Cloud of Witnesses
3 witnesses

Refutation of All Heresies; On Christ and Antichrist; fragments on Daniel

Volume 2

Chapter XXVIII.—The Valentinian Origin of the Creation.

As, therefore, the primary and greatest power1 of the animal essence came into existence, an image (of the only begotten Son); so also the devil, who is the ruler of this world, constitutes the power of the material essence, as Beelzebub is of the essence of demons which emanates from anxiety. (In consequence of this,) Sophia from above exerted her energy from the Ogdoad to the Hebdomad. For the Demiurge, they say, knows nothing at all, but is, according to them, devoid of understanding, and silly, and is not conscious of what he is doing or working at. But in him, while thus in a state of ignorance that even he is producing, Sophia wrought all sorts of energy, and infused vigour (into him). And (although Sophia) was really the operating cause, he himself imagines that he evolves the creation of the world out of himself: whence he commenced, saying, "I am God, and beside me there is no other."2

Chapter XXIX.—The Other Valentinian Emanations in Conformity with the Pythagorean System of Numbers.

The quaternion, then, advocated by Valentinus, is "a source of the everlasting nature having roots;"3 and Sophia (is the power) from whom the animal and material creation has derived its present condition. But Sophia is called "Spirit," and the Demiurge "Soul," and the Devil "the ruler of this world," and Beelzebub "the (ruler) of demons." These are the statements which they put forward. But further, in addition to these, rendering, as I have previously mentioned, their entire system of doctrine (akin to the) arithmetical (art), (they determine) that the thirty Æons within the Pleroma have again, in addition to these, projected other Æons, according to the (numerical) proportion (adopted by the Pythagoreans), in order that the Pleroma might be formed into an aggregate, according to a perfect number. For how the Pythagoreans divided (the celestial sphere) into twelve and thirty and sixty parts, and how they have minute parts of diminutive portions, has been made evident.

In this manner these (followers of Valentinus) subdivide the parts within the Pleroma. Now likewise the parts in the Ogdoad have been subdivided, and there has been projected Sophia, which is, according to them, mother of all living creatures, and the "Joint Fruit of the Pleroma," (who is) the Logos,4 (and other Æons,) who are celestial angels that have their citizenship in Jerusalem which is above, which is in heaven. For this Jerusalem is Sophia, she (that is) outside (the Pleroma), and her spouse is the "Joint Fruit of the Pleroma." And the Demiurge projected souls; for this (Sophia) is the essence of souls. This (Demiurge), according to them, is Abraham, and these (souls) the children of Abraham. From the material and devilish essence the Demiurge fashioned bodies for the souls. This is what has been declared: "And God formed man, taking clay from the earth, and breathed upon his face the breath of life, and man was made into a living soul."5 This, according to them, is the inner man, the natural (man), residing in the material body: Now a material (man) is perishable, incomplete, (and) formed out of the devilish essence. And this is the material man, as it were, according to them an inn,6 or domicile, at one time of soul only, at another time of soul and demons, at another time of soul and Logoi.7 And these are the Logoi that have been dispersed from above, from the "Joint Fruit of the Pleroma" and (from) Sophia, into this world. And they dwell in an earthly body, with a soul, when demons do not take up their abode with that soul. This, he says, is what has been written in Scripture: "On this account I bend my knees to the God and Father and Lord of our Lord Jesus Christ, that God would grant you to have Christ dwelling in the inner man,"8 —that is, the natural (man), not the corporeal (one),—"that you may be able to understand what is the depth," which is the Father of the universe, "and what is the breadth," which is Staurus, the limit of the Pleroma, "or what is the length," that is, the Pleroma of the Æons. Wherefore, he says, "the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him;"9 but folly, he says, is the power of the Demiurge, for he was foolish and devoid of understanding, and imagined himself to be fabricating the world. He was, however, ignorant that Sophia, the Mother, the Ogdoad, was really the cause of all the operations performed by him who had no consciousness in reference to the creation of the world.

Chapter XXX.—Valentinus' Explanation of the Birth of Jesus; Twofold Doctrine on the Nature of Jesus' Body; Opinion of t

All the prophets, therefore, and the law, spoke by means of the Demiurge,—a silly god,10 he says, (and themselves) fools, who knew nothing. On account of this, he says, the Saviour observes: "All that came before me are thieves and robbers."11 And the apostle (uses these words): "The mystery which was not made known to former generations."12 For none of the prophets, he says, said anything concerning the things of which we speak; for (a prophet) could not but be ignorant of all (these) things, inasmuch as they certainly had been uttered by the Demiurge only. When, therefore, the creation received completion, and when after (this) there ought to have been the revelation of the sons of God—that is, of the Demiurge, which up to this had been concealed, and in which obscurity the natural man was hid, and had a veil upon the heart;—when (it was time), then, that the veil should be taken away, and that these mysteries should be seen, Jesus was born of Mary the virgin, according to the declaration (in Scripture), "The Holy Ghost will come upon thee"—Sophia is the Spirit—"and the power of the Highest will overshadow thee"—the Highest is the Demiurge,—"wherefore that which shall be born of thee shall be called holy."13 For he has been generated not from the highest alone, as those created in (the likeness of) Adam have been created from the highest alone—that is, (from) Sophia and the Demiurge. Jesus, however, the new man, (has been generated) from the Holy Spirit—that is, Sophia and the Demiurge—in order that the Demiurge may complete the conformation and constitution of his body, and that the Holy Spirit may supply his essence, and that a celestial Logos may proceed from the Ogdoad being born of Mary.

Concerning this (Logos) they have a great question amongst them—an occasion both of divisions and dissension. And hence the doctrine of these has become divided: and one doctrine, according to them, is termed Oriental, and the other Italian. They from Italy, of whom is Heracleon and Ptolemæus, say that the body of Jesus was (an) animal (one). And on account of this, (they maintain) that at his baptism the Holy Spirit as a dove came down—that is, the Logos of the mother above, (I mean Sophia)—and became (a voice) to the animal (man), and raised him from the dead. This, he says, is what has been declared: "He who raised Christ from the dead will also quicken your mortal and natural bodies."14 For loam has come under a curse; "for," says he, "dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."15 The Orientals, on the other hand, of whom is Axionicus16 and Bardesianes,17 assert that the body of the Saviour was spiritual; for there came upon Mary the Holy Spirit—that is, Sophia and the power of the highest. This is the creative art, (and was vouchsafed) in order that what was given to Mary by the Spirit might be fashioned.

Chapter XXXI.—Further Doctrines of Valentinus Respecting the Æons; Reasons for the Incarnation.

Let, then, those (heretics) pursue these inquiries among themselves, (and let others do so likewise,) if it should prove agreeable to anybody else to investigate (such points. Valentinus) subjoins, however, the following statement: That the trespasses appertaining to the Æons within (the Pleroma) had been corrected; and likewise had been rectified the trespasses appertaining to the Ogdoad, (that is,) Sophia, outside (the Pleroma); and also (the trespasses) appertaining to the Hebdomad (had been rectified). For the Demiurge had been taught by Sophia that He is not Himself God alone, as He imagined, and that except Himself there is not another (Deity). But when taught by Sophia, He was made to recognise the superior (Deity). For He was instructed18 by her, and initiated and indoctrinated into the great mystery of the Father and of the Æons, and divulged this to none. This is, as he says, what (God) declares to Moses: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and my name I have not announced to them;"19 that is, I have not declared the mystery, nor explained who is God, but I have preserved the mystery which I have heard from Sophia in secrecy with myself. When, then, the trespasses of those above had been rectified, it was necessary, according to the same consequence, that the (transgressions) here likewise should obtain rectification. On this account Jesus the Saviour was born of Mary that he might rectify (the trespasses committed) here; as the Christ who, having been projected additionally from above by Nous and Aletheia, had corrected the passions of Sophia—that is, the abortion (who was) outside (the Pleroma). And, again, the Saviour who was born of Mary came to rectify the passions20 of the soul. There are therefore, according to these (heretics), three Christs: (the first the) one additionally projected by Nous and Aletheia, along with the Holy Spirit; and (the second) the "Joint Fruit of the Pleroma," spouse of Sophia, who was outside (the Pleroma). And she herself is likewise styled Holy Spirit, but one inferior to the first (projection). And the third (Christ is) He who was born of Mary for the restoration of this world of ours.

Chapter XXXII.—Valentinus Convicted of Plagiarisms from Plato.

I think that the heresy of Valentinus which is of Pythagorean (origin), has been sufficiently, indeed more than sufficiently, delineated. It therefore seems also expedient, that having explained his opinions, we should desist from (further) refutation (of his system). Plato, then, in expounding mysteries concerning the universe, writes to Dionysius expressing himself after some such manner21 as this: "I must speak to you by riddles,22 in order that if the letter may meet with any accident in its leaves by either sea or land, he who reads (what falls into his hands) may not understand it. For so it is. All things are about the King of all, and on his account are all things, and he is cause of all the glorious (objects of creation). The second is about the second, and the third about the third. But pertaining to the King there is none of those things of which I have spoken. But after this the soul earnestly desires to learn what sort these are, looking upon those things that are akin to itself, and not one of these is (in itself) sufficient. This is, O son of Dionysius and Doris, the question (of yours) which is a cause of all evil things. Nay, but rather the solicitude concerning this is innate in the soul; and if one does not remove this, he will never really attain truth.23 But what is astonishing in this matter, listen. For there are men who have heard these things—(men) furnished with capacities for learning, and furnished with capacities of memory, and persons who altogether in every way are endued with an aptitude for investigation with a view to inference. (These are) at present aged speculators.24 And they assert that opinions which at one time were credible are now incredible, and that things once incredible are now the contrary. While, therefore, turning the eye of examination towards these (inquiries), exercise caution, lest at any time you should have reason to repent in regard of those things should they happen in a manner unbecoming to your dignity. On this account I have written nothing concerning these (points); nor is there any treatise of Plato's (upon them), nor ever shall there be. The observations, however, now made are those of Socrates, conspicuous for virtue even while he was a young man."

Valentinus, falling in with these (remarks), has made a fundamental principle in his system "the King of all," whom Plato mentioned, and whom this heretic styles Pater, and Bythos, and Proarche25 over the rest of the Æons. And when Plato uses the words, "what is second about things that are second," Valentinus supposes to be second all the Æons that are within the limit (of the Pleroma, as well as) the limit (itself). And when Plato uses the words, "what is third about what is third," he has (constituted as third) the entire of the arrangement (existing) outside the limit26 and the Pleroma. And Valentinus has elucidated this (arrangement) very succinctly, in a psalm commencing from below, not as Plato does, from above, expressing himself thus: "I behold27 all things suspended in air by spirit, and I perceive all things wafted by spirit; the flesh (I see) suspended from soul, but the soul shining out from air, and air depending from Æther, and fruits produced from Bythus, and the foetus borne from the womb." Thus (Valentinus) formed his opinion on such (points). Flesh, according to these (heretics), is matter which is suspended from the soul of the Demiurge. And soul shines out from air; that is, the Demiurge emerges from the spirit, (which is) outside the Pleroma. But air springs forth from Æther; that is, Sophia, which is outside (the Pleroma, is projected from the Pleroma) which is within the limit, and (from) the entire Pleroma (generally). And from Bythus fruits are produced; (that is,) the entire projection of the Æons is made from the Father. The opinions, then, advanced by Valentinus have been sufficiently declared. It remains for us to explain the tenets of those who have emanated from his school, though each adherent (of Valentinus) entertains different opinions.28

Chapter XXXIII.—Secundus' System of Æons; Epiphanes; Ptolemæus.

A certain (heretic) Secundus,29 born about the same time with Ptolemæus, expresses himself thus: (he says) that there is a right tetrad and a left tetrad,—namely, light and darkness. And he affirms that the power which withdrew and laboured under deficiency, was not produced from the thirty Æons, but from the fruits of these. Some other (heretic), however—Epiphanes, a teacher among them—expresses himself thus: "The earliest originating principle was inconceivable, ineffable, and unnameable;" and he calls this Monotes. And (he maintains) that there co-exists with this (principle) a power which he denominates Henotes. This Henotes and this Monotes, not by projection (from themselves), sent forth a principle (that should preside) over all intelligibles; (and this was) both unbegotten and invisible, and he styles it a Monad. "With this power co-exists a power of the same essence, which very (power) I call Unity. These four powers sent forth the remainder of the projections of the Æons." But others, again, denominate the chief and originating Ogdoad, (which is) fourth (and) invisible, by the following names: first, Proarche; next, Anennoetus; third, Arrhetus; and fourth, Aoratus. And that from the first, Proarche, was projected by a first and fifth place, Arche; and from Anennoetus, by a second and sixth place, Acataleptus; and from Arrhetus, by a third and seventh place, Anonomastus; and from Aoratus, Agennetus, a complement of the first Ogdoad. They wish that these powers should exist before Bythus and Sige. Concerning, however, Bythus himself, there are many different opinions. Some affirm him to be unwedded, neither male nor female; but others (maintain) that Sige, who is a female, is present with him, and that this constitutes the first conjugal union.

But the followers of Ptolemæus30 assert that (Bythus) has two spouses, which they call likewise dispositions, viz., Ennoia and Thelesis (conception and volition). For first the notion was conceived of projecting anything; next followed, as they say, the will to do so. Wherefore also these two dispositions and powers—namely, Ennoia and Thelesis—being, as it were, mingled one with the other, there ensued a projection of Monogenes and Aletheia by means of a conjugal union. And the consequence was, that visible types and images of those two dispositions of the Father came forth from the invisible (Æons), viz., from Thelema, Nous, and from Ennoia, Aletheia. And on this account the image of the subsequently generated Thelema is (that of a) male; but (the image) of the unbegotten Ennoia is (that of a) female, since volition is, as it were, a power of conception. For conception always cherished the idea of a projection, yet was not of itself at least able to project itself, but cherished the idea (of doing so). When, however, the power of volition (would be present), then it projects the idea which had been conceived.

Chapter XXXIV.—System of Marcus; A Mere Impostor; His Wicked Devices Upon the Eucharistic Cup.

A certain other teacher among them, Marcus,31 an adept in sorcery, carrying on operations32 partly by sleight of hand and partly by demons, deceived many from time to time. This (heretic) alleged that there resided in him the mightiest power from invisible and unnameable places. And very often, taking the Cup, as if offering up the Eucharistic prayer, and prolonging to a greater length than usual the word of invocation, he would cause the appearance of a purple, and sometimes of a red mixture, so that his dupes imagined that a certain Grace descended and communicated to the potion a blood-red potency. The knave, however, at that time succeeded in escaping detection from many; but now, being convicted (of the imposture), he will be forced to desist from it. For, infusing secretly into the mixture some drug that possessed the power of imparting such a colour (as that alluded to above), uttering for a considerable time nonsensical expressions, he was in the habit of waiting, (in expectation) that the (drug), obtaining a supply of moisture, might be dissolved, and, being intermingled with the potion, might impart its colour to it. The drugs, however, that possess the quality of furnishing this effect we have previously mentioned in the book on magicians.33 And here we have taken occasion to explain how they make dupes of many, and thoroughly ruin them. And if it should prove agreeable to them to apply their attention with greater accuracy to the statement made by us, they will become aware of the deceit of Marcus.

Chapter XXXV.—Further Acts of Jugglery on the Part of Marcus.

And this (Marcus), infusing (the aforesaid) mixture into a smaller cup, was in the habit of delivering it to a woman to offer up the Eucharistic prayer, while he himself stood by, and held (in his hand) another empty (chalice) larger than that. And after his female dupe had pronounced the sentence of Consecration,34 having received (the cup from her), he proceeded to infuse (its contents) into the larger (chalice), and, pouring them frequently from one cup to the other, was accustomed at the same time to utter the following invocation: "Grant that the inconceivable and ineffable Grace which existed prior to the universe, may fill thine inner man, and make to abound in thee the knowledge of this (grace), as She disseminates the seed of the mustard-tree upon the good soil." And simultaneously pronouncing some such words as these, and astonishing both his female dupe and those that are present, he was regarded as one performing a miracle; while the larger was being filled from the smaller chalice, in such a way as that (the contents), being superabundant, flowed over. And the contrivance of this (juggler) we have likewise explained in the aforesaid (fourth) book, where we have proved that very many drugs, when mingled in this way with liquid substances, are endued with the quality of yielding augmentation, more particularly when diluted in wine. Now, when (one of these impostors) previously smears, in a clandestine manner, an empty cup with any one of these drugs, and shows it (to the spectators) as if it contained nothing, by infusing into it (the contents) from the other cup, and pouring them back again, the drug, as it is of a flatulent nature, is dissolved35 by being blended with the moist substance. And the effect of this was, that a superabundance of the mixture ensued, and was so far augmented, that what was infused was put in motion, such being the nature of the drug. And if one stow away (the chalice) when it has been filled, (what has been poured into it) will after no long time return to its natural dimensions, inasmuch as the potency of the drug becomes extinct by reason of the continuance of moisture. Wherefore he was in the habit of hurriedly presenting the cup to those present, to drink; but they, horrified at the same time, and eager (to taste the contents of the cup), proceeded to drink (the mixture), as if it were something divine, and devised by the Deity.36

Chapter XXXVI.—The Heretical Practices of the Marcites in Regard of Baptism.

Such and other (tricks) this impostor attempted to perform. And so it was that he was magnified by his dupes, and sometimes he was supposed to utter predictions. But sometimes he tried to make others (prophesy), partly by demons carrying on these operations, and partly by practising sleight of hand, as we have previously stated. Hoodwinking therefore multitudes, he led on (into enormities) many (dupes) of this description who had become his disciples, by teaching them that they were prone, no doubt, to sin, but beyond the reach of danger, from the fact of their belonging to the perfect power, and of their being participators in the inconceivable potency. And subsequent to the (first) baptism, to these they promise another, which they call Redemption. And by this (other baptism) they wickedly subvert those that remain with them in expectation of redemption, as if persons, after they had once been baptized, could again obtain remission. Now, it is by means of such knavery as this that they seem to retain their hearers. And when they consider that these have been tested, and are able to keep (secret the mysteries) committed unto them, they then admit them to this (baptism). They, however, do not rest satisfied with this alone, but promise (their votaries) some other (boon) for the purpose of confirming them in hope, in order that they may be inseparable (adherents of their sect). For they utter something in an inexpressible (tone of) voice, after having laid hands on him who is receiving the redemption. And they allege that they could not easily declare (to another) what is thus spoken unless one were highly tested, or one were at the hour of death, (when) the bishop comes and whispers (it) into the (expiring one's) ear. And this knavish device (is undertaken) for the purpose of securing the constant attendance upon the bishop of (Marcus') disciples, as individuals eagerly panting to learn what that may be which is spoken at the last, by (the knowledge of) which the learner will be advanced to the rank of those admitted into the higher mysteries. And in regard of these I have maintained a silence for this reason, lest at any time one should suppose that I was guilty of disparaging these (heretics). For this does not come within the scope of our present work, only so far as it may contribute to prove from what source (the heretics) have derived the standing-point from which they have taken occasion to introduce the opinions advanced by them.37

Chapter XXXVII.—Marcus' System Explained by Irenæus; Marcus' Vision; The Vision of Valentinus Revealing to Him His Syst

For also the blessed presbyter Irenæus, having approached the subject of a refutation in a more unconstrained spirit, has explained such washings and redemptions, stating more in the way of a rough digest38 what are their practices. (And it appears that some of the Marcosians,) on meeting with (Irenæus' work), deny that they have so received (the secret word just alluded to), but they have learned that always they should deny. Wherefore our anxiety has been more accurately to investigate, and to discover minutely what are the (instructions) which they deliver in the case of the first bath, styling it by some such name; and in the case of the second, which they denominate Redemption. But not even has this secret of theirs escaped (our scrutiny). For these opinions, however, we consent to pardon Valentinus and his school.

But Marcus, imitating his teacher, himself also feigns a vision, imagining that in this way he would be magnified. For Valentinus likewise alleges that he had seen an infant child lately born; and questioning (this child), he proceeded to inquire who it might be. And (the child) replied, saying that he himself is the Logos, and then subjoined a sort of tragic legend; and out of this (Valentinus) wishes the heresy attempted by him to consist. Marcus, making a similar attempt39 with this (heretic), asserts that the Tetrad came to him in the form of a woman,—since the world could not bear, he says, the male (form) of this Tetrad, and that she revealed herself who she was, and explained to this (Marcus) alone the generation of the universe, which she never had revealed to any, either of gods or of men, expressing herself after this mode: When first the self-existent Father, He who is inconceivable and without substance, He who is neither male nor female, willed that His own ineffability should become realized in something spoken, and that His invisibility should become realized in form, He opened His mouth, and sent forth similar to Himself a Logos. And this (Logos) stood by Him, and showed unto Him who he was, viz., that he himself had been manifested as a (realization in) form of the Invisible One. And the pronunciation of the name was of the following description. He was accustomed to utter the first word of the name itself, which was Arche, and the syllable of this was (composed) of four40 letters. Then he subjoined the second (syllable), and this was also (composed) of four letters. Next he uttered the third (syllable), which was (composed) of ten letters; and he uttered the fourth (syllable), and this was (composed) of twelve letters. Then ensued the pronunciation of the entire name, (composed) of thirty letters, but of four syllables. And each of the elements had its own peculiar letters, and its own peculiar form, and its own peculiar pronunciation, as well as figures and images. And not one of these was there that beholds the form of that (letter) of which this was an element. And of course none of them could know the pronunciation of the (letter) next to this, but (only) as he himself pronounces it, (and that in such a way) as that, in pronouncing the whole (word), he supposed that he was uttering the entire (name). For each of these (elements), being part of the entire (name), he denominates (according to) its own peculiar sound, as if the whole (of the word). And he does not intermit sounding until he arrived at the last letter of the last element, and uttered it in a single articulation. Then he said, that the restoration of the entire ensued when all the (elements), coming down into the one letter, sounded one and the same pronunciation, and an image of the pronunciation he supposed to exist when we simultaneously utter the word Amen.41 And that these sounds are those which gave form to the insubstantial and unbegotten Æon, and that those forms are what the Lord declared to be angels—the (forms) that uninterruptedly behold the face of the Father.

Chapter XXXVIII.—Marcus' System of Letters.

But the generic and expressed names of the elements he called Æons, and Logoi, and Roots, and Seeds, and Pleromas, and Fruits. (And he maintains) that every one of these, and what was peculiar to each, is perceived as being contained in the name of "Ecclesia." And the final letter of the last element sent forth its own peculiar articulation. And the sound of this (letter) came forth and produced, in accordance with images of the elements, its own peculiar elements. And from these he says that things existing here were garnished, and the things antecedent to these were produced. The letter itself certainly, of which the sound was concomitant with the sound below, he says, was received up by its own syllable into the complement of the entire (name); but that the sound, as if cast outside, remained below. And that the element itself, from which the letter along with its own pronunciation descended below, he says, is (composed) of thirty letters, and that each one of the thirty letters contains in itself other letters, by means of which the title of the letter is named. And again, that the other (letters) are named by different letters, and the rest by different (ones still). So that by writing down the letters individually, the number would eventuate in infinity. In this way one may more clearly understand what is spoken. The element Delta, (he says,) has five letters in itself, (viz.), Delta, and Epsilon, and Lambda, and Tau, and Alpha; and these very letters are (written) by means of other letters. If, therefore, the entire substance of the Delta eventuates in infinity, (and if) different letters invariably produce different letters, and succeed one another, by how much greater than that element is the more enormous sea42 of the letters? And if one letter is thus infinite, behold the entire name's depth of the letters out of which the patient industry, nay, rather (I should say,) the vain toil of Marcus wishes that the Progenitor (of things) should consist! Wherefore also (he maintains) that the Father, who knew that He was inseparable from Himself, gave (this depth) to the elements, which he likewise denominates Æons. And he uttered aloud to each one of them its own peculiar pronunciation, from the fact that one could not pronounce the entire.

Chapter XXXIX.—The Quaternion Exhibits "Truth."

And (Marcus alleged) that the Quaternion, after having explained these things, spoke as follows: "Now, I wish also to exhibit to you Truth herself, for I have brought her down from the mansions above, in order that you may behold her naked, and become acquainted with her beauty; nay, also that you may hear her speak, and may marvel at her wisdom. Observe," says the Quaternion, "then, first, the head above, Alpha (and long) O; the neck, B and P[si]; shoulders, along with hands, G and C[hi]; breasts, Delta and P[hi]; diaphragm,43 Eu; belly, Z and T; pudenda, Eta and S; thighs, T[h] and R; knees, Ip; calves, Ko; ankles, Lx[si]; feet, M and N." This is in the body of Truth, according to Marcus. This is the figure of the element; this the character of the letter. And he styles this element Man, and affirms it to be the source of every word, and the originating principle of every sound, and the realization in speech of everything that is ineffable, and a mouth of taciturn silence. And this is the body of (Truth) herself. But do you, raising aloft the conceiving power of the understanding, hear from the mouths of Truth (of) the Logos, who is Self-generator44 and Progenitor.45

Notes

  1. The opening sentence in this chapter is confused in Miller's text. The sense, however, as given above, is deducible from a reference to a corresponding passage in Irenæus (i. 5). ↩
  2. Deut. iv. 35; Isa. xlv. 5, 14, 18, 21, 22. ↩
  3. These words are a line out of Pythagoras' Golden Verses:— Pege tis aenaou phuseos rhizomat' echousa—(48). ↩
  4. The Abbe Cruise thinks that a comparison of this passage with the corresponding one in Irenæus suggests the addition of hoi doruphoroi after Logos, i.e., the Logos and his satellites. [Vol. i. p. 381, this series.] ↩
  5. Gen. ii. 7. ↩
  6. Or, "subterranean" (Cruice). ↩
  7. Epiphanius, Hær., xxxi. sec. 7. ↩
  8. Eph. iii. 14-18. ↩
  9. 1 Cor. ii. 14. ↩
  10. Epiphanius, Hær., xxxi. 22. ↩
  11. John x. 8. ↩
  12. Col. i. 26. ↩
  13. Luke i. 35. ↩
  14. Rom. viii. 11, 12. ↩
  15. Gen. iii. 19. ↩
  16. Axionicus is mentioned by Tertullian only (see Tertullian, Contr. Valent., c. iv; [vol. iii. p. 505, this series]). ↩
  17. Bardesianes (or Ardesianes, as Miller's text has it) is evidently the same with Bardesanes, mentioned by Eusebius and St. Jerome. ↩
  18. katechethe. Miller's text has katechthe, which is properly corrected by Bunsen into the word as translated above. ↩
  19. Ex. vi. 2, 3. ↩
  20. Or, "the multitudes." ↩
  21. Cruice thinks that the following extract from Plato's epistles has been added by a second hand. [Cf. vol. iii. p. 181, this series.] ↩
  22. There are some verbal diversities between the texts of Plato and Hippolytus, which a reference will show (see Plat., Epist., t. ix. p. 76, ed. Bekker). ↩
  23. Some forty lines that follow in Plato's letter are omitted here. ↩
  24. Here likewise there is another deficiency as compared with the original letter. ↩
  25. Miller's text is, kai pasi gen, etc. In the German and French edition of Hippolytus we have, instead of this, kai Proarchen. The latter word is introduced on the authority of Epiphanius and Theodoret. Bernays proposes Sigen, and Scott Plasten. The Abbe Cruice considers Plasten an incongruous word as applied to the creation of spiritual beings. ↩
  26. The word "limit" occurs twice in this sentence, and Bunsen alters the second into "Pleroma," so that the words may be rendered thus: "Valentinus supposes to be second all the Æons that are within the Pleroma." ↩
  27. This is a Gnostic hymn, and is arranged metrically by Cruice, of which the following is a translation:— All things whirled on by spirit I see, Flesh from soul depending, And soul from air forth flashing, And air from æther hanging, And fruits from Bythus streaming, And from womb the infant growing. ↩
  28. The text here is corrupt, but the above rendering follows the Abbe Cruice's version. Bunsen's emendation would, however, seem untenable. ↩
  29. Concerning Secundus and Epiphanes, see Irenæus, i. 11; Theodoret, Hær. Fab., i. 5-9; Epiphanius, xxxii. 1, 3, 4; Tertullian, Adv. Valent., c. xxxviii.; and St. Augustine, Hær., xi. Hippolytus, in his remarks on Secundus and Epiphanes, borrows from St. Irenæus. ↩
  30. Concerning Ptolemæus, see Irenæus, i. 12; Tertullian, De Præscript., c. xlix.; and Advers. Valent., c. viii.; Epiphanius, Hær., xxxiii. 3-7; and Theodoret, Hæret. Fab., i. 8. ↩
  31. Concerning Marcus, see Irenæus, i. 12-18; Tertullian, Præscript., c. l.; Epiphanius, Hær., xxxiv.; Theodoret, Hæret. Fab., i. 9; St. Augustine, Hær., c. xiv.; and St. Jerome's 29th Epistle. ↩
  32. energon: Bunsen reads dron, which has the same meaning. Cruice reads aioron, but makes no attempt at translation. Miller's reading is doron, which is obviously corrupt, but for which dolon has been suggested, and with good show of reason. ↩
  33. [The lost book upon the Witch of Endor, possibly. "Against the Magi" is the title of the text, and is taken to refer to book iv. cap. xxviii. p. 35, supra: the more probable opinion. ↩
  34. Or, "had given thanks." ↩
  35. analuomenou: some read anaduomenou, which is obviously untenable. ↩
  36. [Here was an awful travesty of the heresy of a later day which introduced "the miracle of Bolsena" and the Corpus-Christi celebration. See Robertson, Hist., vol. iii. p. 604.] ↩
  37. [Bunsen (vol. i. p 72-75) makes useful comments.] ↩
  38. Hippolytus has already employed this word, hadromesteron, in the Prooemium. It literally means, of strong or compact parts. Hippolytus, however, uses it in contrast to the expression leptomeres, in reference to his Summary of Heresies. Bunsen thinks that Hippolytus means to say that Irenæus expressed himself rather too strongly, and that the Marcosians, on meeting with Irenæus' assertions, indignantly repudiated them. Dr. Wordsworth translates hadromeros (in the Prooemium), "with rude generality,"—a rendering scarcely in keeping with the passage above. ↩
  39. The largest extract from Irenæus is that which follows—the explanation of the heresy of Marcus. From this to the end of book vi. occurs in Irenæus likewise. Hippolytus' text does not always accurately correspond with that of his master. The divergence, however, is inconsiderable, and may sometimes be traceable to the error of the transcriber. ↩
  40. Hippolytus uses two words to signify letters, stoicheion and gramma. The former strictly means an articulate sound as the basis of language or of written words, and the latter the sound itself when represented by a particular symbol or sign. ↩
  41. [Rev. iii. 14. A name of Christ. This word is travestied as the name Logos also, most profanely.] ↩
  42. This is Duncker's emendation, suggested by Irenæus' text. Miller reads ton topon, which yields scarcely any meaning. ↩
  43. Hippolytus' text has been here corrected from that of Irenæus. ↩
  44. This is a correction from Progenitor, on the authority of Irenæus and Epiphanius. ↩
  45. Propatora: Irenæus reads Patrodora, which is adopted by Schneidewin, and translated patrium. ↩
Chapter XXVIII.—The Valentinian Origin of the Creation. — Refutation of All Heresies; On Christ and Antichrist; fragments on Daniel · Hippolytus · Cloud of Witnesses