [in production], and yet be the
author of ignorance to His Mother? For He placed her beyond the pale of
knowledge, when He cast her outside of the Pleroma.
2. Moreover, if they explain being within and without the Pleroma as
implying knowledge and ignorance respectively, as certain of them do (since
he who has knowledge is within that which knows), then they must of
necessity grant that the Saviour Himself (whom they designate All Things)
was in a state of ignorance. For they maintain that, on His coming forth
outside of the Pleroma, He imparted form to their Mother [Achamoth]. If,
then, they assert that whatever is outside [the Pleroma] is ignorant of all
things, and if the Saviour went forth to impart form to their Mother, then
He was situated beyond the pale of the knowledge of all things; that is, He
was in ignorance. How then could He communicate knowledge to her, when He
Himself was beyond the pale of knowledge? For we, too, they declare to be
outside the Pleroma, inasmuch as we are outside of the knowledge which they
possess. And once more: If the Saviour really went forth beyond the Pleroma
to seek after the sheep which was lost, but the Pleroma is [co-extensive
with] knowledge, then He placed Himself beyond the pale of knowledge, that
is, in ignorance. For it is necessary either that they grant that what is
outside the Pleroma is so in a local sense, in which case all the remarks
formerly made will rise up against them; or if they speak of that which is
within in regard to knowledge, and of that which is without in respect to
ignorance, then their Saviour, and Christ long before Him, must have been
formed in ignorance, inasmuch as they went forth beyond the Pleroma, that
is, beyond the pale of knowledge, in order to impart form to their Mother.
3. These arguments may, in like manner, be adapted to meet the case of
all those who, in any way, maintain that the world was formed either by
angels or by any other one than the true God. For the charges which they
bring against the Demiurge, and those things which were made material and
temporal, will in truth fall back on the Father; if indeed the(7) very
things which were formed in the bosom of the Pleroma began by and by in
fact to be dissolved, in accordance with the permission and good-will of
the Father. The [immediate] Creator, then, is not the [real] Author of this
work, thinking, as He did, that He formed it very good, but He who allows
and approves of the productions of defect, and the works of error having a
place among his own possessions, and that temporal things should be mixed
up with eternal, corruptible with incorruptible, and those which partake of
error with those which belong to truth. If, however, these things were
formed without the permission or approbation of the Father of all, then
that Being must be more powerful, stronger, and more kingly, who made these
things within a territory which properly belongs to Him (the Father), and
did so without His permission. If again, as some say, their Father
permitted these things without approving of them, then He gave the
permission on account of some necessity, being either able to prevent [such
procedure], or not able. But if indeed He could not [hinder it], then He is
weak and powerless; while, if He could, He is a seducer, a hypocrite, and a
slave of necessity, inasmuch as He does not consent [to such a course], and
yet allows it as if He did consent. And allowing error to arise at the
first, and to go on increasing, He endeavours in later times to destroy it,
when already many have miserably perished on account of the [original]
defect.
4. It is not seemly, however, to say of Him who is God over all, since
He is free and independent, that He was a slave to necessity, or that
anything takes place with His permission, yet against His desire; otherwise
they will make necessity greater and more kingly than God, since that which
has the most power is superior(1) to all [others]. And He ought at the very
beginning to have cut off the causes of [the fancied] necessity, and not to
have allowed Himself to be shut up to yielding to that necessity, by
permitting anything besides that which became Him. For it would have been
much better, more consistent, and more God-like, to cut off at the
beginning the principle of this kind of necessity, than afterwards, as if
moved by repentance, to endeavour to extirpate the results of necessity
when they had reached such a development. And if the Father of all be a
slave to necessity, and must yield to fate, while He unwillingly tolerates
the things which are done, but is at the same time powerless to do anything
in opposition to necessity and fate (like the Homeric Jupiter, who says of
necessity, "I have willingly given thee, yet with unwilling mind"), then,
according to this reasoning, the Bythus of whom they speak will be found to
be the slave of necessity and fate.
CHAP. VI. --THE ANGELS AND THE CREATOR OF THE WORLD COULD NOT HAVE BEEN
IGNORANT OF THE SUPREME GOD.
1. How, again, could either the angels, or the Creator of the world,
have been ignorant of the Supreme God, seeing they were His property, and
His creatures, and were contained by Him? He might indeed have been
invisible to them on account of His superiority, but He could by no means
have been unknown to them on account of His providence. For though it is
true, as they declare, that they were very far separated from Him through
their inferiority [of nature], yet, as His dominion extended over all of
them, it behoved them to know their Ruler, and to be aware of this in
particular, that He who created them is Lord of all. For since His
invisible essence is mighty, it confers on all a profound mental intuition
and perception of His most powerful, yea, omnipotent greatness. Wherefore,
although "no one knows the Father, except the Son, nor the Son except the
Father, and those to whom the Son will reveal Him,"(2) yet all [beings] do
know this one fact at least, because reason, implanted in their minds,
moves them, and reveals to them [the truth] that there is one God, the Lord
of all.
2. And on this account all things have been [by general consent] placed
under the sway of Him who is styled the Most High, and the Almighty. By
calling upon Him, even before the coming of our Lord, men were saved both
from most wicked spirits, and from all kinds of demons, and from every sort
of apostate power. This was the case, not as if earthly spirits or demons
had seen Him, but because they knew of the existence of Him who is God over
all, at whose invocation they trembled, as there does tremble every
creature, and principality, and power, and every being endowed with energy
under His government. By way of parallel, shall not those who live under
the empire of the Romans, although they have never seen the emperor, but
are far separated from him both by land and sea, know very well, as they
experience his rule, who it is that possesses the principal power in the
state? How then could it be, that those angels who were superior to us [in
nature], or even He whom they call the Creator of the world, did not know
the Almighty, when even dumb animals tremble and yield at the invocation of
His name? And as, although they have not seen Him, yet all things are
subject to the name of our Lord,(3) so must they also be to His who made
and established all things by His word, since it was no other than He who
formed the world. And for this reason do the Jews even now put demons to
flight by means of this very adjuration, inasmuch as all beings fear the
invocation of Him who created them.
3. If, then, they shrink from affirming that the angels are more
irrational than the dumb animals, they will find that it behoved these,
although they had not seen Him who is God over all, to know His power and
sovereignty. For it will appear truly ridiculous, if they maintain that
they themselves indeed, who dwell upon the earth, know Him who is God over
all whom they have never seen, but will not allow Him who, according to
their opinion, formed them and the whole world, although He dwells in the
heights and above the heavens, to know those things with which they
themselves, though they dwell below, are acquainted. [This is the case],
unless perchance they maintain that Bythus lives in Tartarus below the
earth, and that on this account they have attained to a knowledge of Him
before those angels who have their abode on high. Thus do they rush into
such an abyss of madness as to pronounce the Creator of the world void of
understanding. They are truly deserving of pity, since with such utter
folly they affirm that He (the Creator of the world) neither knew His
Mother, nor her seed, nor the Pleroma of the AEons, nor the Propator, nor
what the things were which He made; but that these are images of those
things which are within the Pleroma, the Saviour having secretly laboured
that they should be so formed ['by the unconscious Demiurge], in honour of
those things which are above.
CHAP. VII.--CREATED THINGS ARE NOT THE IMAGES OF THOSE AEONS WHO ARE WITHIN
THE PLEROMA.
1. While the Demiurge was thus ignorant of all things, they tell us
that the Saviour conferred honour upon the Pleroma by the creation [which
he summoned into existence] through means of his Mother, inasmuch as he
produced similitudes and images of those things which are above. But I have
already shown that it was impossible that anything should exist beyond the
Pleroma (in which external region they tell us that images were made of
those things which are within the Pleroma), or that this world was formed
by any other one than the Supreme God. But if it is a pleasant thing to
overthrow them on every side, and to prove them vendors of falsehood; let
us say, in opposition to them, that if these things were made by the
Saviour to the honour of those which are above, after their likeness, then
it behoved them always to endure, that those things which have been
honoured should perpetually continue in honour. But if they do in fact pass
away, what is the use of this very brief period of honour,--an honour which
at one time had no existence, and which shall again come to nothing? In
that case I shall prove that the Saviour is rather an aspirant after
vainglory, than(1) one who honours those things which are above, For what
honour can those things which are temporal confer on such as are eternal
and endure for ever? or those which pass away on such as remain? or those
which are corruptible on such as are incorruptible?--since, even among men
who are themselves mortal, there is no value attached to that honour which
speedily passes away, but to that which endures as long as it possibly can.
But those things which, as soon as they are made, come to an end, may
justly be said rather to have been formed for the contempt of such as are
thought to be honoured by them; and that that which is eternal is
contumeliously treated when its image is corrupted and dissolved. But what
if their Mother had not wept, and laughed, and been involved in despair?
The Saviour would not then have possessed any means of honouring the
Fulness, inasmuch as her last state of confusion(2) did not have substance
of its own by which it might honour the Propator.
2. Alas for the honour of vainglory which at once passes away, and no
longer appears! There will be some(3) AEon, in whose case such honour will
not be thought at all to have had an existence, and then the things which
are above will be unhonoured; or it will be necessary to produce once more
another Mother weeping, and in despair, in order to the honour of the
Pleroma. What a dissimilar, and at the same time blasphemous image! Do you
tell me that an image of the Only-begotten was produced by the former(4) of
the world, whom(5) again ye wish to be considered the Nous (mind) of the
Father of all, and [yet maintain] that this image was ignorant of itself,
ignorant of creation,--ignorant, too, of the Mother,--ignorant of
everything that exists, and of those things which were made by it; and are
you not ashamed while, in opposition to yourselves, you ascribe ignorance
even to the Only-begotten Himself? For if these things [below] were made by
the Saviour after the similitude of those which are above, while He (the
Demiurge) who was made after such similitude was in so great ignorance, it
necessarily follows that around Him, and in accordance with Him, after
whose likeness be that is thus ignorant was formed, ignorance of the kind
in question spiritually exists.
For it is not possible, since both were produced spiritually, and neither
fashioned nor composed, that in some the likeness was preserved, while in
others the likeness of the image was spoiled, that image which was here
produced that it might be according to the image of that production which
is above. But if it is not similar, the charge will then attach to the
Saviour, who produced a dissimilar image,--of being, so to speak, an
incompetent workman. For it is out of their power to affirm that the
Saviour had not the faculty of production, since they style Him All Things.
If, then, the image is dissimilar, he is a poor workman, and the blame
lies, according to their hypothesis, with the Saviour. If, on the other
hand, it is similar, then the same ignorance will be found to exist in the
Nous (mind) of their Propator, that is, in the Only-begotten. The Nous of
the Father, in that case, was ignorant of Himself; ignorant, too, of the
Father; ignorant, moreover, of those very things which were formed by Him.
But if He has knowledge, it necessarily follows also that he who was formed
after his likeness by the Saviour should know the things which are like;
and thus, according to their own principles, their monstrous blasphemy is
overthrown.
3. Apart from this, however, how can those things which belong to
creation, various, manifold, and innumerable as they are, be the images of
those thirty AEons which are within the Pleroma, whose names, as these men
fix them, I have set forth in the book which precedes this? And not only
will they be unable to adapt the [vast] variety of creation at large to the
[comparative] smallness of their Pleroma, but they cannot do this even with
respect to any one part of it, whether [that possessed by] celestial or
terrestrial beings, or those that live in the waters. For they themselves
testify that their Pleroma consists of thirty AEons; but any one will
undertake to show that, in a single department of those [created beings]
which have been mentioned, they reckon that there are not thirty, but many
thousands of species. How then can those things, which constitute such a
multiform creation, which are opposed in nature to each other, and disagree
among themselves, and destroy the one the other, be the images and
likenesses of the thirty AEons of the Pleroma, if indeed, as they declare,
these being possessed of one nature, are of equal and similar properties,
and exhibit no differences [among themselves]? For it was incumbent, if
these things are images of those AEons,--inasmuch as they declare that some
men are wicked by nature, and some, on the other hand, naturally good,--to
point out such differences also among their AEons, and to maintain that
some of them were produced naturally good, while some were naturally evil,
so that the supposition of the likeness of those things might harmonize
with the AEons. Moreover, since there are in the world some creatures that
are gentle, and others that are fierce, some that are innocuous, while
others are hurtful and destroy the rest; some have their abode on the
earth, others in the water, others in the air, and others in the heaven; in
like manner, they are bound to show that the AEons possess such properties,
if indeed the one are the images of the others. And besides; "the eternal
fire which the Father has prepared for the devil and his angels,"(2)-- they
ought to show of which of those AEons that are above it is the image; for
it, too, is reckoned part of the creation.
4. If, however, they say that these things are the images of the
Enthymesis of that AEon who fell into passion, then, first of all, they
will act impiously against their Mother, by declaring her to be the first
cause of evil and corruptible images. And then, again, how can those things
which are manifold, and dissimilar, and contrary in their nature, be the
images of one and the same Being? And if they say that the angels of the
Pleroma are numerous, and that those things which are many are the images
of these--not in this way either will the account they give be
satisfactory. For, in the first place, they are then bound to point out
differences among the angels of the Pleroma, which are mutually opposed to
each other, even as the images existing below are of a contrary nature
among themselves. And then, again, since there are many, yea, innumerable
angels who surround the Creator, as all the prophets acknowledge,--[saying,
for instance,] "Ten thousand times ten thousand stood beside Him, and many
thousands of thousands ministered unto Him,"(2)--then, according(3) to
them, the angels of the Pleroma will have as images the angels of the
Creator, and the entire creation remains in the image of the Pleroma, but
so that the thirty AEons no longer correspond to the manifold variety of
the creation.
5. Still further, if these things [below] were made after the
similitude of those [above], after the likeness of which again will those
then be made? For if the Creator of the world did not form these things
directly from His own(4) conception, but, like an architect of no ability,
or a boy receiving his first lesson, copied them from archetypes furnished
by others, then whence did their Bythus obtain the forms of that creation
which He at first produced? It clearly follows that He must have received
the model from some other one who is above Him, and that one, in turn, from
another. And none the less [for these suppositions], the talk about images,
as about gods, will extend to infinity, if we do not at once fix our mind
on one Artificer, and on one God, who of Himself formed those things which
have been created. Or is it really the case that, in regard to mere men,
one will allow that they have of themselves invented what is useful for the
purposes of life, but will not grant to that God who formed the world, that
of Himself He created the forms of those things which have been made, and
imparted to it its orderly arrangement?
6. But, again, how can these things [below] be images of those [above],
since they are really contrary to them, and can in no respect have sympathy
with them? For those things which are contrary to each other may indeed be
destructive of those to which they are contrary, but can by no means be
their images--as, for instance, water and fire; or, again, light and
darkness, and other such things, can never be the images of one another. In
like manner, neither can those things which are corruptible and earthly,
and of a compound nature, and transitory, be the images of those which,
according to these men, are spiritual; unless these very things themselves
be allowed to be compound, limited in space, and of a definite shape, and
thus no longer spiritual, and diffused, and spreading into vast extent, and
incomprehensible. For they must of necessity be possessed of a definite
figure, and confined within certain limits, that they may be true images;
and then it is decided that they are not spiritual. If, however, these men
maintain that they are spiritual, and diffused, and incomprehensible, how
can those things which are possessed of figure, and confined within certain
limits, be the images of such as are destitute of figure and
incomprehensible?
7. If, again, they affirm that neither according to configuration nor
formation, but according to number and the order of production, those
things [above] are the images [of these below], then, in the first place,
these things [below] ought not to be spoken of as images and likenesses of
those AEons that are above. For how can the things which have neither the
fashion nor shape of those [above] be their images? And, in the next place,
they would adapt both the numbers and productions of the AEons above, so as
to render them identical with and similar to thoseth at belong to the
creation [below]. But now, since they refer to only thirty AEons, and
declare that the vast multitude of things which are embraced within the
creation [below] are images of those that are but thirty, we may justly
condemn them as utterly destitute of sense.
CHAP. VIII.--CREATED THINGS ARE NOT A SHADOW OF THE PLEROMA.
1. If, again, they declare that these things [below] are a shadow of
those [above], as some of them are bold enough to maintain, so that in this
respect they are images, then it will be necessary for them to allow that
those things which are above are possessed of bodies. For those bodies
which are above do cast a shadow, but spiritual substances do not, since
they can in no degree darken others. If, however, we also grant them this
point (though it is, in fact, an impossibility), that there is a shadow
belonging to those essences which are spiritual and lucent, into which they
declare their Mother descended; yet, since those things [which are above]
are eternal, and that shadow which is cast by them endures for ever, [it
follows that] these things [below] are also not transitory, but endure
along with those which cast their shadow over them. If, on the other hand,
these things [below] are transitory, it is a necessary consequence that
those [above] also, of which these are the shadow, pass away; while; if
they endure, their shadow likewise endures.
2. If, however, they maintain that the shadow spoken of does not exist
as being produced by the shade of [those above], but simply in this
respect, that [the things below] are far separated from those [above], they
will then charge the light of their Father with weakness and insufficiency,
as if it cannot extend so far as these things, but fails to fill that which
is empty, and to dispel the shadow, and that when no one is offering any
hindrance. For, according to them, the light of their Father will be
changed into darkness and buried in obscurity, and will come to an end in
those places which are characterized by emptiness, since it cannot
penetrate and fill all things. Let them then no longer declare that their
Bythus is the fulness of all things, if indeed he has neither filled nor
illuminated that which is vacuum and shadow; or, on the other hand, let
them cease talking of vacuum and shadow, if the light of their Father does
in truth fill all things.
3. Beyond the primary Father, then--that is, the God who is over all--
there can neither be any Pleroma into which they declare the Enthymesis of
that AEon who suffered passion, descended (so that the Pleroma itself, or
the primary God, should not be limited and circumscribed by that which is
beyond, and should, in fact, be contained by it); nor can vacuum or shadow
have any existence, since the Father exists beforehand, so that His light
cannot fail, and find end in a vacuum. It is, moreover, irrational and
impious to conceive of a place in which He who is, according to them,
Propator, and Proarche, and Father of all, and of this Pleroma, ceases and
has an end. Nor, again, is it allowable, for the reasons(1) already stated,
to allege that some other being formed so vast a creation in the bosom of
the Father, either with or without His consent. For it is equally impious
and infatuated to affirm that so great a creation was(2) formed by angels,
or by some particular production ignorant of the true God in that territory
which is His own. Nor is it possible that those things which are earthly
and material could have been formed within their Pleroma, since that is
wholly spiritual. And further, it is not even possible that those things
which belong to a multiform creation, and have been formed with mutually
opposite qualities [could have been created] after the image of the things
above, since these (i.e., the AEons) are said to be few, and of a like
formation, and homogeneous. Their talk, too, about the shadow of kenoma--
that is, of a vacuum--has in all points turned out false. Their figment,
then, [in what way soever viewed,] has been proved groundless,(3) and their
doctrines untenable. Empty, too, are those who listen to them, and are
verily descending into the abyss of perdition.
CHAP. IX.--THERE IS BUT ONE CREATOR OF THE WORLD, GOD THE FATHER: THIS THE
CONSTANT BELIEF OF THE CHURCH.
1. That God is the Creator of the world is accepted even by those very
persons who in many ways speak against Him, and yet acknowledge Him,
styling Him the Creator, and an angel, not to mention that all the
Scriptures call out [to the same effect], and the Lord teaches us of this
Father(4) who is in heaven, and no other, as I shall show in the sequel of
this work. For the present, however, that proof which is derived from those
who allege doctrines opposite to ours, is of itself sufficient,--all men,
in fact, consenting to this truth: the ancients on their part preserving
with special care, from the tradition of the first-formed man, this
persuasion, while they celebrate the praises of one God, the Maker of
heaven and earth; others, again, after them, being reminded of this fact by
the prophets of God, while the very heathen learned it from creation
itself. For even creation reveals Him who formed it, and the very work made
suggests Him who made it, and the world manifests Him who ordered it. The
Universal Church, moreover, through the whole world, has received this
tradition from the apostles.
2. This God, then, being acknowledged, as I have said, and receiving
testimony from all to the fact of His existence, that Father whom they
conjure into existence is beyond doubt untenable, and has no witnesses [to
his existence]. Simon Magus was the first who said that he himself was God
over all, and that the world was formed by his angels. Then those who
succeeded him, as I have shown in the first book,(5) by their several
opinions, still further depraved [his teaching] through their impious and
irreligious doctrines against the Creator. These [heretics now referred
to],(6) being the disciples of those mentioned, render such as assent to
them worse than the heathen. For the former "serve the creature rather than
the Creator,"(7) and "those which are not gods,"(8) notwithstanding that
they ascribe the first place in Deity to that God who was the Maker of this
universe. But the latter maintain that He, [i.e., the Creator of this
world,] is the fruit of a defect, and describe Him as being of an animal
nature, and as not knowing that Power which is above Him, while He also
exclaims, "I am God, and besides Me there is no other God."(9) Affirming
that He lies, they are themselves liars, attributing all sorts of
wickedness to Him; and conceiving of one who is not above this Being as
really having an existence, they are thus convicted by their own views of
blasphemy against that God who really exists, while they conjure into
existence a god who has no existence, to their own condemnation. And thus
those who declare themselves "perfect," and as being possessed of the
knowledge of all things, are found to be worse than the heathen, and to
entertain more blasphemous opinions even against their own Creator.
CHAP. X.--PERVERSE INTERPRETATIONS OF SCRIPTURE BY THE HERETICS: GOD
CREATED ALL THINGS OUT OF NOTHING, AND NOT FROM PRE-EXISTENT MATTER.
1. It is therefore in the highest degree irrational, that we should
take no account of Him who is truly God, and who receives testimony from
all, while we inquire whether there is above Him that [other being] who
really has no existence, and has never been proclaimed by any one. For
that nothing has been clearly spoken regarding Him, they themselves furnish
testimony; for since they, with wretched success, transfer to that being
who has been conceived of by them, those parables [of Scripture] which,
whatever the form in which they have been spoken, are sought after [for
this purpose], it is manifest that they now generate another [god], who was
never previously sought after. For by the fact that they thus endeavour to
explain ambiguous passages of Scripture (ambiguous, however, not as if
referring to another god, but as regards the dispensations of [the true]
God), they have constructed another god, weaving, as I said before, ropes
of sand, and affixing a more important to a less important question. For no
question can be solved by means of another which itself awaits solution;
nor, in the opinion of those possessed of sense, can an ambiguity be
explained by means of another ambiguity, or enigmas by means of another
greater enigma, but things of such character receive their solution from
those which are manifest, and consistent and clear.
2. But these [heretics], while striving to explain passages of
Scripture and parables, bring forward another more important, and indeed
impious question, to this effect, "Whether there be really another god
above that God who was the Creator of the world?" They are not in the way
of solving the questions [which they propose]; for how could they find
means of doing so? But they append an important question to one of less
consequence, and thus insert [in their speculations] a difficulty incapable
of solution. For in order that they may(1) know "knowledge" itself (yet not
learning this fact, that the Lord, when thirty years old, came to the
baptism of truth), they do impiously despise that God who was the Creator,
and who sent Him for the salvation of men. And that they may be deemed
capable of informing us whence is the substance of matter, while they
believe not that God, according to His pleasure, in the exercise of His own
will and power, formed all things (so that those things which now are
should have an existence) out of what did not previously exist, they have
collected [a multitute of] vain discourses. They thus truly reveal their
infidelity; they do not believe in that which really exists, and they have
fallen away into [the belief of] that which has, in fact, no existence.
3. For, when they tell us that all moist substance proceeded from the
tears of Achamoth, all lucid substance from her smile, all solid substance
from her sadness, all mobile substance from her terror, and that thus they
have sublime knowledge on account of which they are superior to others,--
how can these things fail to be regarded as worthy of contempt, and truly
ridiculous? They do not believe that God (being powerful, and rich in all
resources) created matter itself, inasmuch as they know not how much a
spiritual and divine essence can accomplish. But they do believe that their
Mother, whom they style a female from a female, produced from her passions
aforesaid the so vast material substance of creation. They inquire, too,
whence the substance of creation was supplied to the Creator; but they do
not inquire whence [were supplied] to their Mother (whom they call the
Enthymesis and impulse of the AEon that went astray) so great an amount of
tears, or perspiration, or sadness, or that which produced the remainder of
matter.
4. For, to attribute the substance of created things to the power and
will of Him who is God of all, is worthy both of credit and acceptance. It
is also agreeable [to reason], and there may be well said regarding such a
belief, that "the things which are impossible with men are possible with
God."(2) While men, indeed, cannot make anything out of nothing, but only
out of matter already existing, yet God is in this point proeminently
superior to men, that He Himself called into being the substance of His
creation, when previously it had no existence. But the assertion that
matter was produced from the Enthymesis of an AEon going astray, and that
the AEon [referred to] was far separated from her Enthymesis, and that,
again, her passion and feeling, apart from herself, became matter--is
incredible, infatuated, impossible, and untenable.
CHAP. XI.--THE HERETICS, FROM THEIR DISBELIEF OF THE TRUTH, HAVE FALLEN
INTO AN ABYSS OF ERROR: REASONS FOR INVESTIGATING THEIR SYSTEMS.
1. They do not believe that He, who is God above all, formed by His
Word, in His own territory, as He Himself pleased, the various and
diversified [works of creation which exist], inasmuch as He is the former
of all things, like a wise architect, and a most powerful monarch. But they
believe that angels, or some power separate from God, and who was ignorant
of Him, formed this universe. By this course, therefore, not yielding
credit to the truth, but wallowing in falsehood, they have lost the bread
of true life, and have fallen into vacuity(3) and an abyss of shadow. They
are like the dog of AEsop, which dropped the bread, and made an attempt at
seizing its Shadow, thus losing the [real] food. It is easy to prove from
the very words of the Lord, that He acknowledges one Father and Creator of
the world, and Fashioner of man, who was proclaimed by the law and the
prophets, while He knows no other, and that this One is really God over
all; and that He teaches that that adoption of sons pertaining to the
Father, which is eternal life, takes place through Himself, conferring it
[as He does] on all the righteous.
2. But since these men delight in attacking us, and in their true
character of cavillers assail us with points which really tell not at all
against us, bringing forward in opposition to us a multitude of parables
and [captious] questions, I have thought it well, on the other side, first
of all to put to them the following inquiries concerning their own
doctrines, to exhibit their improbability, and to put an end to their
audacity. After this has been done, [I intend] to bring forward the
discourses of the Lord, so that they may not only be rendered destitute of
the means of attacking us, but that, since they will be unable reasonably
to reply to those questions which are put, they may see that their plan of
argument is destroyed; so that, either returning to the truth, and humbling
themselves, and ceasing from their multifarious phantasies, they may
propitiate God for those. blasphemies they have uttered against Him, and
obtain salvation; or that, if they still persevere in that system of
vainglory which has taken possession of their minds, they may at least find
it necessary to change their kind of argument against us.
CHAP. XII.--THE TRIACONTAD OF THE HERETICS ERRS BOTH BY DEFECT AND EXCESS:
SOPHIA COULD NEVER HAVE PRODUCED ANYTHING APART FROM HER CONSORT; LOGOS AND
SIGE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONTEMPORARIES.
1. We may(1) remark, in the first place, regarding their Triacontad,
that the whole of it marvellously falls to ruin on both sides, that is,
both as respects defect and excess. They say that to indicate it the Lord
came to be baptized at the age of thirty years. But this assertion really
amounts to a manifest subversion of their entire argument. As to defect,
this happens as follows: first of all, because they reckon the Propator
among the other AEons. For the Father of all ought not to be counted with
other productions; He who was not produced with that which was produced; He
who was unbegotten with that which was born; He whom no one comprehends
with that which is comprehended by Him, and who is on this account
[Himself] incomprehensible; and He who is without figure with that which
has a definite shape. For inasmuch as He is superior to the rest, He ought
not to be numbered with them, and that so that He who is impassible and not
in error should be reckoned with an AEon subject to passion, and actually
in error. For I have shown in the book which immediately precedes this,
that, beginning with Bythus, they reckon up the Tricontad to Sophia, whom
they describe as the erring AEon; and I have also there set forth the names
of their [AEons]; but if He be not reckoned, there are no longer, on their
own showing, thirty productions of AEons, but these then become only
twenty-nine.
2. Next, with respect to the first production Ennoea, whom they also
term Sige, from whom again they describe Nous and Aletheia as having been
sent forth, they err in both particulars. For it is impossible that the
thought (Ennoea) of any one, or his silence (Sige), should be understood
apart from himself; and that, being sent forth beyond him, it should
possess a special figure of its own. But if they assert that the (Ennoea)
was not sent forth beyond Him, but continued one with the Propator, why
then do they reckon her with the other AEons--with those who were not one
[with the Father], and are on this account ignorant of His greatness? If,
however, she was so united (let us take this also into consideration),
there is then an absolute necessity, that from this united and inseparable
conjunction, which constitutes but one being, there(2) should proceed an
unseparated and united production, so that it should not be dissimilar to
Him who sent it forth. But if this be so, then just as Bythus and Sige, so
also Nous and Aletheia will form one and the same being, ever cleaving
mutually together. And inasmuch as the one cannot be conceived of without
the other, just as water cannot [be conceived of] without [the thought of]
moisture, or fire without [the thought of] heat, or a stone without [the
thought] of hardness (for these things are mutually bound together, and the
one cannot be separated from the other, but always co-exists with it), so
it behoves Bythus to be united in the same way with Ennoea, and Nous with
Aletheia. Logos and Zoe again, as being sent forth by those that are thus
united, ought themselves to be united, and to constitute only one being.
But, according to such a process of reasoning, Homo and Ecclesia too, and
indeed all the remaining conjunctions of the AEons produced, ought to be
united, and always to coexist, the one with the other. For there is a
necessity in their opinion, that a female AEon should exist side by side
with a male one, inasmuch as she is, so to speak, [the forthputting of] his
affection.
3. These things being so, and such opinions being proclaimed by them,
they again venture, without a blush, to teach that the younger AEon of the
Duodecad, whom they also style Sophia, did, apart from union with her
consort, whom they call Theletus, endure passion, and separately, without
any assistance from him, gave birth to a production which they name "a
female from a female." They thus rush into such utter frenzy, as to form
two most clearly opposite opinions respecting the same point. For if Bythus
is ever one with Sige, Nous with Aletheia, Logos with Zoe, and so on, as
respects the rest, how could Sophia, without union with her consort, either
suffer or generate anything? And if, again, she did really. suffer passion
apart from him, it necessarily follows that the other conjunctions also
admit of disjunction and separation among themselves,--a thing which I have
already shown to be impossible. It is also impossible, therefore, that
Sophia suffered passion apart from Theletus; and thus, again, their whole
system of argument is overthrown. For they have yet(1) again derived the
whole of remaining [material substance], like the composition of a tragedy,
from that passion which they affirm she experienced apart from union with
her consort.
4. If, however, they impudently maintain, in order to preserve from
ruin their vain imaginations, that the rest of the conjunctions also were
disjoined and separated from one another on account of this latest
conjunction, then [I reply that], in the first place, they rest upon a
thing which is impossible. For how can they separate the Propator from his
Ennoea, or Nous from Aletheia, or Logos from Zoe, and so on with the rest?
And how can they themselves maintain that they tend again to unity, and
are, in fact, all at one, if indeed these very conjunctions, which are
within the Pleroma, do not preserve unity, but are separate from one
another; and that to such a degree, that they both endure passion and
perform the work of generation without union one with another, just as hens
do apart from intercourse with cocks.
5. Then, again, their first and first-begotten Ogdoad will be
overthrown as follows: They must admit that Bythus and Sige, Nous and
Aletheia, Logos and Zoe, Anthropos and Ecclesia, do individually dwell in
the same Pleroma. But it is impossible that Sige (silence) can exist in the
presence of Logos (speech), or again, that Logos can manifest himself in
the presence of Sige. For these are mutually destructive of each other,
even as light and darkness can by no possibility exist in the same place:
for if light prevails, there cannot be darkness; and if darkness, there
cannot be light, since, where light appears, darkness is put to flight. In
like manner, where Sige is, there cannot be Logos; and where Logos is,
there certainly cannot be Sige. But if they say that Logos simply exists
within(2) (unexpressed), Sige also will exist within, and will not the less
be destroyed by the Logos within. But that he really is not merely
conceived of in the mind, the very order of the production of their (AEons)
shows.
6. Let them not then declare that the first and principal Ogdoad
consists of Logos and Sige, but let them [as a matter of necessity] exclude
either Sige or Logos; and then their first and principal Ogdoad is at an
end. For if they describe the conjunctions [of the AEons] as united, then
their whole argument fails to pieces. Since, if they were united, how could
Sophia have generated a defect without union with her consort? If, on the
other hand, they maintain that, as in production, each of the AEons
possesses his own peculiar substance, then how can Sige and Logos manifest
themselves in the same place? So far, then, with respect to defect.
7. But again, their Triacontad is overthrown as to excess by the
following considerations. They represent Horos (whom they call by a variety
of names which I have mentioned in the preceding book) as having been
produced by Monogenes just like the other AEons. Some of them maintain that
this Horos was produced by Monogenes, while others affirm that he was sent
forth by the Propator himself in His own image. They affirm further, that a
production was formed by Monogenes--Christ and the Holy Spirit; and they do
not reckon these in the number of the Pleroma, nor the Saviour either, whom
they also declare to be Totum(3) (all things). Now, it is evident even to a
blind man, that not merely thirty productions, as they maintain, were sent
forth, but four more along with these thirty. For they reckon the Propator
himself in the Pleroma, and those too, who in succession were produced by
one another. Why is it, then, that those [other beings] are not reckoned as
existing with these in the same Pleroma, since they were produced in the
same manner? For what just reason can they assign for not reckoning along
with the other AEons, either Christ, whom they describe as having,
according to the Father's will, been produced by Monogenes, or the Holy
Spirit, or Horos, whom they also call Soter(4) (Saviour), and not even the
Saviour Himself, who came to impart assistance and form to their Mother?
Whether is this as if these latter were weaker than the former, and
therefore unworthy of the name of AEons, or of being numbered among them,
or as if they were superior and more excellent? But how could they be
weaker, since they were produced for the establishment and rectification of
the others? And then, again, they cannot possibly be superior to the first
and principal Tetrad, by which they were also produced; for it, too, is
reckoned in the number above mentioned. These latter beings, then, ought
also to have been numbered in the Pleroma of the or that should be deprived
of the honour of those AEons which bear this appellation (the Tetrad).
8. Since, therefore, their Triacontad is thus brought to nought, as I
have shown, both with respect to defect and excess (for in dealing with
such a number, either excess or defect [to any extent] will render the
number untenable, and how much more so great variations?), it follows that
what they maintain respecting their Ogdoad and Duodecad is a mere fable
which cannot stand. Their whole system, moreover, falls to the ground, when
their very foundation is destroyed and dissolved into Bythus,(1) that is,
into what has no existence. Let them, then, henceforth seek to set forth
some other reasons why the Lord came to be baptized at the age of thirty
years, and [explain in some other way] the Duodecad of the apostles; and
[the fact stated regarding] her who suffered from an issue of blood; and
all the other points respecting which they so madly labour in vain.
CHAP. XIII.--THE FIRST ORDER OF PRODUCTION MAINTAINED BY THE HERETICS IS
ALTOGETHER INDEFENSIBLE.
1. I now proceed to show, as follows, that the first order of
production, as conceived of by them, must be rejected. For they maintain
that Nous and Aletheia were produced from Bythus and his Ennoea, which is
proved to be a contradiction. For Nous is that which is itself chief, and
highest, and, as it were, the principle and source of all understanding.
Ennoea, again, which arises from him, is any sort of emotion concerning any
subject. It cannot be, therefore, that Nous was produced by Bythus and
Ennoea; it would be more like the truth for them to maintain that Ennoea
was produced as the daughter of the Propator and this Nous. For Ennoea not
the daughter of Nous, as they assert, but Nous becomes the father of
Ennoea. For how can Nous have been produced by the Propator, when he holds
the chief and primary place of that hidden and invisible affection which is
within Him? By this affection sense is produced, and Ennoea, and
Enthymesis, and other things which are simply synonyms for Nous himself. As
I have said already, they are merely certain definite exercises in thought
of that very power concerning some particular subject. We understand the
[several] terms according to their(2) length and breadth of meaning, not
according to any [fundamental] change [of signification]; and the [various
exercises of thought] are limited by [the same sphere of] knowledge, and
are expressed together by [the same] term, the [very same] sense remaining
within, and creating, and administering, and freely governing even by its
own power, and as it pleases, the things which have been previously
mentioned.
2. For the first exercise of that [power] respecting anything, is
styled Ennoea; but when it continues, and gathers strength, and takes
possession of the whole soul, it is called Enthymesis. This Enthymesis,
again, when it exercises itself a long time on the same point, and has, as
it were, been proved, is named Sensation. And this Sensation, when it is
much developed, becomes Counsel. The increase, again, and greatly developed
exercise of this Counsel becomes the Examination of thought (Judgment); and
this remaining in the mind is most properly termed Logos (reason), from
which the spoken Logos (word) proceeds.(3) But all the [exercises of
thought] which have been mentioned are [fundamentally] one and the same,
receiving their origin from Nous, and obtaining [different] appellation
according to their increase. Just as the human body, which is at one time
young, then in the prime of life, and then old, has received [different]
appellations according to its increase and continuance, but not according
to any change of substance, or on account of any [real] loss of body, so is
it with those [mental exercises]. For, when one [mentally] contemplates
anything, he also thinks of it; and when he thinks of it, he has also
knowledge regarding it; and when he knows it, he also considers it; and
when he considers it, he also mentally handles it; and when he mentally
handles it, he also speaks of it. But, as I have already said, it is Nous
who governs all these [mental processes], while He is himself invisible,
and utters speech of himself by means of those processes which have been
mentioned, as it were by rays [proceeding from Him], but He himself is not
sent forth by any other.
3. These things may properly be said to hold good in men, since they
are compound by nature, and consist of a body and a soul. But those who
affirm that Ennoea was sent forth from God, and Nous from Ennoea, and then,
in succession, Logos from these, are, in the first place, to be blamed as
having improperly used these productions; and, in the next place, as
describing the affections, and passions, and mental tendencies of men,
while they [thus prove themselves] ignorant of God. By their manner of
speaking, they ascribe those things which apply to men to the Father of
all, whom they also declare to be unknown to all; and they deny that He
himself made the world, to guard against attributing want of power(1) to
Him; while, at the same time, they endow Him with human affections and
passions. But if they had known the Scriptures, and been taught by the
truth, they would have known, beyond doubt, that God is not as men are; and
that His thoughts are not like the thoughts of men.(2) For the Father of
all is at a vast distance from those affections and passions which operate
among men. He is a simple, uncompounded Being, without diverse members,(3)
and altogether like, and equal to himself, since He is wholly
understanding, and wholly spirit, and wholly thought, and wholly
intelligence, and wholly reason, and wholly hearing, and wholly seeing, and
wholly light, and the whole source of all that is good--even as the
religious and pious are wont to speak concerning God.
4. He is, however, above [all] these properties, and therefore
indescribable. For He may well and properly be called an Understanding
which comprehends all things, but He is not [on that account] like the
understanding of men; and He may most properly be termed Light, but He is
nothing like that light with which we are acquainted. And so, in all other
particulars, the Father of all is in no degree similar to human weakness.
He is spoken of in these terms according to the love [we bear Him]; but in
point of greatness, our thoughts regarding Him transcend these expressions.
If then, even in the case of human beings, understanding itself does not
arise from emission, nor is that intelligence which produces other things
separated from the living man, while its motions and affections come into
manifestation, much more will the mind of God, who is all understanding,
never by any means be separated from Himself; nor can anything(4) [in His
case] be produced as if by a different Being.
5. For if He produced intelligence, then He who did thus produce
intelligence must be understood, in accordance with their views, as a
compound and corporeal Being; so that God, who sent forth [the intelligence
referred to], is separate from it, and the intelligence which was sent
forth separate [from Him]. But if they affirm that intelligence was sent
forth from intelligence, they then cut asunder the intelligence of God, and
divide it into parts. And whither has it gone? Whence was it sent forth?
For whatever is sent forth from any place, passes of necessity into some
other. But what existence was there more ancient than the intelligence of
God, into which they maintain it was sent forth? And what a vast region
that must have been which was capable of receiving and containing the
intelligence of God! If, however, they affirm [that this emission took
place] just as a ray proceeds from the sun, then, as the subjacent air
which receives the ray must have had an existence prior to it, so [by such
reasoning] they will indicate that there was something in existence, into
which the intelligence of God was sent forth, capable of containing it, and
more ancient than itself. Following upon this, we must hold that, as we see
the sun, which is less than all things, sending forth rays from himself to
a great distance, so likewise we say that the Propator sent forth a ray
beyond, and to a great distance from, Himself. But what can be conceived of
beyond, or at a distance from, God, into which He sent forth this ray?
6. If, again, they affirm that that [intelligence] was not sent forth
beyond the Father, but within the Father Himself, then, in the first place,
it becomes superfluous to say that it was sent forth at all. For how could
it have been sent forth if it continued within the Father? For an emission
is the manifestation of that which is emitted, beyond him who emits it. In
the next place, this [intelligence] being sent forth, both that Logos who
springs from Him will still be within the Father, as will also be the
future emissions proceeding from Logos. These, then, cannot in such a case
be ignorant of the Father, since they are within Him; nor, being all
equally surrounded by the Father, can any one know Him less [than another]
according to the descending order of their emission. And all of them must
also in an equal measure continue impassible, since they exist in the bosom
of their Father, and none of them can ever sink into a state of degeneracy
or degradation. For with the Father there is no degeneracy, unless
perchance as in a great circle a smaller is contained, and within this one
again a smaller; or unless they affirm of the Father, that, after the
manner of a sphere or a square, He contains within Himself on all sides the
likeness of a sphere, or the production of the rest of the AEons in the
form of a square, each one of these being surrounded by that one who is
above him in greatness, and surrounding in turn that one who is after him
in smallness; and that on this account, the smallest and the last of all,
having its place in the centre, and thus being far separated from the
Father, was really ignorant of the Propator. But if they maintain any such
hypothesis, they must shut up their Bythus within a definite form and
space, while He both surrounds others, and is surrounded by them; for they
must of necessity acknowledge that there is something outside of Him which
surrounds Him. And none the less will the talk concerning those that
contain, and those that are contained, flow on into infinitude; and all
[the AEons] will most clearly appear to be bodies enclosed [by one
another].
7. Further, they must also confess either that He is mere vacuity, or
that the entire universe is within Him; and in that case all will in like
degree partake of the Father. Just as, if one forms circles in water, or
round or square figures, all these will equally partake of water; just as
those, again, which are framed in the air, must necessarily partake of air,
and those which [are formed] in light, of light; so must those also who are
within Him all equally partake of the Father, ignorance having no place
among them. Where, then, is this partaking of the Father who fills [all
things]? If, indeed, He has filled [all things], there will be no ignorance
among them. On this ground, then, their work of [supposed] degeneracy is
brought to nothing, and the production of matter with the formation of the
rest of the world; which things they maintain to have derived their
substance from passion and ignorance. If, on the other hand, they
acknowledge that He is vacuity, then they fall into the greatest blasphemy;
they deny His spiritual nature. For how can He be a spiritual being, who
cannot fill even those things which are within Him?
8. Now, these remarks which have been made concerning the emission of
intelligence are in like manner applicable in opposition to those who
belong to the school of Basilides, as well as in opposition to the rest of
the Gnostics, from whom these also (the Valentinians) have adopted the
ideas about emissions, and were refuted in the first book. But I have now
plainly shown that the first production of Nous, that is, of the
intelligence they speak of, is an untenable and impossible opinion. And let
us see how the matter stands with respect to the rest [of the AEons]. For
they maintain that Logos and Zoe were sent forth by him (i.e., Nous) as
fashioners of this Pleroma; while they conceive of an emission of Logos,
that is, the Word after the analogy of human feelings, and rashly form
conjectures respecting God, as if they had discovered something wonderful
in their assertion that Logos was I produced by Nous. All indeed have a
clear perception that this may be logically affirmed with respect to
men.(1) But in Him who is God over all, since He is all Nous, and all
Logos, as I have said before, and has in Himself nothing more ancient or
late than another, and nothing at variance with another, but continues
altogether equal, and similar, and homogeneous, there is no longer ground
for conceiving of such production in the order which has been mentioned.
Just as he does not err who declares that God is all vision, and all
hearing (for in what manner He sees, in that also He hears; and in what
manner He hears, in that also He sees), so also he who affirms that He is
all intelligence, and all word, and that, in whatever respect He is
intelligence, in that also He is word, and that this Nous is His Logos,
will still indeed have only an inadequate conception of the Father of all,
but will entertain far more becoming [thoughts regarding Him] than do those
who transfer the generation of the word to which men gave utterance to the
eternal Word of God, assigning a beginning and course of production [to
Him], even as they do to their own word. And in what respect will the Word
of God--yea, rather God Himself, since He is the Word--differ from the word
of men, if He follows the same order and process of generation?
9. They have fallen into error, too, respecting Zoe, by maintaining
that she was produced in the sixth place, when it behoved her to take
precedence of all [the rest], since God is life, and incorruption, and
truth. And these and such like attributes have not been produced according
to a gradual scale of descent, but they are names of those perfections
which always exist in God, so far as it is possible and proper for men to
hear and to speak of God. For with the name of God the following words will
harmonize: intelligence, word, life, incorruption, truth, wisdom, goodness,
and such like. And neither can any one maintain that intelligence is more
ancient than life, for intelligence itself is life; nor that life is later
than intelligence, so that He who is the intellect of all, that is God,
should at one time have been destitute of life. But if they affirm that
life was indeed [previously] in the Father, but was produced in the sixth
place in order that the Word might live, surely it ought long before,
[according to such reasoning,] to have been sent forth, in the fourth
place, that Nous might have life; and still further, even before Him, [it
should have been] with Bythus, that their Bythus might live. For to reckon
Sige, indeed, along with their Propator, and to assign her to Him as His
consort, while they do not join Zoe to the number,--is not this to surpass
all other madness?
10. Again, as to the second production which proceeds from these [AEons
who have been mentioned],--that, namely, of Homo and Ecclesia,--their very
fathers, falsely styled Gnostics, strive among themselves, each one seeking
to make good his own opinions, and thus convicting themselves of being
wicked thieves.
They maintain that it is more suitable to [the theory of] production--as
being, in fact, truth-like--that the Word was produced by man, and not man
by the Word; and that man existed prior to the Word, and that this is
really He who is God over all. And thus it is, as I have previously
remarked, that heaping together with a kind of plausibility all human
feelings, and mental exercises, and formation of intentions, and utterances
of words, they have lied with no plausibility at all against God. For while
they ascribe the things which happen to men, and whatsoever they recognise
themselves as experiencing, to the divine reason, they seem to those who
are ignorant of God to make statements suitable enough. And by these human
passions, drawing away their intelligence, while they describe the origin
and production of the Word of God in the fifth place, they assert that thus
they teach wonderful mysteries, unspeakable and sublime, known to no one
but themselves. It was, [they affirm,] concerning these that the Lord said,
"Seek, and ye shall find,"(1) that is, that they should inquire how Nous
and Aletheia proceeded from Bythus and Sage; whether Logos and Zoe again
derive their origin from these and then, whether Anthropos and Ecclesia
proceed from Logos and Zoe.
CHAP. XIV.-- VALENTINUS AND HIS FOLLOWERS DERIVED THE PRINCIPLES OF THEIR
SYSTEM FROM THE HEATHEN; THE NAMES ONLY ARE CHANGED.
1. Much more like the truth, and more pleasing, is the account which
Antiphanes,(2) one of the ancient comic poets, gives in his Theogony as to
the origin of all things. For he speaks Chaos as being produced from Night
and Silence; relates that then Love(3) sprang from Chaos and Night; from
this again, Light; and that from this, in his opinion, were derived all the
rest of the first generation of the gods. After these he next introduces a
second generation of gods, and the creation of the world; then he narrates
the formation of mankind by the second order of the gods. These men (the
heretics), adopting this fable as their own, have ranged their opinions
round it, as if by a sort of natural process, changing only the names of
the things referred to, and setting forth the very same beginning of the
generation of all things, and their production. In place of Night and
Silence they substitute Bythus and Sige; instead of Chaos, they put Nous;
and for Love (by whom, says the comic poet, all other things were set in
order) they have brought forward the Word; while for the primary and
greatest gods they have formed the AEons; and in place of the secondary
gods, they tell us of that creation by their mother which is outside of the
Pleroma, calling it the second Ogdoad. They proclaim to us, like the writer
referred to, that from this (Ogdoad) came the creation of the world and the
formation of man, maintaining that they alone are acquainted with these
ineffable and unknown mysteries. Those things which are everywhere acted in
the theatres by comedians with the clearest voices they transfer to their
own system, teaching them undoubtedly through means of the same arguments,
and merely changing the names.
2. And not only are they convicted of bringing forward, as if their own
[original ideas], those things which are to be found among the comic
poets, but they also bring together the things which have been said by all
those who were ignorant of God, and who are termed philosophers; and sewing
together, as it were, a motley garment out of a heap of miserable rags,
they have, by their subtle manner of expression, furnished themselves with
a cloak which is really not their own. They do, it is true, introduce a new
kind of doctrine, inasmuch as by a new sort of art it has been substituted
[for the old]. Yet it is in reality both old and useless, since these very
opinions have been sewed together out of ancient dogmas redolent of
ignorance and irreligion. For instance, Thales(4) of Miletus affirmed that
water was the generative and initial principle of all things. Now it is
just the same thing whether we say water or Bythus. The poet Homer,(5)
again, held the opinion that Oceanus, along with mother Tethys, was the
origin of the gods: this idea these men have transferred to Bythus and
Sige. Anaximander laid it down that infinitude is the first principle of
all things, having seminally in itself the generation of them all, and from
this he declares the immense worlds [which exist] were formed: this, too,
they have dressed up anew, and referred to Bythus and their AEons.
Anaxagoras, again, who has also been surnamed "Atheist," gave it as his
opinion that animals were formed from seeds falling down from heaven upon
earth. This thought, too, these men have transferred to "the seed" of their
Mother, which they maintain to be themselves; thus acknowledging at once,
in the judgment of such as are possessed of sense, that they themselves are
the offspring of the irreligious Anaxagoras.
3. Again, adopting the [ideas of] shade and vacuity from Democritus and
Epicurus, they have fitted these to their own views, following upon those
[teachers] who had already talked a great deal about a vacuum and atoms,
the one of which they called that which is, and the other that which is
not. In like manner, these men call those things which are within the
Pleroma real existences, just as those philosophers did the atoms; while
they maintain that those which are without the Pleroma have no true
existence, even as those did respecting the vacuum. They have thus banished
themselves in this world (since they are here outside of the Pleroma) into
a place which has no existence. Again, when they maintain that these things
[below] are images of those which have a true existence [above], they again
most manifestly rehearse the doctrine of Democritus and Plato. For
Democritus was the first who maintained that numerous and diverse figures
were stamped, as it were, with the forms [of things above], and descended
from universal space into this world. But Plato, for his part, speaks of
matter, and exemplar,(1) and God. These men, following those distinctions,
have styled what he calls ideas, and exemplar, the images of those things
which are above; while, through a mere change of name, they boast
themselves as being discoverers and contrivers of this kind of imaginary
fiction.
4. This opinion, too, that they hold the Creator formed the world out
of previously existing matter, both Anaxagoras, Empedocles, and Plato
expressed before them; as, forsooth, we learn they also do under the
inspiration of their Mother. Then again, as to the opinion that everything
of necessity passes away to those things out of which they maintain it was
also formed, and that God is the slave of this necessity, so that He cannot
impart immortality to what is mortal, or bestow incorruption on what is
corruptible, but every one passes into a substance similar in nature to
itself, both those who are named Stoics from the portico (stoa`), and
indeed all that are ignorant of God, poets and historians alike, make the
same affirmation.(2) Those [heretics] who hold the same [system of]
infidelity have ascribed, no doubt, their own proper region to spiritual
beings,--that, namely, which is within the Pleroma, but to animal beings
the intermediate space, while to corporeal they assign that which is
material. And they assert that God Himself can do no otherwise, but that
every one of the [different kinds of substance] mentioned passes away to
those things which are of the same nature. [with itself].
5. Moreover, as to their saying that the Saviour was formed out of all
the AEons, by every one of them depositing, so to speak, in Him his own
special flower, they bring forward nothing new that may not be found in the
Pandora of Hesiod. For what he says respecting her, these men insinuate
concerning the Saviour, bringing Him before us as Pandoros (All-gifted), as
if each of the AEons had bestowed on Him what He possessed in the greatest
perfection. Again, their opinion as to the indifference of [eating of]
meats and other actions, and as to their thinking that, from the nobility
of their nature, they can in no degree at all contract pollution, whatever
they eat or perform, they have derived it from the Cynics, since they do in
fact belong to the same society as do these [philosophers]. They also
strive to transfer to [the treatment of matters of] faith that
hairsplitting and subtle mode of handling questions which is, in fact, a
copying of Aristotle.
6. Again, as to the desire they exhibit to refer this whole universe to
numbers, they have learned it from the Pythagoreans. For these were the
first who set forth numbers as the initial principle of all things, and
[described] that initial principle of theirs as being both equal and
unequal, out of which [two properties] they conceived that both things
sensible(3) and immaterial derived their origin. And [they held] that one
set of first principles(4) gave rise to the matter [of things], and another
to their form. They affirm that from these first principles all things have
been made, just as a statue is of its metal and its special form. Now, the
heretics have adapted this to the things which are outside of the Pleroma.
The [Pythagoreans] maintained that the(5) principle of intellect is
proportionate to the energy wherewith mind, as a recipient of the
comprehensible, pursues its inquiries, until, worn out, it is resolved at
length in the Indivisible and One. They further affirm that Hen--that is,
One--is the first principle of all things, and the substance of all that
has been formed. From this again proceeded the Dyad, the Tetrad, the
Pentad, and the manifold generation of the others. These things the
heretics repeat, word for word, with a reference to their Pleroma and
Bythus.
From the same source, too, they strive to bring into vogue those
conjunctions which proceed from unity. Marcus boasts of such views as if
they were his own, and as if he were seen to have discovered something more
novel than others, while he simply sets forth the Tetrad of Pythagoras as
the originating principle and mother of all things.
7. But I will merely say, in opposition to these men--Did all those who
have been mentioned, with whom you have been proved to coincide in
expression, know, or not know, the truth? If they knew it, then the descent
of the Saviour into this world was superfluous. For why [in that case] did
He descend? Was it that He might bring that truth which was [already] known
to the knowledge of those who knew it? If, on the other hand, these men did
not know it, then how is it that, while you express yourselves in the same
terms as do those who knew not the truth, ye boast that yourselves alone
possess that knowledge which is above all things, although they who are
ignorant of God [likewise] possess it? Thus, then, by a complete
perversion(1) of language, they style ignorance of the truth knowledge: and
Paul well says [of them, that [they make use of] "novelties of words of
false knowledge."(2) For that knowledge of theirs is truly found to be
false. If, however, taking an impudent course with respect to these points,
they declare that men indeed did not know the truth, but that their
Mother,(3) the seed of the Father, proclaimed the mysteries of truth
through such men, even as also through the prophets, while the Demiurge was
ignorant [of the proceeding], then I answer, in the first place, that the
things which were predicted were not of such a nature as to be intelligible
to no one; for the men themselves knew what they were saying, as did also
their disciples, and those again succeeded these. And, in the next place,
if either the Mother or her seed knew and proclaimed those things which
were of the truth (and the Father(4) is truth), then on their theory the
Saviour spoke falsely when He said, "No one knoweth the Father but the
Son,"(5) unless indeed they maintain that their seed or Mother is No-one.
8. Thus far, then, by means of [ascribing to their AEons] human
feelings, and by the fact that they largely coincide in their language with
many of those who are ignorant of God, they have been seen plausibly
drawing a certain number away [from the truth]. They lead them on by the
use of those [expressions] with which they have been familiar, to that
sort of discourse which treats of all things, setting forth the production
of the Word of God, and of Zoe, and of Nous, and bringing into the world,
as it were, the [successive] emanations of the Deity. The views, again,
which they propound, without either plausibility or parade, are simply lies
from beginning to end. Just as those who, in order to lure and capture any
kind of animals, place their accustomed food before them, gradually drawing
them on by means of the familiar aliment, until at length they seize it,
but, when they have taken them captive, they subject them to the bitterest
of bendage, and drag them along with violence whithersoever they please; so
also do these men gradually and gently persuading [others], by means of
their plausible speeches, to accept of the emission which has been
mentioned, then bring forward things which are not consistent, and forms of
the remaining emissions which are not such as might have been expected.
They declare, for instance, that [ten](6) AEons were sent forth by Logos
and Zoe, while from Anthropos and Ecclesia there proceeded twelve, although
they have neither proof, nor testimony, nor probability, nor anything
whatever of such a nature [to support these assertions]; and with equal
folly and audacity do they wish it to be believed that from Logos and Zoe,
being AEons, were sent forth Bythus and Mixis, Ageratos and Henosis,
Autophyes and Hedone, Acinetos and Syncrasis, Monogenes and Macaria.
Moreover, [as they affirm,] there were sent forth, in a similar way, from
Anthropos and Ecclesia, being AEons, Paracletas and Pistis, Patricos and
Elpis, Metricos and Agape, Ainos and Synesis, Ecclesiasticus and
Macariotes, Theletos and Sophia.
9. The passions and error of this Sophia, and how she ran the risk of
perishing through her investigation [of the nature] of the Father, as they
relate, and what took place outside of the Pleroma, and from what sort of a
defect they teach that the Maker of the world was produced, I have set
forth in the preceding book, describing in it, with all diligence, the
opinions of these heretics. [I have also detailed their views] respecting
Christ, whom they describe as having been produced subsequently to all
these, and also regarding Soter, who, [according to them,] derived his
being from those AEons who were formed within the Pleroma.(7) But I have of
necessity mentioned their names at present, that from these the absurdity
of their falsehood may be made manifest, and also the confused nature of
the nomenclature they have devised. For they themselves detract from [the
dignity of] their AEons by a multitude of names of this sort. They give out
names plausible and credible to the heathen, [as being similar] to those
who are called their twelve gods,(1) and even these they will have to be
images of their twelve AEons. But the images [so called] can produce names
[of their own] much more seemly, and more powerful through their etymology
to indicate divinity [than are those of their fancied prototypes].
CHAP. XV.--NO ACCOUNT CAN BE GIVEN OF THESE PRODUCTIONS.
1. But let us return to the fore-mentioned question as to the
production [of the AEons]. And, in the first place, let them tell us the
reason of the production of the AEons being of such a kind that they do not
come in contact with any of those things which belong to creation. For they
maintain that those things [above] were not made on account of creation,
but creation on account of them; and that the former are not images of the
latter, but the latter of the former. As, therefore, they render a reason
for the images, by saying that the month has thirty days on account of the
thirty AEons, and the day twelve hours, and the year twelve months, on
account of the twelve AEons which are within the Pleroma, with other such
nonsense of the same kind, let them now tell us also the reason for that
production of the AEons, why it was of such a nature, for what reason the
first and first-begotten Ogdoad was sent forth, and not a Pentad, or a
Triad, or a Septenad, or any one of those which are defined by a different
number? Moreover, how did it come to pass, that from Logos and Zoe were
sent forth ten AEons, and neither more nor less; while again from Anthropos
and Ecclesia proceeded twelve, although these might have been either more
or less numerous?
2. And then, again, with reference to the entire Pleroma, what reason
is there that it should be divided into these three--an Ogdoad, a Decad,
and a Duodecad--and not into some other number different from these?
Moreover, with respect to the division itself, why has it been made into
three parts, and not into four, or five, or six, or into some other number
among those which have no connection with such numbers(2) as belong to
creation? For they describe those [AEons above] as being more ancient than
these [created things below], and it behoves them to possess their
principle [of being] in themselves, one which existed before creation, and
not after the pattern of creation, all exactly agreeing as to the point.(3)
3. The account which we give of creation is one harmonious with that
regular order [of things prevailing in the world], for this scheme of ours
is adapted to the(4) things which have [actually] been made; but it is a
matter of necessity that they, being unable to assign any reason belonging
to the things themselves, with regard to those beings that existed before
[creation], and were perfected by themselves, should fall into the greatest
perplexity. For, as to the points on which they interrogate us as knowing
nothing of creation, they themselves, when questioned in turn respecting
the Pleroma, either make mention of mere human feelings, or have recourse
to that sort of speech which bears only upon that harmony observable in
creation, improperly giving us replies concerning things which are
secondary, and not concerning those which, as they maintain, are primary.
For we do not question them concerning that harmony which belongs to
creation, nor concerning human feelings; but because they must acknowledge,
as to their octiform, deciform, and duodeciform Pleroma (the image of which
they declare creation to be), that their Father formed it of that figure
vainly and thoughtlessly, and must ascribe to Him deformity, if He made
anything without a reason. Or, again, if they declare that the Pleroma was
so produced in accordance with the foresight of the Father, for the sake of
creation, as if He had thus symmetrically arranged its very essence, then
it follows that the Pleroma can no longer be regarded as having been formed
on its own account, but for the sake of that [creation] which was to be its
image as possessing its likeness (just as the clay model is not moulded for
its own sake, but for the sake of the statue in brass, or gold, or silver
about to be formed), then creation will have greater honour than the
Pleroma, if, for its sake, those things [above] were produced.
CHAP. XVI.--THE CREATOR OF THE WORLD EITHER PRODUCED OF HIMSELF THE IMAGES
OF THINGS TO BE MADE, OR THE PLEROMA WAS FORMED AFTER THE IMAGE OF SOME
PREVIOUS SYSTEM; AND SO ON AD INFINITUM.
1. But if they will not yield assent to any one of these conclusions,
since in that case they would be proved by us as incapable of rendering any
reason for such a production of their Pleroma, they will of necessity be
shut up to this--that they confess that, above the Pleroma, there was some
other system more spiritual and more powerful, after the image of which
their Pleroma was formed. For if the Demiurge did not of himself construct
that figure of creation which exists, but made it after the form of those
things which are above, then from whom did their Bythus--who, to be sure,
brought it about that the Pleroma should be possessed of a configuration of
this kind--receive the figure of those things which existed before Himself?
For it must needs be, either that the intention [of creating] dwelt in that
god who made the world, so that of his own power, and from himself, he
obtained the model of its formation; or, if any departure is made from this
being, then there will arise a necessity for constantly asking whence there
came to that one who is above him the configuration of those things which
have been made; what, too, was the number of the productions; and what the
substance of the model itself? If, however, it was in the power of Bythus
to impart of himself such a configuration to the Pleroma, then why may it
not have been in the power of the Demiurge to form of himself such a world
as exists? And then, again, if creation be an image of those things
[above], why should we not affirm that those are, in turn, images of others
above them, and those above these again, of others, and thus go on
supposing innumerable images of images?
2. This difficulty presented itself to Basilides after he had utterly
missed the truth, and was conceiving that, by an infinite succession of
those beings that were formed from one another, he might escape such
perplexity. When he had proclaimed that three hundred and sixty-five
heavens were formed through succession and similitude by one another, and
that a manifest proof [of the existence] of these was found in the number
of the days of the year, as I stated before; and that above these there was
a power which they also style Unnameable, and its dispensation--he did not
even in this way escape such perplexity. For, when asked whence came the
image of its configuration to that heaven which is above all, and from
which he wishes the rest to be regarded as having been formed by means of
succession, he will say, from that dispensation which belongs to the
Unnameable. He must then say, either that the Unspeakable formed it of
himself, or he will find it necessary to acknowledge that there is some
other power above this being, from whom his unnameable One derived such
vast numbers of configurations as do, according to him, exist.
3. How much safer and more accurate a course is it, then, to confess at
once that which is true: that this God, the Creator, who formed the world,
is the only God, and that there is no other God besides Him--He Himself
receiving from Himself the model and figure of those things which have been
made--than that, after wearying ourselves with such an impious and
circuitous description, we should be compelled, at some point or another,
to fix the mind on some One, and to confess that from Him proceeded the
configuration of things created.
4. As to the accusation brought against us by the followers of
Valentinus, when they declare that we continue in that Hebdomad which is
below, as if we could not lift our minds on high, nor understand those
things which are above, because we do not accept their monstrous
assertions: this very charge do the followers of Basilides bring in turn
against them, inasmuch as they (the Valentinians) keep circling about those
things which are below, [going] as far as the first and second Ogdoad, and
because they unskilfully imagine that, immediately after the thirty AEons,
they have discovered Him who is above all things Father, not following out
in thought their investigations to that Pleroma which is above the three
hundred and sixty-five heavens, which(1) is above forty-five Ogdoads. And
any one, again, might bring against them the same charge, by imagining four
thousand three hundred and eighty heavens, or AEons, since the days of the
year contain that number of hours. If, again, some one adds also the
nights, thus doubling the hours which have been mentioned, imagining that
[in this way] he has discovered a great multitude of Ogdoads, and a kind of
innumerable company(2) of AEons, and thus, in opposition to Him who is
above all things Father, conceiving himself more perfect than all [others],
he will bring the same charge against all, inasmuch as they are not capable
of rising to the conception of such a multitude of heavens or AEons as he
has announced, but are either so deficient as to remain among those things
which are below, or continue in the intermediate space.
CHAP. XVII.--INQUIRY INTO THE PRODUCTION OF THE AEONS: WHATEVER ITS
SUPPOSED NATURE, IT IS IN EVERY RESPECT INCONSISTENT; AND ON THE HYPOTHESIS
OF THE HERETICS, EVEN NOUS AND THE FATHER HIMSELF WOULD BE STAINED WITH
IGNORANCE.
1. That system, then, which has respect to their Pleroma, and
especially that part of it which refers to the primary Ogdoad being thus
burdened with so great contradictions and perplexities, let me now go on to
examine the remainder of their scheme. [In doing so] on account of their
madness, I shall be making inquiry respecting things which have no real
existence; yet it is necessary to do this, since the treatment of this
subject has been entrusted to me, and since I desire all men to come to the
knowledge of the truth, as well as because thou thyself hast asked to
receive from me full and complete means for overturning [the views of]
these men.
2. I ask, then, in what manner were the rest of the AEons produced? Was
it so as to be united with Him who produced them, even as the solar rays
are with the sun; or was it actually(1) and separately, so that each of
them possessed an independent existence and his own special form, just as
has a man from another man, and one herd of cattle from another? Or was it
after the manner of germination, as branches from a tree? And were they of
the same substance with those who produced them, or did they derive their
substance from some other [kind of] substance? Also, were they produced at
the same time, so as to be contemporaries; or after a certain order, so
that some of them were older, and others younger? And, again, are they
uncompounded and uniform, and altogether equal and similar among
themselves, as spirit and light are produced; or are they compounded and
different, unlike [to each other] in their members?
3. If each of them was produced, after the manner of men, actually and
according to its own generation, then either those thus generated by the
Father will be of the same substance with Him, and similar to their Author;
or if(2) they appear dissimilar, then it must of necessity be acknowledged
that they are [formed of some different substance. Now, if the beings
generated by the Father be similar to their Author, then those who have
been produced must remain for ever impossible, even as is He who produced
them; but if, on the other hand, they are of a different substance, which
is capable of passion, then whence came this dissimilar substance to find a
place within the incorruptible Pleroma? Further, too, according to this
principle, each one of them must be understood as being completely
separated from every other, even as men are not mixed with nor united the
one to the other, but each having a distinct shape of his own, and a
definite sphere of action, while each one of them, too, is formed of a
particular size,--qualities characteristic of a body, and not of a spirit.
Let them therefore no longer speak of the Pleroma as being spiritual, or of
themselves as "spiritual," if indeed their AEons sit feasting with the
Father, just as if they were men, and He Himself is of such a configuration
as those reveal Him to be who were produced by Him.
4. If, again, the AEons were derived from Logos, Logos from Nous, and
Nous from Bythus, just as lights are kindled from a light--as, for example,
torches are from a torch--then they may no doubt differ in generation and
size from one another; but since they are of the same substance with the
Author of their production, they must either all remain for ever
impossible, or their Father Himself must participate in passion. For the
torch which has been kindled subsequently cannot be possessed of a
different kind of light from that which preceded it. Wherefore also their
lights, when blended in one, return to the original identity, since that
one light is then formed which has existed even from the beginning. But we
cannot speak, with respect to light itself, of some part being more recent
in its origin, and another being more ancient (for the whole is but one
light); nor can we so speak even in regard to those torches which have
received the light (for these are all contemporary as respects their
material substance, for the substance of torches is one and the same), but
simply as to [the time of] its being kindled, since one was lighted a
little while ago, and another has just now been kindled.
5. The defect, therefore, of that passion which has regard to
ignorance, will either attach alike to their whole Pleroma, since [all its
members] are of the same substance; and the Propator will share in this
defect of ignorance--that is, will be ignorant of Himself; or, on the other
hand, all those lights which are within the Pleroma will alike remain for
ever impassible. Whence, then, comes the passion of the youngest AEon, if
the light of the Father is that from which all other lights have been
formed, and which is by nature impassible? And how can one AEon be spoken
of as either younger or older among themselves, since there is but one
light in the entire Pleroma? And if any one calls them stars, they will all
nevertheless appear to participate in the same nature. For if "one star
differs from another star in glory,"(3) but not in qualities, nor
substance, nor in the fact of being passible or impassible; so all these,
since they are alike derived from the light of the Father, must either be
naturally impossible and immutable, or they must all, in common with the
light of the Father, be passible, and are capable of the varying phases of
corruption.
6. The same conclusion will follow, although they affirm that the
production of AEons sprang from Logos, as branches from a tree, since Logos
has his generation from their Father. For all [the AEons] are formed of the
same substance with the Father, differing from one another only in size,
and not in nature, and filling up the greatness of the Father, even as the
fingers complete the hand. If therefore He exists in passion and ignorance,
so must also those AEons who have been generated by Him. But if it is
impious to ascribe ignorance and passion to the Father of all, how can they
describe an AEon produced by Him as being passible; and while they ascribe
the same impiety to the very wisdom (Sophia) of God, how can they still
call themselves religious men?
7. If, again, they declare that their AEons were sent forth just as
rays are from the sun, then, since all are of the same substance and sprung
from the same source, all must either be capable of passion along with Him
who produced them, or all will remain impassible for ever. For they can no
longer maintain that, of beings so produced, some are impassible and others
passible. If, then, they declare all impassible, they do themselves destroy
their own argument. For how could the youngest AEon have suffered passion
if all were impassible? If, on the other hand, they declare that all
partook of this passion, as indeed some of them venture to maintain, then,
inasmuch as it originated with Logos,(1) but flowed onwards to Sophia, they
will thus be convicted of tracing back the passion to Logos, who is the(2)
Nous of this Propator, and so acknowledging the Nous of the Propator and
the Father Himself to have experienced passion. For the Father of all is
not to be regarded as a kind of compound Being, who can be separated from
his Nous (mind), as I have already shown; but Nous is the Father, and the
Father Nous. It necessarily follows, therefore, both that he who springs
from Him as Logos, or rather that Nous himself, since he is Logos, must be
perfect and impassible, and that those productions which proceed from him,
seeing that they are of the same substance with himself, should be perfect
and impassible, and should ever remain similar to him who produced them.
8. It cannot therefore longer be held, as these men teach, that Logos,
as occupying the third place in generation, was ignorant of the Father.
Such a thing might indeed perhaps be deemed probable in the case of the
generation of human beings, inasmuch as these frequently know nothing of
their parents; but it is altogether impossible in the case of the Logos of
the Father. For if, existing in the Father, he knows Him in whom he exists-
-that is, is not ignorant of himself--then those productions which issue
from him being his powers (faculties), and always present with him, will
not be ignorant of him who emitted them, any more than rays [may be
supposed to be] of the sun. It is impossible, therefore, that the Sophia
(wisdom) of God, she who is within the Pleroma, inasmuch as she has been
produced in such a manner, should have fallen under the influence of
passion, and conceived such ignorance. But it is possible that that Sophia
(wisdom) who pertains to [the scheme] of Valentinus, inasmuch as she is a
production of the devil, should fall into every kind of passion, and
exhibit the profoundest ignorance. For when they themselves bear testimony
concerning their mother, to the effect that she was the offspring of an
erring AEon, we need no longer search for a reason why the sons of such a
mother should be ever swimming in the depths of ignorance.
9. I am not aware that, besides these productions [which have been
mentioned], they are able to speak of any other; indeed, they have not been
known to me (although I have had very frequent discussions with them
concerning forms of this kind) as ever setting forth any other peculiar
kind of being as produced [in the manner under consideration]. This only
they maintain, that each one of these was so produced as to know merely
that one who produced him, while he was ignorant of the one who immediately
preceded. But they do not in this matter go forward [in their account] with
any kind of demonstration as to the manner in which these were produced, or
how such a thing could take place among spiritual beings. For, in
whatsoever way they may choose to go forward, they will feel themselves
bound (while, as regards the truth, they depart(3) entirely from right
reason) to proceed so far as to maintain that their Word, who springs from
the Nous of the Propator,--to maintain, I say, that he was produced in a
state of degeneracy. For [they hold] that perfect Nous, previously begotten
by the perfect Bythus, was not capable of rendering that production which
issued from him perfect, but [could only bring it forth] utterly blind to
the knowledge and greatness of the Father. They also maintain that the
Saviour exhibited an emblem of this mystery in the case of that man who was
blind from his birth,(4) since the AEon was in this manner produced by
Monogenes blind, that is, in ignorance, thus falsely ascribing ignorance
and blindness to the Word of God, who, according to their own theory, holds
the second [place of] production from the Propator. Admirable sophists, and
explorers of the sublimities of the unknown Father, and rehearsers of those
super-celestial mysteries "which the angels desire to look into!"(5)--that
they may learn that from the Nous of that Father who is above all, the Word
was produced blind, that is, ignorant of the Father who produced him!
10. But, ye miserable sophists, how could the Nous of the Father, or
rather the very Father Himself, since He is Nous and perfect in all things,
have produced his own Logos as an imperfect and blind AEon, when He was
able also to produce along with him the knowledge of the Father? As ye
affirm that Christ was generated after the rest, and yet declare that he
was produced perfect, much more then should Logos, who is anterior to him
in age, be produced by the same Nous, unquestionably perfect, and not
blind; nor could he, again, have produced AEons still blinder than himself,
until at last your Sophia, always utterly blinded, gave birth to so vast a
body of evils. And your Father is the cause of all this mischief; for ye
declare the magnitude and power of your Father to be the causes of
ignorance, assimilating Him to Bythus, and assigning this as a name to Him
who is the unnameable Father. But if ignorance is an evil, and ye declare
all evils to have derived their strength from it, while ye maintain that
the greatness and power of the Father is the cause of this ignorance, ye do
thus set Him forth as the author of [all] evils. For ye state as the cause
of evil this fact, that [no one] could contemplate His greatness. But if it
was really impossible for the Father to make Himself known from the
beginning to those [beings] that were formed by Him, He must in that case
be held free from blame, inasmuch as He could not remove the ignorance of
those who came after Him. But if, at a subsequent period, when He so willed
it, He could take away that ignorance which had increased with the
successive productions as they followed each other, and thus become deeply
seated in the AEons, much more, had He so willed it might He formerly have
prevented that ignorance, which as yet was not, from coining into
existence.
11. Since therefore, as soon as He so pleased, He did become known not
only to the AEons, but also to these men who lived in these latter times;
but, as He did not so please to be known from the beginning, He remained
unknown--the cause of ignorance is, according to you, the will of the
Father. For if He foreknew that these things would in future happen in such
a manner, why then did He not guard against the ignorance of these beings
before it had obtained a place among them, rather than afterwards, as if
under the influence of repentance, deal with it through the production of
Christ? For the knowledge which through Christ He conveyed to all, He might
long before have imparted through Logos, who was also the first-begotten of
Monogenes. Or if, knowing them beforehand, He willed that these things
should happen [as they have done], then the works of ignorance must endure
for ever, and never pass away. For the things which have been made in
accordance with the will of your Propator must continue along with the will
of Him who willed them; or if they pass away, the will of Him also who
decreed that they should have a being will pass away along with them. And
why did the AEons find rest and attain perfect knowledge through learning
[at last] that the Father is altogether(2) incomprehensible? They might
surely have possessed this knowledge before they became involved in
passion; for the greatness of the Father did not suffer diminution from the
beginning, so that these might(3) know that He was altogether
incomprehensible. For if, on account of His infinite greatness, He remained
unknown, He ought also on account of His infinite love to have preserved
those impassible who were produced by Him, since nothing hindered, and
expediency rather required, that they should have known from the beginning
that the Father was altogether incomprehensible.
CHAP. XVIII.--SOPHIA WAS NEVER REALLY IN IGNORANCE OR PASSION; HER
ENTHYMESIS COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SEPARATED FROM HERSELF, OR EXHIBITED SPECIAL
TENDENCIES OF ITS OWN.
1. How can it be regarded as otherwise than absurd, that they also
affirm this Sophia (wisdom) to have been involved in ignorance, and
degeneracy, and passion? For these things are alien and contrary to wisdom,
nor can they ever be qualities belonging to it. For wherever there is a
want of foresight, and an ignorance of the course of utility, there wisdom
does not exist. Let them therefore no longer call this suffering AEon,
Sophia, but let them give up either her name or her sufferings. And let
them, moreover, not call their entire Pleroma spiritual, if this AEon had a
place within it when she was involved in such a tumult of passion. For even
a vigorous soul, not to say a spiritual substance, would not pass through
any such experience.
2. And, again, how could her Enthymesis, going forth [from her] along
with the passion, have become a separate existence? For Enthymesis
(thought) is understood in connection with some person, and can never have
an isolated existence by itself. For a bad Enthymesis is destroyed and
absorbed by a good one, even as a state of disease is by health. What,
then, was the sort of Enthymesis which preceded that of passion? [It was
this]: to investigate the [nature of] the Father, and to consider His
greatness. But what did she afterwards become persuaded of, and so was
restored to health? [This, viz.], that the Father is incomprehensible, and
that He is past finding out. It was not, then, a proper feeling that she
wished to know the Father, and on this account she became passible; but
when she became persuaded that He is unsearchable, she was restored to
health. And even Nous himself, who was inquiring into the [nature of] the
Father, ceased, according to them, to continue his researches, on learning
that the Father is incomprehensible.
3. How then could the Enthymesis separately conceive passions, which
themselves also were her affections? For affection is necessarily connected
with an individual: it cannot come into being or exist apart by itself.
This opinion [of theirs], however, is not only untenable, but also opposed
to that which was spoken by our Lord: "Seek, and ye shall find."(1) For the
Lord renders His disciples perfect by their seeking after and finding the
Father; but that Christ of theirs, who is above, has rendered them perfect,
by the fact that He has commanded the AEons not to seek after the Father,
persuading them that, though they should labour hard, they would not find
Him. And they(2) declare that they themselves are perfect, by the fact that
they maintain they have found their Bythus; while the AEons [have been made
perfect] through means of this, that He is unsearchable who was inquired
after by them.
4. Since, therefore, the Enthymesis herself could not exist separately,
apart from the AEon, [it is obvious that] they bring forward still greater
falsehood concerning her passion, when they further proceed to divide and
separate it from her, while they declare that it was the substance of
matter. As if God were not light, and as if no Word existed who could
convict them, and overthrow their wickedness. For it is certainly true,
that whatsoever the AEon thought, that she also suffered; and what she
suffered, that she also thought. And her Enthymesis was, according to them,
nothing else than the passion of one thinking how she might comprehend the
incomprehensible. And thus Enthymesis (thought) was the passion; for she
was thinking of things impossible. How then could affection and passion be
separated and set apart from the Enthymesis, so as to become the substance
of so vast a material creation, when Enthymesis herself was the passion,
and the passion Enthymesis? Neither, therefore, can Enthymesis apart from
the AEon, nor the affections apart from Enthymesis, separately possess
substance; and thus once more their system breaks down and is destroyed.
5. But how did it come to pass that the AEon was both dissolved [into
her component parts], and became subject to passion? She was undoubtedly of
the same substance as the Pleroma; but the entire Pleroma was of the
Father. Now, any substance, when brought in contact with what is of a
similar nature, will not be dissolved into nothing, nor will be in danger
of perishing, but will rather continue and increase, such as fire in fire,
spirit in spirit, and water in water; but those which are of a contrary
nature to each other do, [when they meet,] suffer and are changed and
destroyed. And, in like manner, if there had been a production of light, it
would not suffer passion, or recur any danger in light like itself, but
would rather glow with the greater brightness, and increase, as the day
does from [the increasing brilliance of] the sun; for they maintain that
Bythus [himself] was the image of their father(3) (Sophia). Whatever
animals are alien [in habits] and strange to each other, or are mutually
opposed in nature, fall into danger [on meeting together], and are
destroyed; whereas, on the other hand, those who are accustomed to each
other, and of a harmonious disposition, suffer no peril from being together
in the same place, but rather secure both safety and life by such a fact.
If, therefore, this AEon was produced by the Pleroma of the same substance
as the whole of it, she could never have undergone change, since she was
consorting with beings similar to and familiar with herself, a spiritual
essence among those that were spiritual. For fear, terror, passion,
dissolution, and such like, may perhaps occur through the struggle of
contraries among such beings as we are, who are possessed of bodies; but
among spiritual beings, and those that have the light diffused among them,
no such calamities can possibly happen. But these men appear to me to have
endowed their AEon with the [same sort of] passion as belongs to that
character in the comic poet Menunder,(4) who was himself deeply in love,
but an object of hatred [to his beloved]. For those who have invented such
opinions have rather had an idea and mental conception of some unhappy
lover among men, than of a spiritual and divine substance.
6. Moreover, to meditate how to search into [the nature of] the perfect
Father, and to have a desire to exist within Him, and to have a
comprehension of His [greatness], could not entail the stain of ignorance
or passion, and that upon a spiritual AEon; but would rather [give rise to]
perfection, and impassibility, and truth. For they do not say that even
they, though they be but men, by meditating on Him who was before them,--
and while now, as it were, comprehending the perfect, and being placed
within the knowledge of Him,--are thus involved in a passion of perplexity,
but rather attain to the knowledge and apprehension of truth. For they
affirm that the Saviour said, "Seek, and ye shall find," to His disciples
with this view, that they should seek after Him who, by means of
imagination, has been conceived of by them as being above the Maker of all-
-the ineffable Bythus; and they desire themselves to be regarded as "the
perfect;" because they have sought and found the perfect One, while they
are still on earth. Yet they declare that that AEon who was within the
Pleroma, a wholly spiritual being, by seeking after the Propator, and
endeavouring to find a place within His greatness, and desiring to have a
comprehension of the truth of the Father, fell down into [the endurance of]
passion, and such a passion that, unless she had met with that Power who
upholds all things, she would have been dissolved into the general
substance [of the AEons], and thus come to an end of her [personal]
existence.
7. Absurd is such presumption, and truly an opinion of men totally
destitute of the truth. For, that this AEon is superior to themselves, and
of greater antiquity, they themselves acknowledge, according to their own
system, when they affirm that they are the fruit of the Enthymesis of that
AEon who suffered passion, so that this AEon is the father of their mother,
that is, their own grandfather. And to them, the later grandchildren, the
search after the Father brings, as they maintain, truth, and perfection,
and establishment, and deliverance from unstable matter, and reconciliation
to the Father; but on their grandfather this same search entailed
ignorance, and passion, and terror, and perplexity, from which
[disturbances] they also declare that the substance of matter was formed.
To say, therefore, that the search after and investigation of the perfect
Father, and the desire for communion and union with Him, were things quite
beneficial to them, but to an AEon, from whom also they derive their
origin, these things were the cause of dissolution and destruction, how can
such assertions be otherwise viewed than as totally inconsistent, foolish,
and irrational? Those, too, who listen to these teachers, truly blind
themselves, while they possess blind guides, justly [are left to] fall
along with them into the gulf of ignorance which lies below them.
CHAP. XIX.--ABSURDITIES OF THE HERETICS AS TO THEIR OWN ORIGIN: THEIR
OPINIONS RESPECTING THE DEMIURGE SHOWN TO BE EQUALLY UNTENABLE AND
RIDICULOUS.
1. But what sort of talk also is this concerning their seed--that it
was conceived by the mother according to the configuration of those angels
who wait upon the Saviour,--shapeless, without form, and imperfect; and
that it was deposited in the Demiurge without his knowledge, in order that
through his instrumentality it might attain to perfection and form in that
soul which he had, [so to speak,] filled with seed? This is to affirm, in
the first place, that those angels who wait upon their Saviour are
imperfect, and with out figure or form; if indeed that which was conceived
according to their appearance was generated any such kind of being [as has
been described].
2. Then, in the next place, as to their saying that the Creator was
ignorant of that deposit of seed which took place into him, and again, of
that impartation of seed which was made by him to man, their words are
futile and vain, and are in no way susceptible of proof. For how could he
have been ignorant of it, if that seed had possessed any substance and
peculiar properties? If, on the other hand, it was without substance and
without quality, and so was really nothing, then, as a matter of course, he
was ignorant of it. For those things which have a certain motion of their
own, and quality, either of heat, or swiftness, or sweetness, or which
differ from others in brilliance, do not escape the notice even of men,
since they mingle in the sphere of human action: far less can they [be
hidden from] God, the Maker of this universe. With reason, however, [is it
said, that] their seed was not known to Him, since it is without any
quality of general utility, and without the substance requisite for any
action, and is, in fact, a pure nonentity. It really seems to me, that,
with a view to such opinions, the Lord expressed Himself thus: "For every
idle word that men speak, they shall give account on the day of
judgment."(1) For all teachers of a like character to these, who fill men's
ears with idle talk, shall, when they stand at the throne of judgment,
render an account for those things which they have vainly imagined and
falsely uttered against the Lord, proceeding, as they have done, to such a
height of audacity as to declare of themselves that, on account of the
substance of their seed, they are acquainted with the spiritual Pleroma,
because that man who dwells within reveals to them the true Father; for the
animal nature required(2) to be disciplined by means of the senses. But
[they hold that] the Demiurge, while receiving into himself the whole of
this seed, through its being deposited in him by the Mother, still remained
utterly ignorant of all things, and had no understanding of anything
connected with the Pleroma.
3. And that they are the truly "spiritual," inasmuch as a certain particle
of the Father of the universe has been deposited in their souls, since,
according to their assertions, they have souls formed of the same substance
as the Demiurge himself, yet that he, although he received from the Mother,
once for all, the whole [of the divine] seed, and possessed it in himself,
still remained of an animal nature, and had not the slightest understanding
of those things which are above, which things they boast that they
themselves understand, while they are still on earth;--does not this crown
all possible absurdity? For to imagine that the very same seed conveyed
knowledge and perfection to the souls of these men, while it only gave rise
to ignorance in the God who made them, is an opinion that can be held only
by those utterly frantic, and totally destitute of common sense.
4. Further, it is also a most absurd and groundless thing for them to
say that the seed was, by being thus deposited, reduced to form and
increased, and so was prepared for all the reception of perfect
rationality. For there will be in it an admixture of matter--that substance
which they hold to have been derived from ignorance and defect; [and this
will prove itself] more apt and useful than was the light of their Father,
if indeed, when born, according to the contemplation of that [light], it
was without form or figure, but derived from this [matter], form, and
appearance, and increase, and perfection. For if that light which proceeds
from the Pleroma was the cause to a spiritual being that it possessed
neither form, nor appearance, nor its own special magnitude, while its
descent to this world added all these things to it, and brought it to
perfection, then a sojourn here (which they also term darkness) would seem
much more efficacious and useful than was the light of their Father. But
how can it be regarded as other than ridiculous, to affirm that their
mother ran the risk of being almost extinguished in matter, and was almost
on the point of being destroyed by it, had she not then with difficulty
stretched herself outwards, and leaped, [as it were,] out of herself,
receiving assistance from the Father; but that her seed increased in this
same matter, and received a form, and was made fit for the reception of
perfect rationality; and this, too, while "bubbling up" among substances
dissimilar and unfamiliar to itself, according to their own declaration
that the earthly is opposed to the spiritual, and the spiritual to the
earthly? How, then, could "a little particle,"(1) as they say, increase,
and receive shape, and reach perfection, in the midst of substances
contrary to and unfamiliar to itself?
5. But further, and in addition to what has been said, the question
occurs, Did their mother, when she beheld the angels, bring forth the seed
all at once, or only one by one [in succession]? If she brought forth the
whole simultaneously and at once, that which was thus produced cannot now
be of an infantile character: its descent, therefore, into those men who
now exist must be superfluous.(2) But if one by one, then she did not form
her conception according to the figure of those angels whom she beheld;
for, contemplating them all together, and once for all, so as to conceive
by them, she ought to have brought forth once for all the offspring of
those from whose forms she had once for all conceived.
6. Why was it, too, that, beholding the angels along with the Saviour,
she did indeed conceive their images, but not that of the Saviour, who is
far more beautiful than they? Did He not please her; and did she not, on
that account, conceive after His likeness?(3) How was it, too, that the
Demiurge, whom they can call an animal being, having, as they maintain, his
own special magnitude and figure, was produced perfect as respects his
substance; while that which is spiritual, which also ought to be more
effective than that which is animal, was sent forth imperfect, and he
required to descend into a soul, that in it he might obtain form, and thus
becoming perfect, might be rendered fit for the reception of perfect
reason? If, then, he obtains form in mere earthly and animal men, he can no
longer be said to be after the likeness of angels whom they call lights,
but [after the likeness] of those men who are here below. For he will not
possess in that case the likeness and appearance of angels, but of those
souls in whom also he receives shape; just as water when poured into a
vessel takes the form of that vessel, and if on any occasion it happens to
congeal in it, it will acquire the form of the vessel in which it has thus
been frozen, since souls themselves possess the figure(4) of the body [in
which they dwell]; for they themselves have been adapted to the vessel [in
which they exist], as I have said before. If, then, that seed [referred to]
is here solidified and formed into a definite shape, it will possess the
figure of a man. and not the form of the angels. How is it possible,
therefore, that that seed should be after images of the angels, seeing it
has obtained a form after the likeness of men? Why, again, since it was of
a spiritual nature, had it any need of descending into flesh? For what is
carnal stands in need of that which is spiritual, if indeed it is to be
saved, that in it it may be sanctified and cleared from all impurity, and
that what is mortal may be swallowed up by immortality;(1) but that which
is spiritual has no need whatever of those things which are here below. For
it is not we who benefit it, but it that improves us.
7. Still more manifestly is that talk of theirs concerning their seed
proved to be false, and that in a way which must be evident to every one,
by the fact that they declare those souls which have received seed from the
Mother to be superior to all others; wherefore also they have been honoured
by the Demiurge, and constituted princes, and kings, and priests. For if
this were true, the high priest Caiaphas, and Annas, and the rest of the
chief priests, arid doctors of the law, and rulers of the people, would
have been the first to believe in the Lord, agreeing as they did with
respect(2) to that relationship; and even before them should have been
Herod the king. But since neither he, nor the chief priests, nor the
rulers, nor the eminent of the people, turned to Him [in faith], but, on
the contrary, those who sat begging by the highway, the deaf, and the
blind, while He was rejected and despised by others, according to what Paul
declares, "For ye see your calling, brethen, that there are not many wise
men among you, not many noble, not many mighty; but those things of the
world which were despised hath God chosen."(3) Such souls, therefore, were
not superior to others on account of the seed deposited in them, nor on
this account were they honoured by the Demiurge.
8. As to the point, then, that their system is weak and untenable as
well as utterly chimerical, enough has been said. For it is not needful, to
use a common proverb, that one should drink up the ocean who wishes to
learn that its water is salt. But, just as in the case of a statue which is
made of clay, but coloured on the outside that it may be thought to be of
gold, while it really is of clay, any one who takes out of it a small
particle, and thus laying it open reveals the clay, will set free those who
seek the truth from a false opinion; in the same way have I (by exposing
not a small part only, but the several heads of their system which are of
the greatest importance) shown to as many as do not wish wittingly to be
led astray, what is wicked, deceitful, seductive, and pernicious, connected
with the school of the Valentinians, and all those other heretics who
promulgate(4) wicked opinions respecting the Demiurge, that is, the
Fashioner and Former of this universe, and who is in fact the only true
God--exhibiting, [as I have done,] how easily their views are overthrown.
9. For who that has any intelligence, and possesses only a small
proportion of truth, can tolerate them, when they affirm that there is
another god above the Creator; and that there is another Monogenes as well
as another Word of God, whom also they describe as having been produced in
[a state of] degeneracy; and another Christ, whom they assert to have been
formed, along with the Holy Spirit, later than the rest of the AEons; and
another Saviour, who, they say, did not proceed from the Father of all, but
was a kind of joint production of those AEons who were formed in [a state
of] degeneracy, and that He was produced of necessity on account of this
very degeneracy? It is thus their opinion that, unless the AEons had been
in a state of ignorance and degeneracy, neither Christ, nor the Holy
Spirit, nor Horos, nor the Saviour, nor the angels, nor their Mother, nor
her seed, nor the rest of the fabric of the world, would have been produced
at all; but the universe would have been a desert, and destitute of the
many good things which exist in it. They are therefore not only chargeable
with impiety against the Creator, declaring Him the fruit of a defect, but
also against Christ and the Holy Spirit, affirming that they were produced
on account of that defect; and, in like manner, that the Saviour [was
produced] subsequently to [the existence of] that defect. And who will
tolerate the remainder of their vain talk, which they cunningly endeavour
to accommodate to the parables, and have in this way plunged both
themselves, and those who give credit to them, in the profoundest depths of
impiety?
CHAP. XX.--FUTILITY OF THE ARGUMENTS ADDUCED TO DEMONSTRATE THE SUFFERINGS
OF THE TWELFTH AEON, FROM THE PARABLES, THE TREACHERY OF JUDAS, AND THE
PASSION OF OUR SAVIOUR.
1. That they improperly and illogically apply both the parables and the
actions of the Lord to their falsely-devised system, I prove as follows:
They endeavour, for instance, to demonstrate that passion which, they say,
happened in the case of the twelfth AEon, from this fact, that the passion
of the Saviour was brought about by the twelfth apostle, and happened in
the twelfth month. For they hold that He preached [only] for one year after
His baptism. They maintain also that the same thing was clearly set forth
in the case of her who suffered from the issue of blood. For the woman
suffered during twelve years, and through touching the hem of the Saviour's
garment she was made whole by that power which went forth from the Saviour,
and which, they affirm, had a previous existence. For that Power who
suffered was stretching herself outwards and flowing into immensity, so
that she was in danger of being dissolved into the general substance [of
the AEons]; but then, touching the primary Tetrad, which is typified by the
hem of the garment, she was arrested, and ceased from her passion.
2. Then, again, as to their assertion that the passion of the twelfth
AEon was proved through the conduct of Judas, how is it possible that Judas
can be compared [with this AEon] as being an emblem of her--he who was
expelled from the number of the twelve,(1) and never restored to his place?
For that AEon, whose type they declare Judas to be, after being separated
from her Enthymesis, was restored or recalled [to her former position]; but
Judas was deprived [of his office], and cast out, while Matthias was
ordained in his place, according to what is written, "And his bishopric let
another take."(2) They ought therefore to maintain that the twelfth AEon
was cast out of the Pleroma, and that another was produced, or sent forth
to fill her place; if, that is to say, she is pointed at in Judas.
Moreover, they tell us that it was the AEon herself who suffered, but Judas
was the betrayer, [and not the sufferer.] Even they themselves acknowledge
that it was the suffering Christ, and not Judas, who came to [the endurance
of] passion. How, then, could Judas, the betrayer of Him who had to suffer
for our salvation, be the type and image of that AEon who suffered?
3. But, in truth, the passion of Christ was neither similar to the
passion of the AEon, nor did it take place in similar circumstances. For
the AEon underwent a passion of dissolution and destruction, so that she
who suffered was in danger also of being destroyed. But the Lord, our
Christ, underwent a valid, and not a merely(3) accidental passion; not only
was He Himself not in danger of being destroyed, but He also established
fallen man(4) by His own strength, and recalled him to incorruption. The
AEon, again, underwent passion while she was seeking after the Father, and
was notable to find Him; but the Lord suffered that He might bring those
who have wandered from the Father, back to knowledge and to His fellowship.
The search into the greatness of the Father became to her a passion leading
to destruction; but the Lord, having suffered, and bestowing the knowledge
of the Father, conferred on us salvation. Her passion, as they declare,
gave origin to a female offspring, weak, infirm, unformed, and ineffective;
but His passion gave rise to strength and power. For the Lord, through
means of suffering, "ascending into the lofty place, led captivity captive,
gave gifts to men,"(5) and conferred on those that believe in Him the power
"to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and on all the power of the
enemy,"(6) that is, of the leader of apostasy. Our Lord also by His passion
destroyed death, and dispersed error, and put an end to corruption, and
destroyed ignorance, while He manifested life and revealed truth, and
bestowed the gift of incorruption. But their AEon, when she had suffered,
established(7) ignorance, and brought forth a substance without shape, out
of which all material works have been produced--death, corruption, error,
and such like.
4. Judas, then, the twelfth in order of the disciples, was not a type
of the suffering AEon, nor, again, was the passion of the Lord; for these
two things have been shown to be in every respect mutually dissimilar and
inharmonious. This is the case not only as respects the points which I have
already mentioned, but with regard to the very number. For that Judas the
traitor is the twelfth in order, is agreed upon by all, there being twelve
apostles mentioned by name in the Gospel. But this AEon is not the twelfth,
but the thirtieth; for, according to the views under consideration, there
were not twelve AEons only produced by the will of the Father, nor was she
sent forth the twelfth in order: they reckon her, [on the contrary,] as
having been produced in the thirtieth place. How, then, can Judas, the
twelfth in order, be the type and image of that AEon who occupies the
thirtieth place?
5. But if they say that Judas in perishing was the image of her
Enthymesis, neither in this way will the image bear any analogy to that
truth which [by hypothesis] corresponds to it. For the Enthymesis having
been separated fromt he AEon, and itself afterwards receiving a shape from
Christ,(8) then being made a partaker of intelligence by the Saviour, and
having formed all things which are outside of the Pleroma, after the image
of those which are within the Pleroma, is said at last to have been
received by them into the Pleroma, and, according to [the principle of]
conjunction, to have been united to that Saviour who was formed out of all.
But Judas having been once for all cast away, never returns into the number
of the disciples; otherwise a different person would not have been chosen
to fill his place. Besides, the Lord also declared regarding him, "Woe to
the man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed;" (1) and, "It were better
for him if he had never been born;"(2) and he was called the "son of
perdition"(3) by Him. If, however, they say that Judas was a type of the
Enthymesis, not as separated from the AEon, but of the passion entwined
with her, neither in this way can the number twelve be regarded as a
[fitting] type of the number three. For in the one case Judas was cast
away, and Matthias was ordained instead of him; but in the other case the
AEon is said to have been in danger of dissolution and destruction, and
[there are also] her Enthymesis and passion: for they markedly distinguish
Enthymesis from the passion; and they represent the AEon as being restored,
and Enthymesis as acquiring form, but the passion, when separated from
these, as becoming matter. Since, therefore, there are thus these three,
the AEon, her Enthymesis, and her passion, Judas and Matthias, being only
two, cannot be the types of them.
CHAP. XXI.--THE TWELVE APOSTLES WERE NOT A TYPE OF THE AEONS.
1. If, again, they maintain that the twelve apostles were a type only
of that group of twelve AEons which Anthropos in conjunction with Ecclesia
produced, then let them produce ten other apostles as a type of those ten
remaining AEons, who, as they declare, were produced by Logos and Zoe. For
it is unreasonable to suppose that the junior, and for that reason inferior
AEons, were set forth by the Saviour through the election of the apostles,
while their seniors, and on this account their superiors, were not thus
foreshown; since the Saviour (if, that is to say, He chose the apostles
with this view, that by means of them He might show forth the AEons who are
in the Pleroma) might have chosen other ten apostles also, and likewise
other eight before these, that thus He might set forth the original and
primary Ogdoad. He could not,(4) in regard to the second [Duo] Decad, show
forth [any emblem of it] through the number of the apostles being [already]
constituted a type. For [He made choice of no such other number of
disciples; but] after the twelve apostles, our Lord is found to have sent
seventy others before Him.(5) Now seventy cannot possibly be the type
either of an Ogdoad, a Decad, or a Triacontad. What is the reason, then,
that the inferior AEons are, as I have said, represented by means of the
apostles; but the superior, from whom, too, the former derived their being,
are not prefigured at all? But if(6) the twelve apostles were chosen with
this object, that the number of the twelve AEons might be indicated by
means of them, then the seventy also ought to have been chosen to be the
type of seventy AEons; and in that case, they must affirm that the AEons
are no longer thirty, but eighty-two in number. For He who made choice of
the apostles, that they might be a type of those AEons existing in the
Pleroma, would never have constituted them types of some and not of others;
but by means of the apostles He would have tried to preserve an image and
to exhibit a type of those AEons that exist in the Pleroma.
2. Moreover we must not keep silence respecting Paul, but demand from
them after the type of what AEon that apostle has been handed down to us,
unless perchance [they affirm that he is a representative] of the Saviour
compounded of them [all], who derived his being from the collected gifts of
the whole, and whom they term All Things, as having been formed out of them
all. Respecting this being the poet Hesiod has strikingly expressed
himself, styling him Pandora--that is, "The gift of all"--for this reason,
that the best gift in the possession of all was centred in him. In
describing these gifts the following account is given: Hermes (so(7) he is
called in the Greek language), Haimuli'ous(8) te lo'gous kai epi'klopon
h^thos autou`s Ka'ttheto (or to express this in the English(9) language),
"implanted words of fraud and deceit in their minds, and thievish habits,"
for the purpose of leading foolish men astray, that such should believe
their falsehoods. For their Mother--that is, Leto(10)--secretly stirred
them up (whence also she is called Leto,(11) according to the meaning of
the Greek word, because she secretly stirred up men), without the
knowledge of the Demiurge, to give forth profound and unspeakable mysteries
to itching ears.(12) And not only did their Mother bring it about that this
mystery should be declared by Hesiod; but very skilfully also by means of
the lyric poet Pindar, when he describes to the Demiurge(13) the case of
Pelops, whose flesh was cut in pieces by the Father, and then collected and
brought together, and compacted anew by all the gods,(1) did she in this
way indicate Pandora and these men having their consciences seared(2) by
her, declaring, as they maintain, the very same things, are [proved] of the
same family and spirit as the others.
CHAP. XXII.--THE THIRTY AEONS ARE NOT TYPIFIED BY THE FACT THAT CHRIST WAS
BAPTIZED IN HIS THIRTIETH YEAR: HE DID NOT SUFFER IN THE TWELFTH MONTH
AFTER HIS BAPTISM, BUT WAS MORE THAN FIFTY YEARS OLD WHEN HE DIED.
1. I have shown that the number thirty fails them in every respect; too
few AEons, as they represent them, being at one time found within the
Pleroma, and then again too many [to correspond with that number]. There
are not, therefore, thirty AEons, nor did the Saviour come to be baptized
when He was thirty years old, for this reason, that He might show forth the
thirty silent(3) AEons of their system, otherwise they must first of all
separate and eject [the Saviour] Himself from the Pleroma of all. Moreover,
they affirm that He suffered in the twelfth month, so that He continued to
preach for one year after His baptism; and they endeavour to establish this
point out of the prophet (for it is written, "To proclaim the acceptable
year of the Lord, and the day of retribution"(4)), being truly blind,
inasmuch as they affirm they have found out the mysteries of Bythus, yet
not understanding that which is called by Isaiah the acceptable year of the
Lord, nor the day of retribution. For the prophet neither speaks concerning
a day which includes the space of twelve hours, nor of a year the length of
which is twelve months. For even they themselves acknowledge that the
prophets have very often expressed themselves in parables and allegories,
and [are] not [to be understood] according to the mere sound of the words.
2. That, then, was called the day of retribution on which the Lord will
render to every one according to his works--that is, the judgment. The
acceptable year of the Lord, again, is this present time, in which those
who believe Him are called by Him, and become acceptable to God--that is,
the whole time from His advent onwards to the consummation [of all things],
during which He acquires to Himself as fruits [of the scheme of mercy]
those who are saved. For, according to the phraseology of the prophet, the
day of retribution follows the [acceptable] year; and the prophet will be
proved guilty of falsehood if the Lord preached only for a year, and if he
speaks of it. For where is the day of retribution? For the year has passed,
and the day of retribution has not yet come; but He still "makes His sun to
rise upon the good and upon the evil, and sends rain upon the just and
unjust."(5) And the righteous suffer persecution, are afflicted, and are
slain, while sinners are possessed of abundance, and "drink with the sound
of the harp and psaltery, but do not regard the works of the Lord."(6) But,
according to the language [used by the prophet], they ought to be combined,
and the day of retribution to follow the [acceptable] year. For the words
are, "to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of
retribution." This present time, therefore, in which men are called and
saved by the Lord, is properly understood to be denoted by "the acceptable
year of the Lord;" and there follows on this "the day of retribution," that
is, the judgment. And the time thus referred to is not called "a year"
only, but is also named "a day" both by the prophet and by Paul, of whom
the apostle, calling to mind the Scripture, says in the Epistle addressed
to the Romans, "As it is written, for thy sake we are killed all the day
long, we are counted as sheep for the slaughter."(7) But here the
expression "all the day long" is put for all this time during which we
suffer persecution, and are killed as sheep. As then this day does not
signify one which consists of twelve hours, but the whole time during which
believers in Christ suffer and are put to death for His sake, so also the
year there mentioned does not denote one which consists of twelve months,
but the whole time of faith during which men hear and believe the preaching
of the Gospel, and those become acceptable to God who unite themselves to
Him.
3. But it is greatly to be wondered at, how it has come to pass that,
while affirming that they have found out the mysteries of God, they have
not examined the Gospels to ascertain how often after His baptism the Lord
went up, at the time of the passover, to Jerusalem, in accordance with what
was the practice of the Jews from every land, and every year, that they
should assemble at this period in Jerusalem, and there celebrate the feast
of the passover. First of all, after He had made the water wine at Cana of
Galilee, He went up to the festival day of the passover, on which occasion
it is written, "For many believed in Him, when they saw the signs which He
did,"(8) as John the disciple of the Lord records. Then, again, withdrawing
Himself [from Judaea], He is found in Samaria; on which occasion, too, He
convened with the Samaritan woman, and while at a distance, cured the son
of the centurion by a word, saying, "Go thy way, thy son liveth."(1)
Afterwards He went up, the second time, to observe the festival day of the
passover(2) in Jerusalem; on which occasion He cured the paralytic man, who
had lain beside the pool thirty-eight years, bidding him rise, take up his
couch, and depart. Again, withdrawing from thence to the other side of the
sea of Tiberias,(3) He there seeing a great crowd had followed Him, fed all
that multitude with five loaves of bread, and twelve baskets of fragments
remained over and above. Then, when He had raised Lazarus from the dead,
and plots were formed against Him by the Pharisees, He withdrew to a city
called Ephraim; and from that place, as it is written "He came to Bethany
six days before the passover,"(4) and going up from Bethany to Jerusalem,
He there ate the passover, and suffered on the day following. Now, that
these three occasions of the passover are not included within one year,
every person whatever must acknowledge. And that the special month in which
the passover was celebrated, and in which also the Lord suffered, was not
the twelfth, but the first, those men who boast that they know all things,
if they know not this, may learn it from Moses. Their explanation,
therefore, both of the year and of the twelfth month has been proved false,
and they ought to reject either their explanation or the Gospel; otherwise
[this unanswerable question forces itself upon them], How is it possible
that the Lord preached for one year only?
4. Being thirty years old when He came to be baptized, and then
possessing the full age of a Master,(5) He came to Jerusalem, so that He
might be properly acknowledged(6) by all as a Master. For He did not seem
one thing while He was another, as those affirm who describe Him as being
man only in appearance; but what He was, that He also appeared to be. Being
a Master, therefore, He also possessed the age of a Master, not despising
or evading any condition of humanity, nor setting aside in Himself that law
which He had(7) appointed for the human race, but sanctifying every age, by
that period corresponding to it which belonged to Himself. For He came to
save all through means of Himself--all, I say, who through Him are born
again to God(8)--infants,(9) and children, and boys, and youths, and old
men. He therefore passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants,
thus sanctifying infants; a child for children, thus sanctifying those who
are of this age, being at the same time made to them an example of piety,
righteousness, and submission; a youth for youths, becoming an example to
youths, and thus sanctifying them for the Lord. So likewise He was an old
man for old men, that He might be a perfect Master for all, not merely as
respects the setting forth of the truth, but also as regards age,
sanctifying at the same time the aged also, and becoming an example to them
likewise. Then, at last, He came on to death itself, that He might be "the
first-born from the dead, that in all things He might have the pre-
eminence,"(10) the Prince of life,(11) existing before all, and going
before all.(12)
5. They, however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding
that which is written, "to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,"
maintain that He preached for one year only, and then suffered in the
twelfth month. [In speaking thus], they are forgetful to their own
disadvantage, destroying His whole work, and robbing Him of that age which
is both more necessary and more honourable than any other; that more
advanced age, I mean, during which also as a teacher He excelled all
others. For how could He have had disciples, if He did not teach? And how
could He have taught, unless He had reached the age of a Master? For when
He came to be baptized, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but
was beginning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has
mentioned His years, has expressed it: "Now Jesus was, as it were,
beginning to be thirty years old,"(13) when He came to receive baptism);
and, [according to these men,] He preached only one year reckoning from His
baptism. On completing His thirtieth year He suffered, being in fact still
a young man, and who had by no means attained to advanced age. Now, that
the first stage of early life embraces thirty years,(1) and that this
extends onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the
fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which
our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even
as the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia
with John, the disciple of the Lord, [affirming] that John conveyed to them
that information.(2) And he remained among them up to the times of Trajan.
(3) Some of them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also,
and heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the
[validity of] the statement. Whom then should we rather believe? Whether
such men as these, or Ptolemaeus, who never saw the apostles, and who never
even in his dreams attained to the slightest trace of an apostle?
6. But, besides this, those very Jews who then disputed with the Lord
Jesus Christ have most clearly indicated the same thing. For when the Lord
said to them, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it,
and was glad," they answered Him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and
hast Thou seen Abraham?"(4) Now, such language is fittingly applied to one
who has already passed the age of forty, without having as yet reached his
fiftieth year, yet is not far from this latter period. But to one who is
only thirty years old it would unquestionably be said, "Thou art not yet
forty years old." For those who wished to convict Him of falsehood would
certainly not extend the number of His years far beyond the age which they
saw He had attained; but they mentioned a period near His real age, whether
they had truly ascertained this out of the entry in the public register, or
simply made a conjecture from what they observed that He was above forty
years old, and that He certainly was not one of only thirty years of age.
For it is altogether unreasonable to suppose that they were mistaken by
twenty years, when they wished to prove Him younger than the times of
Abraham. For what they saw, that they also expressed; and He whom they
beheld was not a mere phantasm, but an actual being(5) of flesh and blood.
He did not then wont much of being fifty years old;(6) and, in accordance
with that fact, they said to Him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and
hast Thou seen Abraham?" He did not therefore preach only for one year, nor
did He suffer in the twelfth month of the year. For the period included
between the thirtieth and the fiftieth year can never be regarded as one
year, unless indeed, among their AEons, there be so long years assigned to
those who sit in their ranks with Bythus in the Pleroma; of which beings
Homer the poet, too, has spoken, doubtless being inspired by the Mother of
their [system of] error:--
Hoi de` theoi` pa`r Zhni` kathh'menoi hgorownto
Chruse'w(i) en dapedw(i):(7)
which we may thus render into English:(8)--
"The gods sat round, while Jove presided o'er, And converse held upon the
golden floor."
CHAP. XXIII.--THE WOMAN WHO SUFFERED FROM AN ISSUE OF BLOOD WAS NO TYPE OF
THE SUFFERING AEON.
1. Moreover, their ignorance comes out in a clear light with respect to
the case of that woman who, suffering from an issue of blood, touched the
hem of the Lord's garment, and so was made whole; for they maintain that
through her was shown forth that twelfth power who suffered passion, and
flowed out towards immensity, that is, the twelfth AEon. [This ignorance of
theirs appears] first, because, as I have shown, according to their own
system, that was not the twelfth AEon. But even granting them this point
[in the meantime], there being twelve AEons, eleven of these are said to
have continued impassible, while the twelfth suffered passion; but the
woman, on the other hand, being healed in the twelfth year, it is manifest
that she had continued to suffer during eleven years, and was healed in the
twelfth. If indeed they were to say that eleven AEons were involved in
passion, but the twelfth one was healed, it would then be a plausible
thing to say that the woman was a type of these. But since she suffered
during eleven years, and [all that time] obtained no cure, but was healed
in the twelfth year, in what way can she be a type of the twelfth of the
AEons, eleven of whom, [according to hypothesis,] did not suffer at all,
but the twelfth alone participated in suffering? For a type and emblem is,
no doubt, sometimes diverse from the truth [signified] as to matter and
substance; but it ought, as to the general form and features, to maintain a
likeness [to what is typified], and in this way to shadow forth by means of
things present those which are yet to come.
2. And not only in the case of this woman have the years of her
infirmity (which they affirm to fit in with their figment) been mentioned,
but, lo! another woman was also healed, after suffering in like manner for
eighteen years; concerning whom the Lord said, "And ought not this
daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has bound during eighteen years, to be set
free on the Sabbath-day?"(1) If, then, the former was a type of the twelfth
Aeon that suffered, the latter should also be a type of the eighteenth Aeon
in suffering. But they cannot maintain this; otherwise their primary and
original Ogdoad will be included in the number of Aeons who suffered
together. Moreover, there was also a certain other person(2) healed by the
Lord, after he had suffered for eight-and-thirty years: they ought
therefore to affirm that the Aeon who occupies the thirty-eighth place
suffered. For if they assert that the things which were done by the Lord
were types of what took place in the Pleroma, the type ought to be
preserved throughout. But they can neither adapt to their fictitious system
the case of her who was cured after eighteen years, nor of him who was
cured after thirty-eight years. Now, it is in every way absurd and
inconsistent to declare that the Saviour preserved the type in certain
cases, while He did not do so in others. The type of the woman, therefore,
[with the issue of blood] is shown to have no analogy to their system of
Aeons.(3)
CHAP. XXIV.--FOLLY OF THE ARGUMENTS DERIVED BY THE HERETICS FROM NUMBERS,
LETTERS, AND SYLLABLES.
1. This very thing, too, still further demonstrates their opinion
false, and their fictitious system untenable, that they endeavour to bring
forward proofs of it, sometimes through means of numbers and the syllables
of names, sometimes also through the letter of syllables, and yet again
through those numbers which are, according to the practice followed by the
Greeks, contained in [different] letters;--[this, I say,] demonstrates in
the clearest manner their overthrow or confusion,(4) as well as the
untenable and perverse character of their [professed] knowledge. For,
transferring the name Jesus, which belongs to another language, to the
numeration of the Greeks, they sometimes call it "Episemon,"(5) as having
six letters, and at other times "the Plenitude of the Ogdoads," as
containing the number eight hundred and eighty-eight. But His
[corresponding] Greek name, which is "Soter," that is, Saviour, because it
does not fit in with their system, either with respect to numerical value
or as regards its letters, they pass over in silence. Yet surely, if they
regard the names of the Lord, as, in accordance with the preconceived
purpose of the Father, by means of their numerical value and letters,
indicating number in the Pleroma, Soter, as being a Greek name, ought by
means of its letters and the numbers [expressed by these], in virtue of its
being Greek, to show forth the mystery of the Pleroma. But the case is not
so, because it is a word of five letters, and its numerical value is one
thousand four hundred and eight.(6) But these things do not in any way
correspond with their Pleroma; the account, therefore, which they give of
transactions in the Pleroma cannot be true.
2. Moreover, Jesus, which is a word belonging to the proper tongue of
the Hebrews, contains, as the learned among them declare, two letters and a
half,(7) and signifies that Lord who contains heaven and earth;(8) for
Jesus in the ancient Hebrew language means "heaven," while again "earth" is
expressed by the words sura usser.(9) The word, therefore, which contains
heaven and earth is just Jesus. Their explanation, then, of the Episemon is
false, and their numerical calculation is also manifestly overthrown. For,
in their own language, Soter is a Greek word of five letters; but, on the
other hand, in the Hebrew tongue, Jesus contains only two letters and a
half. The total which they reckon up, viz., eight hundred and eighty-eight,
therefore falls to the ground. And throughout, the Hebrew letters do not
correspond in number with the Greek, although these especially, as being
the more ancient and unchanging, ought to uphold the reckoning connected
with the names. For these ancient, original, and generally called sacred
letters(10) of the Hebrews are ten in number (but they are written by means
of fifteen(11)), the last letter being joined to the first. And thus they
write some of these letters according to their natural sequence, just as we
do, but others in a reverse direction, from the right hand towards the
left, thus tracing the letters backwards. The name Christ, too, ought to be
capable of being reckoned up in harmony with the Aeons of their Pleroma,
inasmuch as, according to their statements, He was produced for the
establishment and rectification of their Pleroma. The Father, too, in the
same way, ought, both by means of letters and numerical value, to contain
the number of those Aeons who were produced by Him; Bythus, in like manner,
and not less Monogenes; but pre-eminently the name which is above all
others, by which God is called, and which in the Hebrew tongue is expressed
by Baruch,(1) [a word] which also contains two and a half letters. From
this fact, therefore, that the more important names, both in the Hebrew and
Greek languages, do not conform to their system, either as respects the
number of letters or the reckoning brought out of them, the forced
character of their calculations respecting the rest becomes clearly
manifest.
3. For, choosing out of the law whatever things agree with the number
adopted in their system, they thus violently strive to obtain proofs of its
validity. But if it was really the purpose of their Mother, or the Saviour,
to set forth, by means of the Demiurge, types of those things which are in
the Pleroma, they should have taken care that the types were found in
things more exactly correspondent and more holy; and, above all, in the
case of the Ark of the Covenant, on account of which the whole tabernacle
of witness was formed. Now it was constructed thus: its length(2) was two
cubits and a half, its breadth one cubit and a half, its height one cubit
and a half; but such a number of cubits in no respect corresponds with
their system, yet by it the type ought to have been, beyond everything
else, clearly set forth. The mercy-seat(3) also does in like manner not at
all harmonize with their expositions. Moreover, the table of shew-bread(4)
was two cubits in length, while its height was a cubit and a half. These
stood before the holy of holies, and yet in them not a single number is of
such an amount as contains an indication of the Tetrad, or the Ogdoad, or
of the rest of their Pleroma. What of the candlestick,(5) too, which had
seven(6) branches and seven lamps? while, if these had been made according
to the type, it ought to have had eight branches and a like number of
lamps, after the type of the primary Ogdoad, which shines pre-eminently
among the Aeons, and illuminates the whole Pleroma. They have carefully
enumerated the curtains(7) as being ten, declaring these a type of the ten
Aeons; but they have forgotten to count the coverings of skin, which were
eleven(8) in number. Nor, again, have they measured the size of these very
curtains, each curtain(9) being eight-and-twenty cubits in length. And they
set forth the length of the pillars as being ten cubits, with a reference
to the Decad of Aeons. "But the breadth of each pillar was a cubit and a
half;"(10) and this they do not explain, any more than they do the entire
number of the pillars or of their bars, because that does not suit the
argument. But what of the anointing oil,(11) which sanctified the whole
tabernacle? Perhaps it escaped the notice of the Saviour, or, while their
Mother was sleeping, the Demiurge of himself gave instructions as to its
weight; and on this account it is out of harmony with their Pleroma,
consisting,(12) as it did, of five hundred shekels of myrrh, five hundred
of cassia, two hundred and fifty of cinnamon, two hundred and fifty of
calamus, and oil in addition, so that it was composed of five ingredients.
The incense(13) also, in like manner, [was compounded] of stacte, onycha,
galbanum, mint, and frankincense, all which do in no respect, either as to
their mixture or weight, harmonize with their argument. It is therefore
unreasonable and altogether absurd [to maintain] that the types were not
preserved in the sublime and more imposing enactments of the law; but in
other points, when any number coincides with their assertions, to affirm
that it was a type of the things in the Pleroma; while [the truth is, that]
every number occurs with the utmost variety in the Scriptures, so that,
should any one desire it, he might form not only an Ogdoad, and a Decad,
and a Duodecad, but any sort of number from the Scriptures, and then
maintain that this was a type of the system of error devised by himself.
4. But that this point is true, that that number which is called five,
which agrees in no respect with their argument, and does not harmonize with
their system, nor is suitable for a typical manifestation of the things in
the Pleroma, [yet has a wide prevalence,(14)] will be proved as follows
from the Scriptures. Soter is a name of five letters; Pater, too, contains
five letters; Agape (love), too, consists of five letters; and our Lord,
after(1) blessing the five loaves, fed with them five thousand men. Five
virgins(2) were called wise by the Lord; and, in like manner, five were
styled foolish. Again, five men are said to have been with the Lord when He
obtained testimony(3) from the Father,--namely, Peter, and James, and John,
and Moses, and Elias. The Lord also, as the fifth person, entered into the
apartment of the dead maiden, and raised her up again; for, says [the
Scripture], "He suffered no man to go in, save Peter and James,(4) and the
father and mother of the maiden."(5) The rich man in hell(6) declared that
he had five brothers, to whom he desired that one rising from the dead
should go. The pool from which the Lord commanded the paralytic man to go
into his house, had five porches. The very form of the cross, too, has
five extremities,(7) two in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle,
on which [last] the person rests who is fixed by the nails. Each of our
hands has five fingers; we have also five senses; our internal organs may
also be reckoned as five, viz., the heart, the liver, the lungs, the
spleen, and the kidneys. Moreover, even the whole person may be divided
into this number [of parts],--the head, the breast, the belly, the thighs,
and the feet. The human race passes through five ages first infancy, then
boyhood, then youth, then maturity,(8) and then old age. Moses delivered
the law to the people in five books. Each table which he received from God
contained five(9) commandments. The veil covering(10) the holy of holies
had five pillars. The altar of burnt-offering also was five cubits in
breadth.(11) Five priests were chosen in the wilderness,--namely,
Aaron,(12) Nadab, Abiud, Eleazar, Ithamar. The ephod and the breastplate,
and other sacerdotal vestments, were formed out of five(13) materials; for
they combined in themselves gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and
fine linen. And there were five(14) kings of the Amorites, whom Joshua the
son of Nun shut up in a cave, and directed the people to trample upon their
heads. Any one, in fact, might collect many thousand other things of the
same kind, both with respect to this number and any other he chose to fix
upon, either from the Scriptures, or from the works of nature lying under
his observation.(15) But although such is the case, we do not therefore
affirm that there are five Aeons above the Demiurge; nor do we consecrate
the Peptad, as if it were some divine thing; nor do we strive to establish
things that are untenable, nor ravings [such as they indulge in], by means
of that vain kind of labour; nor do we perversely force a creation well
adapted by God [for the ends intended to be served], to change itself into
types of things which have no real existence; nor do we seek to bring
forward impious and abominable doctrines, the detection and overthrow of
which are easy to all possessed of intelligence.
5. For who can concede to them that the year has three hundred and
sixty-five days only, in order that there may be twelve months of thirty
days each, after the type of the twelve Aeons, when the type is in fact
altogether out of harmony [with the antitype]? For, in the one case, each
of the Aeons is a thirtieth part of the entire Pleroma, while in the other
they declare that a month is the twelfth part of a year. If, indeed, the
year were divided into thirty parts, and the month into twelve, then a
fitting type might be regarded as having been found for their fictitious
system. But, on the contrary, as the case really stands, their Pleroma is
divided into thirty parts, and a portion of it into twelve; while again the
whole year is divided into twelve parts, and a certain portion of it into
thirty. The Saviour therefore acted unwisely in constituting the month a
type of the entire Pleroma, but the year a type only of that Duodecad which
exists in the Pleroma; for it was more fitting to divide the year into
thirty parts, even as the whole Pleroma is divided, but the month into
twelve, just as the Aeons are in their Pleroma. Moreover, they divide the
entire Pleroma into three portions,--namely, into an Ogdoad, a Decad, and a
Duodecad. But our year is divided into four parts,--namely, spring, summer,
autumn, and winter. And again, not even do the months, which they maintain
to be a type of the Triacontad, consist precisely of thirty days, but some
have more and some less, inasmuch as five days remain to them as an
overplus.(16) The day, too, does not always consist precisely of twelve
hours, but rises from nine(17) to fifteen, and then falls again from
fifteen to nine. It cannot therefore be held that months of thirty days
each were so formed for the sake of [typifying] the Aeons; for, in that
case, they would have consisted precisely of thirty days: nor, again, the
days of these months, that by means of twelve hours they might symbolize
the twelve Aeons; for, in that case, they would always have consisted
precisely of twelve hours.
6. But further, as to their calling material substances "on the left
hand," and maintaining that those things which are thus on the left hand of
necessity fall into corruption, while they also affirm that the Saviour
came to the lost sheep, in order to transfer it to the right hand, that is,
to the ninety and nine sheep which were in safety, and perished not, but
continued within the fold, yet were of the left hand,(1) it follows that
they must acknowledge that the enjoyment(2) of rest did not imply
salvation. And that which has not in like manner the same number, they will
be compelled to acknowledge as belonging to the left hand, that is, to
corruption. This Greek word Agape (love), then, according to the letters of
the Greeks, by means of which reckoning is carried on among them, having a
numerical value of ninety-three,(3) is in like manner assigned to the place
of rest on the left hand. Aletheia (truth), too, having in like manner,
according to the principle indicated above, a numerical value of sixty-
four,(4) exists among material substances. And thus, in fine, they will be
compelled to acknowledge that all those sacred names which do not reach a
numerical value of one hundred, but only contain the numbers summed by the
left hand, are corruptible and material.
CHAP. XXV.--GOD IS NOT TO BE SOUGHT AFTER BY MEANS OF LETTERS, SYLLABLES,
AND NUMBERS; NECESSITY OF HUMILITY IN SUCH INVESTIGATIONS.
1. If any one, however, say in reply to these things, What then? Is it
a meaningless and accidental thing, that the positions of names, and the
election of the apostles, and the working of the Lord, and the arrangement
of created things, are what they are?--we answer them: Certainly not; but
with great wisdom and diligence, all things have clearly been made by God,
fitted and prepared [for their special purposes]; and His word formed both
things ancient and those belonging to the latest times; and men ought not
to connect those things with the number thirty,(5) but to harmonize them
with what actually exists, or with fight reason. Nor should they seek to
prosecute inquiries respecting God by means of numbers, syllables, and
letters. For this is an uncertain mode of proceeding, on account of their
varied and diverse systems, and because every sort of hypothesis may at the
present day be, in like manner, devised(6) by any one; so that(7) they can
derive arguments against the truth from these very theories, inasmuch as
they may be turned in many different directions. But, on the contrary, they
ought to adapt the numbers themselves, and those things which have been
formed, to the true theory lying before them. For system(8) does not spring
out of numbers, but numbers from a system; nor does God derive His being
from things made, but things made from God. For all things originate from
one and the same God.
2. But since created things are various and numerous, they are indeed
well fitted and adapted to the whole creation; yet, when viewed
individually, are mutually opposite and inharmonious, just as the sound of
the lyre, which consists of many and opposite notes, gives rise to one
unbroken melody, through means of the interval which separates each one
from the others. The lover of truth therefore ought not to be deceived by
the interval between each note, nor should he imagine that one was due to
one artist and author, and another to another, nor that one person fitted
the treble, another the bass, and yet another the tenor strings; but he
should hold that one and the same person [formed the whole], so as to
prove the judgment, goodness, and skill exhibited in the whole work and
[specimen of] wisdom. Those, too, who listen to the melody, ought to praise
and extol the artist, to admire the tension of some notes, to attend to the
softness of others, to catch the sound of others between both these
extremes, and to consider the special character of others, so as to inquire
at what each one aims, and what is the cause of their variety, never
failing to apply our rule, neither giving up the [one(9)] artist, nor
casting off faith in the one God who formed all things, nor blaspheming our
Creator.
3. If, however, any one do not discover the cause of all those things
which become objects of investigation, let him reflect that man is
infinitely inferior to God; that he has received grace only in part, and is
not yet equal or similar to his Maker; and, moreover, that he cannot have
experience or form a conception of all things like God; but in the same
proportion as he who was formed but to-day, and received the beginning of
his creation, is inferior to Him who is uncreated, and who is always the
same, in that proportion is he, as respects knowledge and the faculity of
investigating the causes of all things, inferior to Him who made him. For
thou, O man, art not an uncreated being, nor didst thou always co-exist(1)
with God, as did His own Word; but now, through His pre-eminent goodness,
receiving the beginning of thy creation, thou dost gradually learn from the
Word the dispensations of God who made thee.
4. Preserve therefore the proper order of thy knowledge, and do not, as
being ignorant of things really good, seek to rise above God Himself, for
He cannot be surpassed; nor do thou seek after any one above the Creator,
for thou wilt not discover such, For thy Former cannot be contained within
limits; nor, although thou shouldst measure all this [universe], and pass
through all His creation, and consider it in all its depth, and height, and
length, wouldst thou be able to conceive of any other above the Father
Himself. For thou wilt not be able to think Him fully out, but, indulging
in trains of reflection opposed to thy nature, thou wilt prove thyself
foolish; and if thou persevere in such a course, thou wilt fall into utter
madness, whilst thou deemest thyself loftier and greater than thy Creator,
and imaginest that thou canst penetrate beyond His dominions.
CHAP. XXVI.--"KNOWLEDGE PUFFETH UP, BUT LOVE EDIFIETH."
1. It is therefore better and more profitable to belong to the simple
and unlettered class, and by means of love to attain to nearness to God,
than, by imagining ourselves learned and skilful, to be found [among those
who are] blasphemous against their own God, inasmuch as they conjure up
another God as the Father. And for this reason Paul exclaimed, "Knowledge
puffeth up, but love edifieth:"(2) not that he meant to inveigh against a
true knowledge of God, for in that case he would have accused himself; but,
because he knew that some, puffed up by the pretence of knowledge, fall
away from the love of God, and imagine that they themselves are perfect,
for this reason that they set forth an imperfect Creator, with the view of
putting an end to the pride which they feel on account of knowledge of this
kind, he says, "Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth." Now there can be
no greater conceit than this, that any one should imagine he is better and
more perfect than He who made and fashioned him, and imparted to him the
breath of life, and commanded this very thing into existence. It is
therefore better, as I have said, that one should have no knowledge
whatever of any one reason why a single thing in creation has been made,
but should believe in God, and continue in His love, than(3) that, puffed
up through knowledge of this kind, he should fall away from that love which
is the life of man; and that he should search after no other knowledge
except [the knowledge of] Jesus Christ the Son of God, who was crucified
for us, than that by subtle questions and hair-splitting expressions he
should fall into impiety.(4)
2. For how would it be, if any one, gradually elated by attempts of the
kind referred to, should, because the Lord said that "even the hairs of
your head are all numbered,"(5) set about inquiring into the number of
hairs on each one's head, and endeavour to search out the reason on account
of which one man has so many, and another so many, since all have not an
equal number, but many thousands upon thousands are to be found with still
varying numbers, on this account that some have larger and others smaller
heads, some have bushy heads of hair, others thin, and others scarcely any
hair at all,--and then those who imagine that they have discovered the
number of the hairs, should endeavour to apply that for the commendation of
their own sect which they have conceived? Or again, if any one should,
because of this expression which occurs in the Gospel, "Are not two
sparrows sold for a farthing? and not one of them falls to the ground
without the will of your Father,"(6) take occasion to reckon up the number
of sparrows caught daily, whether over all the world or in some particular
district, and to make inquiry as to the reason of so many having been
captured yesterday, so many the day before, and so many again on this day,
and should then join on the number of sparrows to his [particular]
hypothesis, would he not in that case mislead himself altogether, and drive
into absolute insanity those that agreed with him, since men are always
eager in such matters to be thought to have discovered something more
extraordinary than their masters?(7)
3. But if any one should ask us whether every number of all the things
which have been made, and which are made, is known to God, and whether
every one of these [numbers] has, according to His providence, received
that special amount which it contains; and on our agreeing that such is the
case, and acknowledging that not one of the things which have been, or are,
or shall be made, escapes the knowledge of God, but that through His
providence every one of them has obtained its nature, and rank, and number,
and special quantity, and that nothing whatever either has been or is
produced in vain or accidentally, but with exceeding suitability [to the
purpose intended], and in the exercise of transcendent knowledge, and that
it was an admirable and truly divine intellect(1) which could both
distinguish and bring forth the proper causes of such a system: if, [I
say,] any one, on obtaining our adherence and consent to this, should
proceed to reckon up the sand and pebbles of the earth, yea also the waves
of the sea and the stars of heaven, and should endeavour to think out the
causes of the number which he imagines himself to have discovered, would
not his labour be in vain, and would not such a man be justly declared mad,
and destitute of reason, by all possessed of common sense? And the more he
occupied himself beyond others in questions of this kind, and the more he
imagines himself to find out beyond others, styling them unskilful,
ignorant, and animal beings, because they do not enter into his so useless
labour, the more is he [in reality] insane, foolish, struck as it were with
a thunderbolt, since indeed he does in no one point own himself inferior to
God; but, by the knowledge which he imagines himself to have discovered, he
changes God Himself, and exalts his own opinion above the greatness of the
Creator.
CHAP. XXVII.--PROPER MODE OF INTERPRETING PARABLES AND OBSCURE PASSAGES OF
SCRIPTURE.
1. A sound mind, and one which does not expose its possessor to danger,
and is devoted to piety and the love of truth, will eagerly meditate upon
those things which God has placed within the power of mankind, and has
subjected to our knowledge, and will make advancement in [acquaintance
with] them, rendering the knowledge of them easy to him by means of daily
study. These things are such as fall [plainly] under our observation, and
are clearly and unambiguously in express terms set forth in the Sacred
Scriptures. And therefore the parables ought not to be adapted to ambiguous
expressions. For, if this be not done, both he who explains them will do so
without danger, and the parables will receive a like interpretation from
all, and the body(2) of truth remains entire, with a harmonious adaptation
of its members, and without any collision [of its several parts]. But to
apply expressions which are not clear or evident to interpretations of the
parables, such as every one discovers for himself as inclination leads him,
[is absurd.(3)] For in this way no one will possess the rule of truth; but
in accordance with the number of persons who explain the parables will be
found the various systems of truth, in mutual opposition to each other, and
setting forth antagonistic doctrines, like the questions current among the
Gentile philosophers.
2. According to this course of procedure, therefore, man would always
be inquiring but never finding, because he has rejected the very method of
discovery. And when the Bridegroom(4) comes, he who has his lamp untrimmed,
and not burning with the brightness of a steady light, is classed among
those who obscure the interpretations of the parables, forsaking Him who by
His plain announcements freely imparts gifts to all who come to Him, and is
excluded from His marriage-chamber. Since, therefore, the entire
Scriptures, the prophets, and the Gospels, can be clearly, unambiguously,
and harmoniously understood by all, although all do not believe them;
and(5) since they proclaim that one only God, to the exclusion of all
others, formed all things by His word, whether visible or invisible,
heavenly or earthly, in the water or under the earth, as I have shown(6)
from the very words of Scripture; and since the very system of creation to
which we belong testifies, by what falls under our notice, that one Being
made and governs it,--those persons will seem truly foolish who blind their
eyes to such a clear demonstration, and will not behold the light of the
announcement [made to them]; but they put fetters upon themselves, and
every one of them imagines, by means of their obscure interpretations of
the parables, that he has found out a God of his own. For that there is
nothing whatever openly, expressly, and without controversy said in any
part of Scripture respecting the Father conceived of by those who hold a
contrary opinion, they themselves testify, when they maintain that the
Saviour privately taught these same things not to all, but to certain only
of His disciples who could comprehend them, and who understood what was
intended by Him through means of arguments, enigmas, and parables. They
come, [in fine,] to this, that they maintain there is one Being who is
proclaimed as God, and another as Father, He who is set forth as such
through means of parables and enigmas.
3. But since parables admit of many interpretations, what lover of truth
will not acknowledge, that for them to assert God is to be searched out
from these, while they desert what is certain, indubitable, and true, is
the part of men who eagerly throw themselves into danger, and act as if
destitute of reason? And is not such a course of conduct not to build one's
house upon a rock(1) which is firm, strong, and placed in an open position,
but upon the shifting sand? Hence the overthrow of such a building is a
matter of ease.
CHAP. XXVII.--PERFECT KNOWLEDGE CANNOT BE ATTAINED IN THE PRESENT LIFE:
MANY QUESTIONS MUST BE SUBMISSIVELY LEFT IN THE HANDS OF GOD.
1. Having therefore the truth itself as our rule and the testimony
concerning God set clearly before us, we ought not, by running after
numerous and diverse answers to questions, to cast away the firm and true
knowledge of God. But it is much more suitable that we, directing our
inquiries after this fashion, should exercise ourselves in the
investigation of the mystery and administration of the living God, and
should increase in the love of Him who has done, and still does, so great
things for us; but never should fall from the belief by which it is most
clearly proclaimed that this Being alone is truly God and Father, who both
formed this world, fashioned man, and bestowed the faculty of increase on
His own creation, and called him upwards from lesser things to those
greater ones which are in His own presence, just as He brings an infant
which has been conceived in the womb into the light of the sun, and lays up
wheat in the barn after He has given it full strength on the stalk. But it
is one and the same Creator who both fashioned the womb and created the
sun;and one and the same Lord who both reared the stalk of corn, increased
and multiplied the wheat, and prepared the barn.
2. If, however, we cannot discover explanations of all those things in
Scripture which are made the subject of investigation, yet let us not on
that account seek after any other God besides Him who really exists. For
this is the very greatest impiety. We should leave things of that nature to
God who created us, being most properly assured that the Scriptures are
indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God and His Spirit;
but we, inasmuch as we are inferior to, and later in existence than, the
Word of God and His Spirit, are on that very account(2) destitute of the
knowledge of His mysteries. And there is no cause for wonder if this is the
case with us as respects things spiritual and heavenly, and such as require
to be made known to us by revelation, since many even of those things which
lie at our very feet (I mean such as belong to this world, which we handle,
and see, and are in close contact with) transcend out knowledge, so that
even these we must leave to God. For it is fitting that He should excel all
[in knowledge]. For how stands the case, for instance, if we endeavour to
explain the cause of the rising of the Nile? We may say a great deal,
plausible or otherwise, on the subject; but what is true, sure, and
incontrovertible regarding it, belongs only to God. Then, again, the
dwelling-place of birds--of those, I mean, which come to us in spring, but
fly away again on the approach of autumn--though it is a matter connected
with this world, escapes our knowledge. What explanation, again, can we
give of the flow and ebb of the ocean, although every one admits there must
be a certain cause [for these phenomena]? Or what can we say as to the
nature of those things which lie beyond it?(3) What, moreover, can we say
as to the formation of rain, lightning, thunder, gatherings of clouds,
vapours, the bursting forth of winds, and such like things; of tell as to
the storehouses of snow, hail, and other like things? [What do we know
respecting] the conditions requisite for the preparation of clouds, or what
is the real nature of the vapours in the sky? What as to the reason why the
moon waxes and wanes, or what as to the cause of the difference of nature
among various waters, metals, stones, and such like things? On all these
points we may indeed say a great deal while we search into their causes,
but God alone who made them can declare the truth regarding them.
3. If, therefore, even with respect to creation, there are some things
[the knowledge of] Which belongs only to God, and others which come with in
the range of our own knowledge, what ground is there for complaint, if, in
regard to those things which we investigate in the Scriptures (which are
throughout spiritual), we are able by the grace of God to explain some of
them, while we must leave others in the hands of God, and that not only in
the present world, but also in that which is to come, so that God should
for ever teach, and man should for ever learn the things taught him by God?
As the apostle has said on this point, that, when other things have been
done away, then these three, "faith, hope, and charity, shall endure."(4)
For faith, which has respect to our Master, endures(5) unchangeably,
assuring us that there is but one true God, and that we should truly love
Him for ever, seeing that He alone is our Father; while we hope ever to be
receiving more and more from God, and to learn from Him, because He is
good, and possesses boundless riches, a kingdom without end, and
instruction that can never be exhausted. If, therefore, according to the
rule which I have stated, we leave some questions in the hands of God, we
shall both preserve our faith uninjured, and shall continue without danger;
and all Scripture, which has been given to us by God, shall be found by us
perfectly consistent; and the parables shall harmonize with those passages
which are perfectly plain; and those statements the meaning of which is
clear, shall serve to explain the parables; and through the many
diversified utterances [of Scripture] there shall be heard(1) one
harmonious melody in us, praising in hymns that God who created all things.
If, for instance, any one asks, "What was God doing before He made the
world?" we reply that the answer to such a question lies with God Himself.
For that this world was formed perfect(2) by God, receiving a beginning in
time, the Scriptures teach us; but no Scripture reveals to us what God was
employed about before this event. The answer therefore to that question
remains with God, and it is not proper(3) for us to aim at bringing forward
foolish, rash, and blasphemous suppositions [in reply to it]; so, as by
one's imagining that he has discovered the origin of matter, he should in
reality set aside God Himself who made all things.
4. For consider, all ye who invent such opinions, since the Father
Himself is alone called God, who has a real existence, but whom ye style
the Demiurge; since, moreover, the Scriptures acknowledge Him alone as God;
and yet again, since the Lord confesses Him alone as His own Father, and
knows no other, as I shall show from His very words,-- when ye style this
very Being the fruit of defect, and the offspring of ignorance, and
describe Him as being ignorant of those things which are above Him, with
the various other allegations which you make regarding Him,--consider the
terrible blasphemy [ye are thus guilty of] against Him who truly is God. Ye
seem to affirm gravely and honestly enough that ye believe in God; but
then, as ye are utterly unable to reveal any other God, ye declare this
very Being in whom ye profess to believe, the fruit of defect and the
offspring of ignorance. Now this blindness and foolish talking flow to you
from the fact that ye reserve nothing for God, but ye wish to proclaim the
nativity and production both of God Himself, of His Ennoea, of His Logos,
and Life, and Christ; and ye form the idea of these from no other than a
mere human experience; not understanding, as I said before, that it is
possible, in the case of man, who is a compound being, to speak in this way
of the mind of man and the thought of man; and to say that thought (ennoea)
springs from mind (sensus), intention (enthymesis) again from thought, and
word (logos) from intention (but which logos?(4) for there is among the
Greeks one logos which is the principle that thinks, and another which is
the instrument by means of which thought is expressed); and [to say] that a
man sometimes is at rest and silent, while at other times he speaks and is
active. But since God is(5) all mind, all reason, all active spirit, all
light, and always exists one and the same, as it is both beneficial for us
to think of God, and as we learn regarding Him from the Scriptures, such
feelings and divisions [of operation] cannot fittingly be ascribed to Him.
For our tongue, as being carnal, is not sufficient to minister to the
rapidity of the human mind, inasmuch as that is of a spiritual nature, for
which reason our word is restrained(6) within us, and is not at once
expressed as it has been conceived by the mind, but is uttered by
successive efforts, just as the tongue is able to serve it.
5. But God being all Mind, and all Logos, both speaks exactly what He
thinks, and thinks exactly what He speaks. For His thought is Logos, and
Logos is Mind, and Mind comprehending all things is the Father Himself. He,
therefore, who speaks of the mind of God, and ascribes to it a special
origin of its own, declares Him a compound Being, as if God were one thing,
and the original Mind another. So, again, with respect to Logos, when one
attributes to him the third(7) place of production from the Father; on
which supposition he is ignorant of His greatness; and thus Logos has been
far separated from God. As for the prophet, he declares respecting Him,
"Who shall describe His generation?"(8) But ye pretend to set forth His
generation from the Father, and ye transfer the production of the word of
men which takes place by means of a tongue to the Word of God, and thus are
righteously exposed by your own selves as knowing neither things human nor
divine.
6. But, beyond reason inflated [with your own wisdom], ye
presumptuously maintain that ye are acquainted with the unspeakable
mysteries of God; while even the Lord, the very Son of God, allowed that
the Father alone knows the very day and hour of judgment, when He plainly
declares, "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, neither the Son,
but the Father only."(1) If, then, the Son was not ashamed to ascribe the
knowledge of that day to the Father only, but declared what was true
regarding the matter, neither let us be ashamed to reserve for God those
greater questions which may occur to us. For no man is superior to his
master.(2) If any one, therefore, says to us, "How then was the Son
produced by the Father?" we reply to him, that no man understands that
production, or generation, or calling, or revelation, or by whatever name
one may describe His generation, which is in fact altogether indescribable.
Neither Valentinus, nor Marcion, nor Saturninus, nor Basilides, nor angels,
nor archangels, nor principalities, nor powers [possess this knowledge],
but the Father only who begat, and the Son who was begotten. Since
therefore His generation is unspeakable, those who strive to set forth
generations and productions cannot be in their right mind, inasmuch as they
undertake to describe things which are indescribable. For that a word is
uttered at the bidding of thought and mind, all men indeed well understand.
Those, therefore, who have excogitated [the theory of] emissions have not
discovered anything great, or revealed any abstruse mystery, when they have
simply transferred what all understand to the only-begotten Word of God;
and while they style Him unspeakable and unnameable, they nevertheless set
forth the production and formation of His first generation, as if they
themselves had assisted at His birth, thus assimilating Him to the word of
mankind formed by emissions.
7. But we shall not be wrong if we affirm the same thing also
concerning the substance of matter, that God produced it. For we have
learned from the Scriptures that God holds the supremacy over all things.
But whence or in what way He produced it, neither has Scripture anywhere
declared; nor does it become us to conjecture, so as, in accordance with
our own opinions, to form endless conjectures concerning God, but we should
leave such knowledge in the hands of God Himself. In like manner, also, we
must leave the cause why, while all things were made by God, certain of His
creatures sinned and revolted from a state of submission to God, and
others, indeed the great majority, persevered, and do still persevere, in
[willing] subjection to Him who formed them, and also of what nature those
are who sinned, and of what nature those who persevere,--[we must, I say,
leave the cause of these things] to God and His Word, to whom alone He
said, "Sit at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool."(3)
But as for us, we still dwell upon the earth, and have not yet sat down
upon His throne. For although the Spirit of the Saviour that is in Him
"searcheth all things, even the deep things of God,"(4) yet as to us "there
are diversities of gifts, differences of administrations, and diversities
of operations;"(5) and we, while upon the earth, as Paul also declares,
"know in part, and prophesy in part."(6) Since, therefore, we know but in
part, we ought to leave all sorts of [difficult] questions in the hands of
Him who in some measure, [and that only,] bestows grace on us. That eternal
fire, [for instance,] is prepared for sinners, both the Lord has plainly
declared, and the rest of the Scriptures demonstrate. And that God fore-
knew that this would happen, the Scriptures do in like manner demonstrate,
since He prepared eternal fire from the beginning for those who were
[afterwards] to transgress [His commandments]; but the cause itself of the
nature of such transgressors neither has any Scripture informed us, nor has
an apostle told us, nor has the Lord taught us. It becomes us, therefore,
to leave the knowledge of this matter to God, even as the Lord does of the
day and hour [of judgment], and not to rush to such an extreme of danger,
that we will leave nothing in the hands of God, even though we have
received only a measure of grace [from Him in this world]. But when we
investigate points which are above us, and with respect to which we cannot
reach satisfaction, [it is absurd(7)] that we should display such an
extreme of presumption as to lay open God, and things which are not yet
discovered,(8) as if already we had found out, by the vain talk about
emissions, God Himself, the Creator of all things, and to assert that He
derived His substance from apostasy and ignorance, so as to frame an
impious hypothesis in opposition to God.
8. Moreover, they possess no proof of their system, which has but
recently been invented by them, sometimes resting upon certain numbers,
sometimes on syllables, and sometimes, again, on names; and there are
occasions, too, when, by means of those letters which are contained in
letters, by parables not properly interpreted, or by certain [baseless]
conjectures, they strive to establish that fabulous account which they have
devised. For if any one should inquire the reason why the Father, who has
fellowship with the Son in all things, has been declared by the Lord alone
to know the hour and the day [of judgment], he will find at present no more
suitable, or becoming, or safe reason than this (since, indeed, the Lord is
the only true Master), that we may learn through Him that the Father is
above all things. For "the Father," says He, "is greater than I."(1) The
Father, therefore, has been declared by our Lord to excel with respect to
knowledge; for this reason, that we, too, as long as we are connected with
the scheme of things in this world, should leave perfect knowledge, and
such questions [as have been mentioned], to God, and should not by any
chance, while we seek to investigate the sublime nature of the Father, fall
into the danger of starting the question whether there is another God above
God.(2)
9. But if any lover of strife contradict what I have said, and also
what the apostle affirms, that "we know in part, and prophesy in part,"(3)
and imagine that he has acquired not a partial, but a universal, knowledge
of all that exists,--being such an one as Valentinus, or Ptolemaeus, or
Basilides, or any other of those who maintain that they have searched out
the deep(4) things of God,--let him not (arraying himself in vainglory)
boast that he has acquired greater knowledge than others with respect to
those things which are invisible, or cannot be placed under our
observation; but let him, by making diligent inquiry, and obtaining
information from the Father, tell us the reasons (which we know not) of
those things which are in this world,--as, for instance, the number of
hairs on his own head, and the sparrows which are captured day by day, and
such other points with which we are not previously acquainted,--so that we
may credit him also with respect to more important points. But if those who
are perfect do not yet understand the very things in their hands, and at
their feet, and before their eyes, and on the earth, and especially the
rule followed with respect to the hairs of their head, how can we believe
them regarding things spiritual, and super-celestial,(5) and those which,
with a vain confidence, they assert to be above God? So much, then, I have
said concerning numbers, and names, and syllables, and questions respecting
such things as are above our comprehension, and concerning their improper
expositions of the parables: [I add no more on these points,] since thou
thyself mayest enlarge upon them.
CHAP. XXIX.--REFUTATION OF THE VIEWS OF THE HERETICS AS TO THE FUTURE
DESTINY OF THE SOUL AND BODY.
1. Let us return, however, to the remaining points of their system. For
when they declare(6) that, at the consummation of all things, their mother
shall re-enter the Pleroma, and receive the Saviour as her consort; that
they themselves, as being spiritual, when they have got rid of their animal
souls, and become intellectual spirits, will be the consorts of the
spiritual angels; but that the Demiurge, since they call him animal, will
pass into the place of the Mother; that the souls of the righteous shall
psychically repose in the intermediate place;--when they declare that like
will be gathered to like, spiritual things to spiritual, while material
things continue among those that are material, they do in fact contradict
themselves, inasmuch as they no longer maintain that souls pass, on account
of their nature, into the intermediate place to those substances which are
similar to themselves, but [that they do so] on account of the deeds done
[in the body], since they affirm that those of the righteous do pass [into
that abode], but those of the impious continue in the fire. For if it is on
account of their nature that all souls attain to the place of enjoyment,(7)
and all belong to the intermediate place simply because they are souls, as
being thus of the same nature with it, then it follows that faith is
altogether superfluous, as was also the descent(8) of the Saviour [to this
world]. If, on the other hand, it is on account of their righteousness
[that they attain to such a place of rest], then it is no longer because
they are souls but because they are righteous. But if souls would have(9)
perished unless they had been righteous, then righteousness must have power
to save the bodies also [which these souls inhabited]; for why should it
not save them, since they, too, participated in righteousness? For if
nature and substance are the means of salvation, then all souls shall be
saved; but if righteousness and faith, why should these not save those
bodies which, equally with the souls, will enter(10) into immortality? For
righteousness will appear, in matters of this kind, either impotent or
unjust, if indeed it saves some substances through participating in it, but
not others.
2. For it is manifest that those acts which are deemed righteous are
performed in bodies. Either, therefore, all souls will of necessity pass
into the intermediate place, and there will never be a judgment; or bodies,
too, which have participated in righteousness, will attain to the place of
enjoyment, along with the souls which have in like manner participated, if
indeed righteousness is powerful enough to bring thither those substances
which have participated in it. And then the doctrine concerning the
resurrection of bodies which we believe, will emerge true and certain [from
their system]; since, [as we hold,] God, when He resuscitates our mortal
bodies which preserved righteousness, will render them incorruptible and
immortal. For God is superior to nature, and has in Himself the disposition
[to show kindness], because He is good; and the ability to do so, because
He is mighty; and the faculty of fully carrying out His purpose, because He
is rich and perfect.
3. But these men are in all points inconsistent with themselves, when
they decide that all souls do not enter into the intermediate place, but
those of the righteous only. For they maintain that, according to nature
and substance, three sorts [of being] were produced by the Mother: the
first, which proceeded from perplexity, and weariness, and fear--that is
material substance; the second from impetuosity(1)--that is animal
substance; but that which she brought forth after the vision of those
angels who wait upon Christ, is spiritual substance. If, then, that
substance(2) which she brought forth will by all means enter into the
Pleroma because it is spiritual, while that which is material will remain
below because it is material, and shall be totally consumed by the fire
which bums within it, why should not the whole animal substance go into the
intermediate place, into which also they send the Demiurge? But what is it
which shall enter within their Pleroma? For they maintain that souls shall
continue in the intermediate place, while bodies, because they possess
material substance, when they have been resolved into matter, shall be
consumed by that fire which exists in it; but their body being thus
destroyed, and their soul remaining in the intermediate place, no part of
man will any longer be left to enter in within the Pleroma. For the
intellect of man--his mind, thought, mental intention, and such like--is
nothing else than his soul; but the emotions and operations of the soul
itself have no substance apart from the soul. What part of them, then, will
still remain to enter into the Pleroma? For they themselves, in as far as
they are souls, remain in the intermediate place; while, in as far as they
are body, they will be consumed with the rest of matter.
CHAP. XXX.--ABSURDITY OF THEIR STYLING THEMSELVES SPIRITUAL, WHILE THE
DEMIURGE IS DECLARED TO BE ANIMAL.
1. Such being the state of the case, these infatuated men declare that
they rise above the Creator (Demiurge); and, inasmuch as they proclaim
themselves superior to that God who made and adorned the heavens, and the
earth, and all things that are in them, and maintain that they themselves
are spiritual, while they are in fact shamefully carnal on account of their
so great impiety,--affirming that He, who has made His angels(3) spirits,
and is clothed with light as with a garment, and holds the circle(4) of the
earth, as it were, in His hand, in whose sight its inhabitants are counted
as grasshoppers, and who is the Creator and Lord of all spiritual
substance, is of an animal nature,--they do beyond doubt and verily betray
their own madness; and, as if truly struck with thunder, even more than
those giants who are spoken of in [heathen] fables, they lift up their
opinions against God, inflated by a vain presumption and unstable glory,--
men for whose purgation all the hellebore(5) on earth would not suffice, so
that they should get rid of their intense folly.
2. The superior person is to be proved by his deeds. In what way, then,
can they show themselves superior to the Creator (that I too, through the
necessity of the argument in hand, may come down to the level of their
impiety, instituting a comparison between God and foolish men, and, by
descending to their argument, may often refute them by their own doctrines;
but in thus acting may God be merciful to me, for I venture on these
statements, not with the view of comparing Him to them, but of convicting
and overthrowing their insane opinions)--they, for whom many foolish
persons entertain so great an admiration, as if, forsooth, they could learn
from them something more precious than the truth itself! That expression of
Scripture, "Seek, and ye shall find,"(6) they interpret as spoken with this
view, that they should discover themselves to be above the Creator, styling
themselves greater and better than God, and calling themselves spiritual,
but the Creator animal; and [affirming] that for this reason they rise
upwards above God, for that they enter in within the Pleroma, while He
remains in the intermediate place. Let them, then, prove themselves by
their deeds superior to the Creator; for the superior person ought to be
proved not by what is said, but by what has a real existence.
3. What work, then, will they point to as having been accomplished
through themselves by the Saviour, or by their Mother, either greater, or
more glorious, or more adorned with wisdom, than those which have been
produced by Him who was the disposer of all around us? What heavens have
they established? what earth have they founded? what stars have they called
into existence? or what lights of heaven have they caused to shine? within
what circles, moreover, have they confined them? or, what rains, or frosts,
or snows, each suited to the season, and to every special climate, have
they brought upon the earth? And again, in opposition to these, what heat
or dryness have they set over against them? or, what rivers have they made
to flow? what fountains have they brought forth? with what flowers and
trees have they adorned this sublunary world? or, what multitude of animals
have they formed, some rational, and others irrational, but all adorned
with beauty? And who can enumerate one by one all the remaining objects
which have been constituted by the power of God, and are governed by His
wisdom? or who can search out the greatness of that God who made them? And
what can be told of those existences which are above heaven, and which do
not pass away, such as Angels, Archangels, Thrones, Dominions, and Powers
innumerable? Against what one of these works, then, do they set themselves
in opposition? What have they similar to show, as having been made through
themselves, or by themselves, since even they too are the Workmanship and
creatures of this [Creator]? For whether the Saviour or their Mother (to
use their own expressions, proving them false by means of the very terms
they themselves employ) used this Being, as they maintain, to make an image
of those things which are within the Pleroma, and of all those beings which
she saw waiting upon the Saviour, she used him (the Demiurge) as being [in
a sense] superior to herself, and better fitted to accomplish her purpose
through his instrumentality; for she would by no means form the images of
such important beings through means of an inferior, but by a superior,
agent.
4. For, [be it observed,] they themselves, according to their own
declarations, were then existing, as a spiritual conception, in consequence
of the contemplation of those beings who were arranged as satellites around
Pandora. And they indeed continued useless, the Mother accomplishing
nothing through their instrumentality,(1)--an idle conception, owing their
being to the Saviour, and fit for nothing, for not a thing appears to have
been done by them. But the God who, according to them, was produced, while,
as they argue, inferior to themselves (for they maintain that he is of an
animal nature), was nevertheless the active agent in all things, efficient,
and fit for the work to be done, so that by him the images of all things
were made; and not only were these things which are seen formed by him, but
also all things invisible, Angels, Archangels, Dominations, Powers, and
Virtues,--[by him, I say,] as being the superior, and capable of
ministering to her desire. But it seems that the Mother made nothing
whatever through their instrumentality, as indeed they themselves
acknowledge; so that one may justly reckon them as having been an abortion
produced by the painful travail of their Mother. For no accoucheurs
performed their office upon her, and therefore they were cast forth as an
abortion, useful for nothing, and formed to accomplish no work of the
Mother. And yet they describe themselves as being superior to Him by whom
so vast and admirable works have been accomplished and arranged, although
by their own reasoning they are found to be so wretchedly inferior!
5. It is as if there were two iron tools, or instruments, the one of
which was continually in the workman's hands and in constant use, and by
the use of which he made whatever he pleased, and displayed his art and
skill, but the other of which remained idle and useless, never being called
into operation, the workman never appearing to make anything by it, and
making no use of it in any of his labours; and then one should maintain
that this useless, and idle, and unemployed tool was superior in nature and
value to that which the artisan employed in his work, and by means of which
he acquired his reputation. Such a man, if any such were found, would
justly be regarded as imbecile, and not in his right mind. And so should
those be judged of who speak of themselves as being spiritual and superior,
and of the Creator as possessed of an animal nature, and maintain that for
this reason they will ascend on high, and penetrate within the Pleroma to
their own husbands (for, according to their own statements, they are
themselves feminine), but that God [the Creator] is of an inferior nature,
and therefore remains in the intermediate place, while all the time they
bring forward no proofs of these assertions: for the better man is shown by
his works, and all works have been accomplished by the Creator; but they,
having nothing worthy of reason to point to as having been produced by
themselves, are labouring under the greatest and most incurable madness.
6. If, however, they labour to maintain that, while all material
things, such as the heaven, and the whole world which exists below it, were
indeed formed by the Demiurge, yet all things of a more spiritual nature
than these,--those, namely, which are above the heavens, such as
Principalities, Powers, Angels, Archangels, Dominations, Virtues,--were
produced by a spiritual process of birth (which they declare themselves to
be), then, in the first place, we prove from the authoritative
Scriptures(1) that all the things which have been mentioned, visible and
invisible, have been made by one God. For these men are not more to be
depended on than the Scriptures; nor ought we to give up the declarations
of the Lord, Moses, and the rest of the prophets, who have proclaimed the
truth, and give credit to them, who do indeed utter nothing of a sensible
nature, but rave about untenable opinions. And, in the next place, if those
things which are above the heavens were really made through their
instrumentality, then let them inform us what is the nature of things
invisible, recount the number of the Angels, and the ranks of the
Archangels, reveal the mysteries of the Thrones, and teach us the
differences between the Dominations, Principalities, Powers, and Virtues.
But they can say nothing respecting them; therefore these beings were not
made by them. If, on the other hand, these were made by the Creator, as was
really the case, and are of a spiritual and holy character, then it follows
that He who produced spiritual beings is not Himself of an animal nature,
and thus their fearful system of blasphemy is overthrown.
7. For that there are spiritual creatures in the heavens, all the
Scriptures loudly proclaim; and Paul expressly testifies that there are
spiritual things when he declares that he was caught up into the third
heaven,(2) and again, that he was carried away to paradise, and heard
unspeakable words which it is not lawful for a man to utter. But what did
that profit him, either his entrance into paradise or his assumption into
the third heaven, since all these things are still but under the power of
the Demiurge, if, as some venture to maintain, he had already begun(3) to
be a spectator and a hearer of those mysteries which are affirmed to be
above the Demiurge? For if it is true that he was becoming acquainted with
that order of things which is above the Demiurge, he would by no means have
remained in the regions of the Demiurge, and that so as not even thoroughly
to explore even these (for, according to their manner of speaking, there
still lay before him four heavens,(4) if he were to approach the Demiurge,
and thus behold the whole seven lying beneath him); but he might have been
admitted, perhaps, into the intermediate place, that is, into the presence
of the Mother, that he might receive instruction from her as to the things
within the Pleroma. For that inner man which was in him, and spoke in him,
as they say, though invisible, could have attained not only to the third
heaven, but even as far as the presence of their Mother. For if they
maintain that they themselves, that is, their [inner] man, at once ascends
above the Demiurge, and departs to the Mother, much more must this have
occurred to the [inner] man of the apostle; for the Demiurge would not have
hindered him, being, as they assert, himself already subject to the
Saviour. But if he had tried to hinder him, the effort would have gone for
nothing. For it is not possible that he should prove stronger than the
providence of the Father, and that when the tuner man is said to be
invisible even to the Demiurge. But since he (Paul) has described that
assumption of himself up to the third heaven as something great and pre-
eminent, it cannot be that these men ascend above the seventh heaven, for
they are certainly not superior to the apostle. If they do maintain that
they are more excellent than he, let them prove themselves so by their
works, for they have never pretended to anything like [what he describes as
occurring to himself]. And for this reason he added, "Whether in the body,
or whether out of the body, God knoweth,"(5) that the body might neither be
thought to be a partaker in that vision,(6) as if it could have
participated in those things which it had seen and heard; nor, again, that
any one should say that he was not carried higher on account of the weight
of the body; but it is therefore thus far permitted even without the body
to behold spiritual mysteries which are the operations of God, who made the
heavens and the earth, and formed man, and placed him in paradise, so that
those should be spectators of them who, like the apostle, have reached a
high degree of perfection in the love of God.
8. This Being, therefore, also made spiritual things, of which, as far
as to the third heaven, the apostle was made a spectator, and heard
unspeakable words which it is not possible for a man to utter, inasmuch as
they are spiritual; and He Himself bestows, [gifts] on the worthy as
inclination prompts Him, for paradise is His; and He is truly the Spirit of
God, and not an animal Demiurge, otherwise He should never have created
spiritual things. But if He really is of an animal nature, then let them
inform us by whom spiritual things were made. They have no proof which they
can give friar this was done by means of the travail of their Mother, which
they declare themselves to be. For, not to speak of spiritual things, these
men cannot create even a fly, or a gnat, or any other small and
insignificant animal, without observing that law by which from the
beginning animals have been and are naturally produced by God--through the
deposition of seed in those that are of the same species. Nor was anything
formed by the Mother alone; [for] they say that this Demiurge was produced
by her, and that he was the Lord (the author) of all creation. And they
maintain that he who is the Creator and Lord of all that has been made is
of an animal nature, while they assert that they themselves are spiritual,-
-they who are neither the authors nor lords of any one work, not only of
those things which are extraneous to them, but not even of their own
bodies! Moreover, these men, who call themselves spiritual, and superior to
the Creator, do often suffer much bodily pain, sorely against their will.
9. Justly, therefore, do we convict them of having departed far and
wide from the truth. For if the Saviour formed the things which have been
made, by means of him (the Demiurge), he is proved in that case not to be
inferior but superior to them, since he is found to have been the former
even of themselves; for they, too, have a place among created things. How,
then, can it be argued that these men indeed are spiritual, but that he by
whom they were created is of an animal nature? Or, again, if (which is
indeed the only true supposition, as I have shown by numerous arguments of
the very clearest nature) He (the Creator) made all things freely, and by
His own power, and arranged and finished them, and His will is the
substance(2) of all things, then He is discovered to be the one only God
who created all things, who alone is Omnipotent, and who is the only Father
rounding and forming all things, visible and invisible, such as may be
perceived by our senses and such as cannot, heavenly and earthly, "by the
word of His power;"(3) and He has fitted and arranged all things by His
wisdom, while He contains all things, but He Himself can be contained by no
one: He is the Former, He the Builder, He the Discoverer, He the Creator,
He the Lord of all; and there is no one besides Him, or above Him, neither
has He any mother, as they falsely ascribe to Him; nor is there a second
God, as Marcion has imagined; nor is there a Pleroma of thirty Aeons, which
has been shown a vain supposition; nor is there any such being as Bythus or
Proarche; nor are there a series of heavens; nor is there a virginal
light,(4) nor an unnameable Aeon, nor, in fact, any one of those things
which are madly dreamt of by these, and by all the heretics. But there is
one only God, the Creator--He who is above every Principality, and Power,
and Dominion, and Virtue: He is Father, He is God, He the Founder, He the
Maker, He the Creator, who made those things by Himself, that is, through
His Word and His Wisdom--heaven and earth, and the seas, and all things
that are in them: He is just; He is good; He it is who formed man, who
planted paradise, who made the world, who gave rise to the flood, who saved
Noah; He is the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,
the God of the living: He it is whom the law proclaims, whom the prophets
preach, whom Christ reveals, whom the apostles make known s to us, and in
whom the Church believes. He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ:
through His Word, who is His Son, through Him He is revealed and manifested
to all to whom He is revealed; for those [only] know Him to whom the Son
has revealed Him. But the Son, eternally co-existing with the Father, from
of old, yea, from the beginning, always reveals the Father to Angels,
Archangels, Powers, Virtues, and all to whom He wills that God should be
revealed.
CHAP. XXXI.--RECAPITULATION AND APPLICATION OF THE FOREGOING ARGUMENTS.
1. Those, then, who are of the school of Valentinus being overthrown,
the whole multitude of heretics are, in fact, also subverted. For all the
arguments I have advanced against their Pleroma, and with respect to those
things which are beyond it, showing how the Father of all is shut up and
circumscribed by that which is beyond Him (if, indeed, there be anything
beyond Him), and how there is an absolute necessity [on their theory] to
conceive of many Fathers, and many Pleromas, and many creations of worlds,
beginning with one set and ending with another, as existing on every side;
and that all [the beings referred to] continue in their own domains, and do
not curiously intermeddle with others, since, indeed, no common interest
nor any fellowship exists between them; and that there is no other God of
all, but that that name belongs only to the Almighty;--[all these
arguments, I say,] will in like manner apply against those who are of the
school of Marcion, and Simon, and Meander, or whatever others there may be
who, like them, cut off that creation with which we are connected from the
Father. The arguments, again, which I have employed against those who
maintain that the Father of all no doubt contains all things, but that the
creation to which we belong was not formed by Him, but by a certain other
power, or by angels having no knowledge of the Propator, who is surrounded
as a centre by the immense extent of the universe, just as a stain is by
the [surrounding] cloak; when I showed that it is not a probable
supposition that any other being than the Father of all formed that
creation to which we belong,--these same arguments will apply against the
followers of Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, and the rest of the
Gnostics, who express similar opinions. Those statements, again, which have
been made with respect to the emanations, and the Aeons, and the [supposed
state of] degeneracy, and the inconstant character of their Mother, equally
overthrow Basilides, and all who are falsely styled Gnostics, who do, in
fact, just repeat the same views under different names, but do, to a
greater extent than the former,(1) transfer those things which lie
outside(2) of the truth to the system of their own doctrine. And the
remarks I have made respecting numbers will also apply against all those
who misappropriate things belonging to the truth for the support of a
system of this kind. And all that has been said respecting the Creator
(Demiurge) to show that he alone is God and Father of all, and whatever
remarks may yet be made in the following books, I apply against the
heretics at large. The more moderate and reasonable among them thou wilt
convert and convince, so as to lead them no longer to blaspheme their
Creator, and Maker, and Sustainer, and Lord, nor to ascribe His origin to
defect and ignorance; but the fierce, and terrible, and irrational [among
them] thou wilt drive far from thee, that you may no longer have to endure
their idle loquaciousness.
2. Moreover, those also will be thus confuted who belong to Simon and
Carpocrates, and if there be any others who are said to perform miracles--
who do not perform what they do either through the power of God, or in
connection with the truth, nor for the well-being of men, but for the sake
of destroying and misleading mankind, by means of magical deceptions, and
with universal deceit, thus entailing greater harm than good on those who
believe them, with respect to the point on which they lead them astray. For
they can neither confer sight on the blind, nor hearing on the deaf, nor
chase away all sorts of demons--[none, indeed,] except those that are sent
into others by themselves, if they can even do so much as this. Nor can
they cure the weak, or the lame, or the paralytic, or those who are
distressed in any other part of the body, as has often been done in regard
to bodily infinity. Nor can they furnish effective remedies for those
external accidents which may occur. And so far are they from being able to
raise the dead, as the Lord raised them, and the apostles did by means of
prayer, and as has been frequently done in the brotherhood on account of
some necessity--the entire Church in that particular locality entreating
[the boon] with much fasting and prayer, the spirit of the dead man has
returned, and he has been bestowed in answer to the prayers of the saints--
that they do not even believe this can be possibly be done, [and hold] that
the resurrection from the dead(3) is simply an acquaintance with that truth
which they proclaim.
3. Since, therefore, there exist among them error and misleading
influences, and magical illusions are impiously wrought in the sight of
men; but in the Church, sympathy, and compassion, and stedfastness, and
truth, for the aid and encouragement of mankind, are not only displayed(4)
without fee or reward, but we ourselves lay out for the benefit of others
our own means; and inasmuch as those who are cured very frequently do not
possess the things which they require, they receive them from us;--[since
such is the case,] these men are in this way undoubtedly proved to be utter
aliens from the divine nature, the beneficence of God, and all spiritual
excellence. But they are altogether full of deceit of every kind, apostate
inspiration, demoniacal working, and the phantasms of idolatry, and are in
reality the predecessors of that dragon(5) who, by means of a deception of
the same kind, will with his tail cause a third part of the stars to fall
from their place, and will cast them down to the earth. It behoves us to
flee from them as we would from him; and the greater the display with which
they are said to perform [their marvels], the more carefully should we
watch them, as having been endowed with a greater spirit of wickedness. If
any one will consider the prophecy referred to, and the daily practices of
these men, he will find that their manner of acting is one and the same
with the demons.
CHAP. XXXII.--FURTHER EXPOSURE OF THE WICKED AND BLASPHEMOUS DOCTRINES OF
THE HERETICS.
1. Moreover, this impious opinion of theirs with respect to actions--
namely, that it is inCumbent on them to have experience of all kinds of
deeds, even the most abominable--is refuted by the teaching of the Lord,
with whom not only is the adulterer rejected, but also the man who desires
to commit adultery;(1) and not only is the actual murderer held guilty of
having killed another to his own damnation, but the man also who is angry
with his brother without a cause: who commanded [His disciples] not only
not to hate men, but also to love their enemies; and enjoined them not only
not to swear falsely, but not even to swear at all; and not only not to
speak evil of their neighbours, but not even to style any one "Raca" and
"fool;" [declaring] that otherwise they were in danger of hell-fire; and
not only not to strike, but even, when themselves struck, to present the
other cheek [to those that maltreated them]; and not only not to refuse to
give up the property of others, but even if their own were taken away, not
to demand it back again from those that took it; and not only not to injure
their neighbours, nor to do them any evil, but also, when themselves
wickedly dealt with, to be long-suffering, and to show kindness towards
those [that injured them], and to pray for them, that by means of
repentance they might be saved--so that we should in no respect imitate the
arrogance, lust, and pride of others. Since, therefore, He whom these men
boast of as their Master, and of whom they affirm that He had a soul
greatly better and more highly toned than others, did indeed, with much
earnestness, command certain things to be done as being good and excellent,
and certain things to be abstained from not only in their actual
perpetration, but even in the thoughts which lead to their performance, as
being wicked, pernicious, and abominable,--how then can they escape being
put to confusion, when they affirm that such a Master was more highly toned
[in spirit] and better than others, and yet manifestly give instruction of
a kind utterly opposed to His teaching? And, again, if there were really no
such thing as good and evil, but certain things were deemed righteous, and
certain others unrighteous, in human opinion only, He never would have
expressed Himself thus in His teaching: "The righteous shall shine forth as
the sun in the kingdom of their Father;"(2) but He shall send the
unrighteous, and those who do not the works of righteousness, "into
everlasting fire, where their worm shall not die, and the fire shall not be
quenched."(3)
2. When they further maintain that it is cumbent on them to have
experience of every kind(4) of work and conduct, so that, if it be
possible, accomplishing all during one manifestation in this life, they may
[at once] pass over to the state of perfection, they are, by no chance,
found striving to do those things which wait upon virtue, and are
laborious, glorious, and skilful,(5) which also are approved universally as
being good. For if it be necessary to go through every work and every kind
of operation, they ought, in the first place, to learn all the arts: all of
them, [I say,] whether referring to theory or practice, whether they be
acquired by self-denial, or are mastered through means of labour, exercise,
and perseverance; as, for example, every kind of music, arithmetic,
geometry, astronomy, and all such as are occupied with intellectual
pursuits: then, again, the whole study of medicine, and the knowledge of
plants, so as to become acquainted with those which are prepared for the
health of man; the art of painting and sculpture, brass and marble work,
and the kindred arts: moreover, [they have to study] every kind of country
labour, the veterinary art, pastoral occupations, the various kinds of
skilled labour, which are said to pervade the whole circle of [human]
exertion; those, again, connected with a maritime life, gymnastic
exercises, hunting, military and kingly pursuits, and as many others as may
exist, of which, with the utmost labour, they could not learn the tenth, or
even the thousandth part, in the whole course of their lives. The fact
indeed is, that they endeavour to learn none of these, although they
maintain that it is incumbent on them to have experience of every kind of
work; but, turning aside to voluptuousness, and lust, and abominable
actions, they stand self-condemned when they are tried by their own
doctrine. For, since they are destitute of all those [virtues] which have
been mentioned, they will [of necessity] pass into the destruction of fire.
These men, while they boast of Jesus as being their Master, do in fact
emulate the philosophy of Epicurus and the indifference of the Cynics,
[calling Jesus their Master,] who not only turned His disciples away from
evil deeds, but even from [wicked] words and thoughts, as I have already
shown.
3. Again, while they assert that they possess souls from the same
sphere as Jesus, and that they are like to Him, sometimes even maintaining
that they are superior; while [they affirm that they were] produced, like
Him, for the performance of works tending to the benefit and establishment
of mankind, they are found doing nothing of the same or a like kind [with
His actions], nor what can in any respect be brought into comparison with
them. And if they have in truth accomplished anything [remarkable] by means
of magic, they strive [in this way] deceitfully to lead foolish people
astray, since they confer no real benefit or blessing on those over whom
they declare that they exert] supernatural] power; but, bringing forward
mere boys(1) [as the subjects on whom they practise], and deceiving their
sight, while they exhibit phantasms that instantly cease, and do not endure
even a moment of time,(2) they are proved to be like, not Jesus our Lord,
but Simon the magician. It is certain,(3) too, from the fact that the Lord
rose from the dead on the third day, and manifested Himself to His
disciples, and was in their sight received up into heaven, that, inasmuch
as these men die, and do not rise again, nor manifest themselves to any,
they are proved as possessing souls in no respect similar to that of Jesus.
4. If, however, they maintain that the Lord, too, performed such works
simply in appearance, we shall refer them to the prophetical writings, and
prove from these both that all things were thus(4) predicted regarding Him,
and did take place undoubtedly, and that He is the only Son of God.
Wherefore, also, those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from
Him, do in His name perform [miracles], so as to promote the welfare of
other men, according to the gift which each one has received from Him. For
some do certainly and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus
been cleansed from evil spirits frequently both believe [in Christ], and
join themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come:
they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the
sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole. Yea,
moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and
remained(5) among us for many years. And what shall I more say? It is not
possible to name the number of the gifts which the Church, [scattered]
throughout the whole world, has received from God, in the name of Jesus
Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and which she exerts day by
day for the benefit of the Gentiles, neither practising deception upon any,
nor taking any reward(6) from them Ion account of such miraculous
interpositions]. For as she has received freely(7) from God, freely also
does she minister [to others].
5. Nor does she perform anything by means of angelic invocations,(8) or
by incantations, or by any other wicked curious art; but, directing her
prayers to the Lord, who made all things, in a pure, sincere, and
straightforward spirit, and calling upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
she has been accustomed to work(9) miracles for the advantage of mankind,
and not to lead them into error. If, therefore, the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ even now confers benefits [upon men], and cures thoroughly and
effectively all who anywhere believe on Him, but not that of Simon, or
Menander, or Carpocrates, or of any other man whatever, it is manifest
that. when He was made man, He held fellowship with His own creation,
and(10) did all things truly through the power of God, according to the
will of the Father of all, as the prophets had foretold. But what these
things were, shall be described in dealing with the proofs to be found in
the prophetical writings.
CHAP. XXXIII.--ABSURDITY OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRANSMIGRATION OF SOULS.
1. We may subvert their doctrine as to transmigration from body to body
by this fact, that souls remember nothing whatever of the events which took
place in their previous states of existence. For if they were sent forth
with this object, that they should have experience of every kind of action,
they must of necessity retain a remembrance of those things which have been
previously accomplished, that they might fill up those in which they were
still deficient, and not by always hovering, without intermission, round
the same pursuits, spend their labour wretchedly in vain (for the mere
union of a body [with a soul] could not altogether extinguish the memory
and contemplation of those things which had formerly been experienced(11)),
and especially as they came [into the world] for this very purpose. For as,
when the body is asleep and at rest, whatever things the soul sees by
herself, and does in a vision, recollecting many of these, she also
communicates them to the body; and as it happens that, when one awakes,
perhaps after a long time, he relates what he saw in a dream, so also would
he undoubtedly remember those things which he did before he came into this
particular body. For if that which is seen only for a very brief space of
time, or has been conceived of simply in a phantasm, and by the soul alone,
through means of a dream, is remembered after she has mingled again with
the body, and been dispersed through all the members, much more would she
remember those things in connection with which she stayed during so long a
time, even throughout the whole period of a bypast life.
2. With reference to these objections, Plato, that ancient Athenian,
who also was the first(1) to introduce this opinion, when he could not set
them aside, invented the [notion of] a cup of oblivion, imagining that in
this way he would escape this son of difficulty. He attempted no kind of
proof [of his supposition], but simply replied dogmatically [to the
objection in question], that when souls enter into this life, they are
caused to drink of oblivion by that demon who watches their entrance [into
the world], before they effect an entrance into the bodies [assigned them].
It escaped him, that [by speaking thus] he fell into another greater
perplexity. For if the cup of oblivion, after it has been drunk, can
obliterate the memory of all the deeds that have been done, how, O Plato,
dost thou obtain the knowledge of this fact (since thy soul is now in the
body), that, before it entered into the body, it was made to drink by the
demon a drug which caused oblivion? For if thou hast a remembrance of the
demon, and the cup, and the entrance [into life], thou oughtest also to be
acquainted with other things; but if, on the other hand, thou art ignorant
of them, then there is no truth in the story of the demon, nor in the cup
of oblivion prepared with art.
3. In opposition, again, to those who affirm that the body itself is
the drug of oblivion, this observation may be made: How, then, does it come
to pass, that whatsoever the soul sees by her own instrumentality, both in
dreams and by reflection or earnest mental exertion, while the body is
passive, she remembers, and reports to her neighbours? But, again, if the
body itself were [the cause of] oblivion, then the soul, as existing in the
body, could not remember even those things which were perceived long ago
either by means of the eyes or the ears; but, as soon as the eye was turned
from the things looked at, the memory of them also would undoubtedly be
destroyed. For the soul, as existing in the very [cause of] oblivion, could
have no knowledge of anything else than that only which it saw at the
present moment. How, too, could it become acquainted with divine things,
and retain a remembrance of them while existing in the body, since, as they
maintain, the body itself is [the cause of] oblivion? But the prophets
also, when they were upon the earth, remembered likewise, on their
returning to their ordinary state of mind,(2) whatever things they
spiritually saw or heard in visions of heavenly objects, and related them
to others. The body, therefore, does not cause the soul to forget those
things which have been spiritually witnessed; but the soul teaches the
body, and shares with it the spiritual vision which it has enjoyed.
4. For the body is not possessed of greater power than the soul, since
indeed the former is inspired, and vivified, and increased, and held
together by the latter; but the soul possesses(3) and rules over the body.
It is doubtless retarded in its velocity, just in the exact proportion in
which the body shares in its motion; but it never loses the knowledge which
properly belongs to it. For the body may be compared to an instrument; but
the soul is possessed of the reason of an artist. As, therefore, the artist
finds the idea of a work to spring up rapidly in his mind, but can only
carry it out slowly by means of an instrument, owing to the want of perfect
pliability in the matter acted upon, and thus the rapidity of his mental
operation, being blended with the slow action of the instrument, gives rise
to a moderate kind of movement [towards the end contemplated]; so also the
soul, by being mixed up with the body belonging to it, is in a certain
measure impeded, its rapidity being blended with the body's slowness. Yet
it does not lose altogether its own peculiar powers; but while, as it were,
sharing life with the body, it does not itself cease to live. Thus, too,
while communicating other things to the body, it neither loses the
knowledge of them, nor the memory of those things which have been
witnessed.
5. If, therefore, the soul remembers nothing(4) of what took place in a
former state of existence, but has a perception of those things which are
here, it follows that she never existed in other bodies, nor did things of
which she has no knowledge, nor [once] knew things which she cannot [now
mentally] contemplate. But, as each one of us receives his body through the
skilful working of God, so does he also possess his soul. For God is not so
poor or destitute in resources, that He cannot confer its own proper soul
on each individual body, even as He gives it also its special character.
And therefore, when the number [fixed upon] is completed, [that number]
which He had predetermined in His own counsel, all those who have been
enrolled for life [eternal] shah rise again, having their own bodies, and
having also their own souls, and their own spirits, in which they had
pleased God. Those, on the other hand, who are worthy of punishment, shall
go away into it, they too having their own souls and their own bodies, in
which they stood apart from the grace of God. Both classes shall then cease
from any longer begetting and being begotten, from marrying and being given
in marriage; so that the number of mankind, corresponding to the fore-
ordination of God, being completed, may fully realize the scheme formed by
the Father.(1)
CHAP. XXXIV.--SOULS CAN BE RECOGNISED IN THE SEPARATE STATE, AND ARE
IMMORTAL ALTHOUGH THEY ONCE HAD A BEGINNING.
1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only
continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve
the same form(2) [in their separate state] as the body had to which they
were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state
of existence, and from which they have now ceased,--in that narrative which
is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in
the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states(3) that Dives knew Lazarus
after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons
continued in his own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to
be sent to relieve him--[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow
even the crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the
answer given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected
himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to come
into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and to
receive(4) the preaching of Him who was(5) to rise again from the dead. By
these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls continue to exist
that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a
man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in
this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham,
and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has
deserved, even before the judgment.
2. But if any persons at this point maintain that those souls, which
only began a little while ago to exist, cannot endure for any length of
time; but that they must, on the one hand, either be unborn, in order that
they may be immortal, or if they have had a beginning in the way of
generation, that they should die with the body itself--let them learn that
God alone, who is Lord of all, is without beginning and without end, being
truly and for ever the same, and always remaining the same unchangeable
Being. But all things which proceed from Him, whatsoever have been made,
and are made, do indeed receive their own beginning of generation, and on
this account are inferior to Him who formed them, inasmuch as they are not
unbegotten. Nevertheless they endure, and extend their existence into a
long series of ages in accordance with the will of God their Creator; so
that He grants them that they should be thus formed at the beginning, and
that they should so exist afterwards.
3. For as the heaven which is above us, the firmament, the sun, the
moon, the rest of the stars, and all their grandeur, although they had no
previous existence, were called into being, and continue throughout a long
course of time according to the will of God, so also any one who thinks
thus respecting souls and spirits, and, in fact, respecting all created
things, will not by any means go far astray, inasmuch as all things that
have been made had a beginning when they were formed, but endure as long as
God wills that they should have an existence and continuance. The prophetic
Spirit bears testimony to these opinions, when He declares, "For He spake,
and they were made; He commanded, and they were created: He hath
established them for ever, yea, forever and ever."(6) And again, He thus
speaks respecting the salvation of man: "He asked life of Thee, and Thou
gavest him length of days for ever and ever;"(7) indicating that it is the
Father of all who imparts continuance for ever and ever on those who are
saved. For life does not arise from us, nor from our own nature; but it is
bestowed according to the grace of God. And therefore he who shall preserve
the life bestowed upon him, and give thanks to Him who imparted it, shall
receive also length of days for ever and ever. But he who shall reject it,
and prove himself ungrateful to his Maker, inasmuch as he has been created,
and has not recognised Him who bestowed [the gift upon him], deprives
himself of [the privilege of] continuance for ever and ever.(1) And, for
this reason, the Lord declared to those who showed themselves ungrateful
towards Him: "If ye have not been faithful in that which is little, who
will give you that which is great?"(2) indicating that those who, in this
brief temporal life, have shown themselves ungrateful to Him who bestowed
it, shall justly not receive from Him length of days for ever and ever.
4. But as the animal body is certainly not itself the soul, yet has
fellowship with the soul as long as God pleases; so the soul herself is not
life,(3) but partakes in that life bestowed upon her by God. Wherefore also
the prophetic word declares of the first-formed man, "He became a living
soul,"(4) teaching us that by the participation of life the soul became
alive; so that the soul, and the life which it possesses, must be
understood as being separate existences. When God therefore bestows life
and perpetual duration, it comes to pass that even souls which did not
previously exist should henceforth endure [for ever], since God has both
willed that they should exist, and should continue in existence. For the
will of God ought to govern and rule in all things, while all other things
give way to Him, are in subjection, and devoted to His service. Thus far,
then, let me speak concerning the creation and the continued duration of
the soul.
CHAP. XXXV.--REFUTATION OF BASILIDES, AND OF THE OPINION THAT THE PROPHETS
UTTERED THEIR PREDICTIONS UNDER THE INSPIRATION OF DIFFERENT GODS.
1. Moreover, in addition to what has been said, Basilides himself will,
according to his own principles, find it necessary to maintain not only
that there are three hundred and sixty-five heavens made in succession by
one another, but that an immense and innumerable multitude of heavens have
always been in the process of being made, and are being made, and will
continue to be made, so that the formation of heavens of this kind can
never cease. For if from the efflux(5) of the first heaven the second was
made after its likeness, and the third after the likeness of the second,
and so on with all the remaining subsequent ones, then it follows, as a
matter of necessity, that from the efflux of our heaven, which he indeed
terms the last, another be formed like to it, and from that again a third;
and thus there can never cease, either the process of efflux from those
heavens which have been already made, or the manufacture of [new] heavens,
but the operation must go on ad infinitum, and give rise to a number of
heavens which will be altogether indefinite.
2. The remainder of those who are falsely termed Gnostics, and who
maintain that the prophets uttered their prophecies under the inspiration
of different gods, will be easily overthrown by this fact, that all the
prophets proclaimed one God and Lord, and that the very Maker of heaven and
earth, and of all things which are therein; while they moreover announced
the advent of His Son, as I shall demonstrate from the Scriptures
themselves, in the books which follow.
3. If, however, any object that, in the Hebrew language, diverse
expressions [to represent God] occur in the Scriptures, such as Sabaoth,
Eloe, Adonai, and all other such terms, striving to prove from these that
there are different powers and gods, let them learn that all expressions of
this kind are but announcements and appellations of one and the same Being.
For the term Eloe in the Jewish language denotes God, while Eloeim(6) and
Eloeuth in the Hebrew language signify "that which contains all." As to the
appellation Adonai, sometimes it denotes what is nameable(7) and admirable;
but at other times, when the letter Daleth in it is doubled, and the word
receives an initial(8) guttural sound--thus Addonai--[it signifies], "One
who bounds and separates the land from the water," so that the water should
not subsequently(9) submerge the land. In like manner also, Sabaoth,(10)
when it [is spelled by a Greek Omega in the last syllable [Sabaoth],
denotes "a voluntary agent;" but when it is spelled with a Greek Omicron--
as, for instance, Sabaoth--it expresses "the first heaven." In the same
way, too, the word Jaoth,(11) when the last syllable is made long and
aspirated, denotes "a predetermined measure;" but when it is written
shortly by the Greek letter Omicron, namely Jaoth, it signifies "one who
puts evils to flight." All the other expressions likewise bring out(1) the
title of one and the same Being; as, for example (in English(2)), The Lord
of Powers, The Father of all, God Almighty, The Most High, The Creator, The
Maker, and such like. These are not the names and titles of a succession of
different beings, but of one and the same, by means of which the one God
and Father is revealed, He who contains all things, and grants to all the
boon of existence.
4. Now, that the preaching of the apostles, the authoritative teaching
of the Lord, the announcements of the prophets, the dictated utterances of
the apostles,(3) and the ministration of the law--all of which praise one
and the same Being, the God and Father of all, and not many diverse beings,
nor one deriving his substance from different gods or powers, but [declare]
that all things [were formed] by one and the same Father (who nevertheless
adapts this works] to the natures and tendencies of the materials dealt
with), things visible and invisible, and, in short, all things that have
been made [were created] neither by angels, nor by any other power, but by
God alone, the Father--are all in harmony with our statements, has, I
think, been sufficiently proved, while by these weighty arguments it has
been shown that there is but one God, the Maker of all things. But that I
may not be thought to avoid that series of proofs which may be derived from
the Scriptures of the Lord (since, indeed, these Scriptures do much more
evidently and clearly proclaim this very point), I shall, for the benefit
of those at least who do not bring a depraved mind to bear upon them,
devote a special book to the Scriptures referred to, which shall fairly
follow them out [and explain them], and I shall plainly set forth from
these divine Scriptures proofs to [satisfy] all the lovers of truth.(4)
Taken from "The Early Church Fathers and Other Works" originally published
by Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. in English in Edinburgh, Scotland beginning in
1867. (ANF 1, Roberts and Donaldson.) The digital version is by The
Electronic Bible Society, P.O. Box 701356, Dallas, TX 75370, 214-407-WORD.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The electronic form of this document is copyrighted.
Copyright (c) Eternal Word Television Network 1996.
Provided courtesy of:
EWTN On-Line Services
PO Box 3610
Manassas, VA 22110
Voice: 703-791-2576
Fax: 703-791-4250
Data: 703-791-4336
FTP: ftp.ewtn.com
Telnet: ewtn.com
WWW:
http://www.ewtn.com.
Email address:
[email protected]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
