IRENAEUS 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
360
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.
361
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,
362
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
363
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
364
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
365
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
366
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.
367
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
368
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
369
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
370
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.
371
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
372
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 men-
373
tioned. 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 them-
374
selves] 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 with.
375
in 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.
376
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
377
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 (<greek>stoa</greek>), 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.
378
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
379
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
380
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
381
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 com-
382
plete 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!
383
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
384
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
385
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.
386
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
387
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
388
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
389
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),
A<greek>imulious</greek>(8) <greek>te</greek>
<greek>logous</greek> <greek>kai</greek>
<greek>epiklopon</greek> <greek>hqos</greek>
<greek>autaus</greek> K<greek>atqeto</greek> (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
390
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)
391
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
392
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:--
O<greek>i</greek> <greek>de</greek>
<greek>qeoi</greek> <greek>par</greek>
Z<greek>hni</greek> <greek>kaqhmenoi</greek>
<greek>hgorownto</greek> X<greek>rusew</greek>
<greek>en</greek> <greek>dapedw</greek>:(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
393
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
394
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
395
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]
396
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
397
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
398
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.
399
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,
400
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
401
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,
402
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
403
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
404
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
405
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 un-
406
speakable 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
407
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
408
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
409
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
410
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
411
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
412
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,
413
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)
|
