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 Pleroma of all things. In such a case, He would have both
beginning, middle, and end, with respect to those who are beyond Him.
And if He has an end in regard to those things which are below, He has
also a beginning with respect to those things which are above. In like
manner, there is an absolute necessity that He should experience the
very same thing at all other points, and should be held in, bounded,
and enclosed by those existences that are outside of Him. For that
being who is the end downwards, necessarily circumscribes and
surrounds him who finds his end in it. And thus, according to them,
the Father of all (that is, He whom they call Proon and Proarche),
with their Pleroma, and the good God of Marcion, is established and
enclosed in some other, and is surrounded from without by another
mighty Being, who must of necessity be greater, inasmuch as that which
contains is greater than that which is contained. But then that which
is greater is also stronger, and in a greater degree Lord; and that
which is greater, and stronger, and in a greater degree Lord--must be
God.

    3. Now, since there exists, according to them, also something else
which they declare to be outside of the Pleroma, into which they
further hold there descended that higher power who went astray, it is
in every way necessary that the Pleroma either contains that which is
beyond, yet is contained (for otherwise, it will not be beyond the
Pleroma; for if there is anything beyond the Pleroma, there will be a
Pleroma within this very Pleroma which they declare to be outside of
the Pleroma, and the Pleroma will be contained by that which is
beyond: and with the Pleroma is understood also the first God); or,
again, they must be an infinite distance separated from each
other--the Pleroma [I mean], and that which is beyond it. But if they
maintain this, there will then be a third kind of existence, which
separates by immensity the Pleroma and that which is beyond it. This
third kind of existence will therefore bound and contain both the
others, and will be greater both than the Pleroma, and than that which
is beyond it, inasmuch as it contains both in its bosom. In this way,
talk might go on for ever concerning those things which are contained,
and those which contain. For if this third existence has its beginning
above, and its end beneath, there is an absolute necessity that it be
also bounded on the sides, either beginning or ceasing at certain
other points, [where new existences begin.] These, again, and others
which are above and below, will have their beginnings at certain other
points, and so on ad infinitum; so that their thoughts would never
rest in one God, but, in consequence of seeking after more than
exists, would wander away to that which has no existence, and depart
from the true God.

    4. These remarks are, in like manner, applicable against the
followers of Marcion. For his two gods will also be contained and
circumscribed by an immense interval which separates them from one
another. But then there is a necessity to suppose a multitude of gods
separated by an immense distance from each other on every side,
beginning with one another, and ending in one another. Thus, by that
very process of reasoning on which they depend for teaching that there
is a certain Pleroma or God above the Creator of heaven and earth, any
one who chooses to employ it may maintain that there is another
Pleroma above the Pleroma, above that again another, and above Bythus
another ocean of Deity, while in like manner the same successions hold
with respect to the sides; and thus, their doctrine flowing out into
immensity, there will always be a necessity to conceive of other
Pleroma, and other Bythi, so as never at any time to stop, but always
to continue seeking for others besides those already mentioned.
Moreover, it will be uncertain whether these which we conceive of are
below, or are, in fact, themselves the things which are above; and, in
like manner, will be doubtful] respecting those things which are said
by them to be above, whether they are really above or below; and thus
our opinions will have no fixed conclusion or certainty, but will of
necessity wander forth after worlds without limits, and gods that
cannot be numbered.

    5. These things, then, being so, each deity will be contented with
his own possessions, and will not be moved with any curiosity
respecting the affairs of others; otherwise he would be unjust, and
rapacious, and would cease to be what God is. Each creation, too, will
glorify its own maker, and will be contented with him, not knowing any
other; otherwise it would most justly be deemed an apostate by all the
others, and would receive a richly-deserved punishment. For it must be
either that there is one Being who contains all things, and formed in
His own territory all those things which have been created, according
to His own will; or, again, that there are numerous unlimited creators
and gods, who begin from each other, and end in each other on every
side; and it will then be necessary to allow that all the rest are
contained from without by some one who is greater, and that they are
each of them shut up within their own territory, and remain in it. No
one of them all, therefore, is God. For there will be [much] wanting
to every one of them, possessing [as he will do] only a very small
part when compared with all the rest. The name of the Omnipotent will
thus be brought to an end, and such an opinion will of necessity fall
to impiety.


CHAP. II--THE WORLD WAS NOT FORMED BY ANGELS, OR BY ANY OTHER BEING,
CONTRARY TO THE WILL OF THE MOST HIGH GOD, BUT WAS MADE BY THE FATHER
THROUGH THE WORD.(1)



    1. Those, moreover, who say that the world was formed by angels,
or by any other maker of it, contrary to the will of Him who is the
Supreme Father, err first of all in this very point, that they
maintain that angels formed such and so mighty a creation, contrary to
the will of the Most High God. This would imply that angels were more
powerful than God; or if not so, that He was either careless, or
inferior, or paid no regard to those things which took place among His
own possessions, whether they turned out ill or well, so that He might
drive away and prevent the one, while He praised and rejoiced over the
other. But if one would not ascribe such conduct even to a man of any
ability, how much less to God

    2. Next let them tell us whether these things have been formed
within the limits which are contained by Him, and in His proper
territory, or in regions belonging to others, and lying beyond Him?
But if they say [that these things were done] beyond Him, then all the
absurdities already mentioned will face them, and the Supreme God will
be enclosed by that which is beyond Him, in which also it will be
necessary that He should find His end. If, on the other hand, [these
things were done] within His own proper territory, it will be very
idle to say that the world was thus formed within His proper territory
against His will by angels who are themselves under His power, or by
any other being, as if either He Himself did not behold all things
which take place among His own possessions, or(2) was not aware of the
things to be done by angels.

    3. If, however, [the things referred to were done] not against His
will, but with His concurrence and knowledge, as some [of these men]
think, the angels, or the Former of the world [whoever that may have
been], will no longer be the causes of that formation, but the will of
God. For if He is the Former of the world, He too made the angels, or
at least was the cause of their creation; and He will be regarded as
having made the world who prepared the causes of its formation.
Although they maintain that the angels were made by a long succession
downwards, or that the Former of the world [sprang] from the Supreme
Father, as Basilides asserts; nevertheless that which is the cause of
those things which have been made will still be traced to Him who was
the Author of such a succession. [The case stands] just as regards
success in war, which is ascribed to the king who prepared those
things which are the cause of victory; and, in like manner, the
creation of any state, or of any work, is referred to him who prepared
materials for the accomplishment of those results which were
afterwards brought about.  Wherefore, we do not say that it was the
axe which cut the wood, or the saw which divided it; but one would
very properly say that the man cut and divided it who formed the axe
and the saw for this purpose, and [who also formed] at a much earlier
date all the tools by which the axe and the saw themselves were
formed. With justice, therefore, according to an analogous process of
reasoning, the Father of all will be declared the Former of this
world, and not the angels, nor any other [so-called] former of the
world, other than He who was its Author, and had formerly(3) been the
cause of the preparation for a creation of this kind.

    4. This manner of speech may perhaps be plausible or persuasive to
those who know not God, and who liken Him to needy human beings, and
to those who cannot immediately and without assistance form anything,
but require many instrumentalities to produce what they intend. But it
will not be regarded as at all probable by those who know that God
stands in need of nothing, and that He created and made all things by
His Word, while He neither required angels to assist Him in the
production of those things which are made, nor of any power greatly
inferior to Himself, and ignorant of the Father, nor of any defect or
ignorance, in order that he who should know Him might become man.(4)
But He Himself in Himself, after a fashion which we can neither
describe nor conceive, predestinating all things, formed them as He
pleased, bestowing harmony on all things, and assigning them their own
place, and the beginning of their creation. In this way He conferred
on spiritual things a spiritual and invisible nature, on
super-celestial things a celestial, on angels an angelical, on animals
an animal, on beings that swim a nature suited to the water, and on
those that live on the land one fitted for the land--on all, in short,
a nature suitable to the character of the life assigned them--while He
formed all things that were made by His Word that never wearies.

    5. For this is a peculiarity of the pre-eminence of God, not to
stand in need of other instruments for the creation of those things
which are summoned into existence. His own Word is both suitable and
sufficient for the formation of all things, even as John, the disciple
of the Lord, declares regarding Him: "All things were made by Him, and
without Him was nothing made."(1) Now, among the "all things" our
world must be embraced. It too, therefore, was made by His Word, as
Scripture tells us in the book of Genesis that He made all things
connected with our world by His Word. David also expresses the same
truth [when he says] "For He spake, and they were made; He commanded,
and they were created."(2) Whom, therefore, shall we believe as to the
creation of the world--these heretics who have been mentioned that
prate so foolishly and inconsistently on the subject, or the disciples
of the Lord, and Moses, who was both a faithful servant of God and a
prophet? He at first narrated the formation of the world in these
words: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,"(3) and
all other things in succession; but neither gods nor angels [had any
share in the work].

    Now, that this God is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Paul
the apostle also has declared, [saying,] "There is one God, the
Father, who is above all, and through all things, and in us all."(4) I
have indeed proved already that there is only one God; but I shall
further demonstrate this from the apostles themselves, and from the
discourses of the Lord. For what sort of conduct would it be, were we
to forsake the utterances of the prophets, of the Lord, and of the
apostles, that we might give heed to these persons, who speak not a
word of sense?



CHAP. III.--THE BYTHUS AND PLEROMA OF THE VALENTINIANS, AS WELL AS THE
GOD OF MAR-CION, SHOWN TO BE ABSURD; THE WORLD WAS ACTUALLY CREATED BY
THE SAME BEING WHO HAD CONCEIVED THE IDEA OF IT, AND WAS NOT THE FRUIT
OF DEFECT OR IGNORANCE.



    1. The Bythus, therefore, whom they conceive of with his Pleroma,
and the God of Marcion, are inconsistent. If indeed, as they affirm,
he has something subjacent and beyond himself, which they style
vacuity and shadow, this vacuum is then proved to be greater than
their Pleroma. But it is inconsistent even to make this statement,
that while he contains all things within himself, the creation was
formed by some other. For it is absolutely necessary that they
acknowledge a certain void and chaotic kind of existence (below the
spiritual Pleroma) in which this universe was formed, and that the
Propator purposely left this chaos as it was, either(5) knowing
beforehand what things were to happen in it, or being ignorant of
them. If he was really ignorant, then God will not be prescient of all
things. But they will not even [in that case] be able to assign a
reason on what account He thus left this place void during so long a
period of time. If, again, He is prescient, and contemplated mentally
that creation which was about to have a being in that place, then He
Himself created it who also formed it beforehand [ideally] in Himself.

    2. Let them cease, therefore, to affirm that the world was made by
any other; for as soon as God formed a conception in His mind, that
was also done which He had thus mentally conceived. For it was not
possible that one Being should mentally form the conception, and
another actually produce the things which had been conceived by Him in
His mind. But God, according to these heretics, mentally conceived
either an eternal world or a temporal one, both of which suppositions
cannot be true. Yet if He had mentally conceived of it as eternal,
spiritual,(6) and visible, it would also have been formed such. But if
it was formed such as it really is, then He made it such who had
mentally conceived of it as such; or He willed it to exist in the
ideality(7) of the Father, according to the conception of His mind,
such as it now is, compound, mutable, and transient. Since, then, it
is just such as the Father had [ideally] formed in counsel with
Himself, it must be worthy of the Father. But to affirm that what was
mentally conceived and pre-created by the Father of all, just as it
has been actually formed, is the fruit of defect, and the production
of ignorance, is to be guilty of great blasphemy. For, according to
them, the Father of all will thus be [regarded as] generating in His
breast, according to His own mental conception, the emanations of
defect and the fruits of ignorance, since the things which He had
conceived in His mind have actually been produced.



CHAP. IV.--THE ABSURDITY OF THE SUPPOSED VACUUM AND DEFECT OF THE
HERETICS IS DEMONSTRATED.



    1. The cause, then, of such a dispensation on the part of God, is
to be inquired after; but the formation of the world is not to be
ascribed to any other. And all things are to be spoken of as having
been so prepared by God beforehand, that they should be made as they
have been made; but shadow and vacuity are not to be conjured into
existence. But whence, let me ask, came this vacuity [of which they
speak]? If it was indeed produced by Him who, according to them, is
the Father and Author of oil things, then it is both equal in honour
and related to the rest of the AEons, perchance even more ancient than
they are. Moreover, if it proceeded from the same source [as they
did], it must be similar in nature to Him who produced it, as well as
to those along with whom it was produced. There will therefore be an
absolute necessity, both that the Bythus of whom they speak, along
with Sige, be similar in nature to a vacuum, that is, that He really
is a vacuum; and that the rest of the AEons, since they are the
brothers of vacuity, should also be devoid(1) of substance. If, on the
other hand, it has not been thus produced, it must have sprang from
and been generated by itself, and in that case it will be equal in
point of age to that Bythus who is, according to them, the Father of
oil; and thus vacuity will be of the same nature and of the same
honour with Him who is, according to them, the universal Father. For
it must of necessity have been either produced by some one, or
generated by itself, and sprung from itself. But if, in truth, vacuity
was produced, then its producer Valentinus is also a vacuum, as are
likewise his followers. If, again, it was not produced, but was
generated by itself, then that which is really a vacuum is similar to,
and the brother of, and of the same honour with, that Father who has
been proclaimed by Valentinus; while it is more ancient, and dating
its existence from a period greatly anterior, and more exalted in
honour than the remaining AEons of Ptolemy himself, and Heracleon, and
all the rest(2) who hold the same opinions.

    2. But if, driven to despair in regard to these points, they
confess that the Father of all contains all things, and that there is
nothing whatever outside of the Heroma (for it is an absolute
necessity that, [if there be anything outside of it,] it should be
bounded and circumscribed by something greater than itself), and that
they speak of what is without and what within in reference to
knowledge and ignorance, and not with respect to local distance; but
that, in the Pleroma, or in those things which are contained by the
Father, the whole creation which we know to have been formed, having
been made by the Demiurge, or by the angels, is contained by the
unspeakable greatness, as the centre is in a circle, or as a spot is
in a garment,--then, in the first place, what sort of a being must
that Bythus be, who allows a stain to have place in His own bosom, and
permits another one to create or produce within His territory,
contrary to His own will? Such a mode of acting would truly entail
[the charge of] degeneracy upon the entire Pleroma, since it might
from the first have cut off that defect, and those emanations which
derived their origin from it,(3) and not have agreed to permit the
formation of creation either in ignorance, or passion, or in defect.
For he who can afterwards rectify a defect, and does, as it were, wash
away a stain,(4) could at a much earlier date have taken care that no
such stain should, even at first, be found among his possessions. Or
if at the first he allowed that the things which were made [should be
as they are], since they could not, in fact, be formed otherwise, then
it follows that they must always continue in the same condition. For
how is it possible, that those things which cannot at the first obtain
rectification, should subsequently receive it? Or how can men say that
they are called to perfection, when those very beings who are the
causes from which men derive their origin--either the Demiurge
himself, or the angels --are declared to exist in defect? And if, as
is maintained, [the Supreme Being,] inasmuch as He is benignant, did
at last take pity upon men, and bestow on them perfection, He ought at
first to have pitied those who were the creators of man, and to have
conferred on them perfection. In this way, men too would verily have
shared in His compassion, being formed. perfect by those that were
perfect. For if He pitied the work of these beings, He ought long
before to have pitied themselves, and not to have allowed them to fall
into such awful blindness.

    3. Their talk also about shadow and vacuity, in which they
maintain that the creation with which we are concerned was formed,
will be brought to nothing, if the things referred to were created
within the territory which is contained by the Father. For if they
hold that the light of their Father is such that it fills all things
which are inside of Him, and illuminates them all, how can any vacuum
or shadow possibly exist within that territory which is contained by
the Pleroma, and by the light of the Father? For, in that case, it
behoves them to point out some place within the Propator, or within
the Pleroma, which is not illuminated, nor kept possession of by any
one, and in which either the angels or the Demiurge formed whatever
they pleased. Nor will it be a small amount of space in which such and
so great a creation can be conceived of as having been formed. There
will therefore be an absolute necessity that, within the Pleroma, or
within the Father of whom they speak, they should conceive(1) of some
place, void, formless, and full of darkness, in which those things
were formed which have been formed. By such a supposition, however,
the light of their Father would incur a reproach, as if He could not
illuminate and fill those things which are within Himself. Thus, then,
when they maintain that these things were the fruit of defect and the
work of error, they do moreover introduce defect and error within the
Pleroma, and into the bosom of the Father.



CHAP. V.--THIS WORLD WAS NOT FORMED BY ANY OTHER BEINGS WITHIN THE
TERRITORY WHICH IS CONTAINED BY THE FATHER.



    1. The remarks, therefore, which I made a little while ago(2) are
suitable in answer to those who assert that this world was formed
outside of the Pleroma, or under a "good God; "and such persons, with
the Father they speak of, will be quite cut off from that which is
outside the Pleroma, in which, at the same time, it is necessary that
they should finally rest.(3) In answer to those, again, who maintain
that this world was formed by certain other beings within that
territory which is contained by the Father, all those points which
have now(4) been noticed will present themselves [as exhibiting their]
absurdities and incoherencies; and they will be compelled either to
acknowledge all those things which are within the Father, lucid, full,
and energetic, or to accuse the light of the Father as if He could not
illuminate all things; or, as a portion of their Pleroma [is so
described], the whole of it must be confessed to be void, chaotic, and
full of darkness. And they accuse all other created things as if these
were merely temporal, or [at the best], if eternal,(5) yet material.
But(6) these (the AEons) ought to be regarded as beyond the reach of
such accusations, since they are within the Pleroma, or the charges in
question will equally fall against the entire Pleroma; and thus the
Christ of whom they speak is discovered to be the author of ignorance.
For, according to their statements, when He had given a form so far as
substance was concerned to the Mother they conceive of, He cast her
outside of the Pleroma; that is, He cut her off from knowledge. He,
therefore, who separated her from knowledge, did in reality produce
ignorance in her. How then could the very same person bestow the gift
of knowledge on the rest of the AEons, those who were anterior to Him
[in production], and yet be the author of ignorance to His Mother? For
He placed her beyond the pale of knowledge, when He cast her outside
of the Pleroma.

    2. Moreover, if they explain being within and without the Pleroma
as implying knowledge and ignorance respectively, as certain of them
do (since he who has knowledge is within that which knows), then they
must of necessity grant that the Saviour Himself (whom they designate
All Things) was in a state of ignorance. For they maintain that, on
His coming forth outside of the Pleroma, He imparted form to their
Mother [Achamoth]. If, then, they assert that whatever is outside [the
Pleroma] is ignorant of all things, and if the Saviour went forth to
impart form to their Mother, then He was situated beyond the pale of
the knowledge of all things; that is, He was in ignorance. How then
could He communicate knowledge to her, when He Himself was beyond the
pale of knowledge? For we, too, they declare to be outside the
Pleroma, inasmuch as we are outside of the knowledge which they
possess. And once more: If the Saviour really went forth beyond the
Pleroma to seek after the sheep which was lost, but the Pleroma is
[co-extensive with] knowledge, then He placed Himself beyond the pale
of knowledge, that is, in ignorance. For it is necessary either that
they grant that what is outside the Pleroma is so in a local sense, in
which case all the remarks formerly made will rise up against them; or
if they speak of that which is within in regard to knowledge, and of
that which is without in respect to ignorance, then their Saviour, and
Christ long before Him, must have been formed in ignorance, inasmuch
as they went forth beyond the Pleroma, that is, beyond the pale of
knowledge, in order to impart form to their Mother.

    3. These arguments may, in like manner, be adapted to meet the
case of all those who, in any way, maintain that the world was formed
either by angels or by any other one than the true God. For the
charges which they bring against the Demiurge, and those things which
were made material and temporal, will in truth fall back on the
Father; if indeed the(7) very things which were formed in the bosom of
the Pleroma began by and by in fact to be dissolved, in accordance
with the permission and good-will of the Father. The [immediate]
Creator, then, is not the [real] Author of this work, thinking, as He
did, that He formed it very good, but He who allows and approves of
the productions of defect, and the works of error having a place among
his own possessions, and that temporal things should be mixed up with
eternal, corruptible with incorruptible, and those which partake of
error with those which belong to truth. If, however, these things were
formed without the permission or approbation of the Father of all,
then that Being must be more powerful, stronger, and more kingly, who
made these things within a territory which properly belongs to Him
(the Father), and did so without His permission. If again, as some
say, their Father permitted these things without approving of them,
then He gave the permission on account of some necessity, being either
able to prevent [such procedure], or not able. But if indeed He could
not [hinder it], then He is weak and powerless; while, if He could, He
is a seducer, a hypocrite, and a slave of necessity, inasmuch as He
does not consent [to such a course], and yet allows it as if He did
consent. And allowing error to arise at the first, and to go on
increasing, He endeavours in later times to destroy it, when already
many have miserably perished on account of the [original] defect.

    4. It is not seemly, however, to say of Him who is God over all,
since He is free and independent, that He was a slave to necessity, or
that anything takes place with His permission, yet against His desire;
otherwise they will make necessity greater and more kingly than God,
since that which has the most power is superior(1) to all [others].
And He ought at the very beginning to have cut off the causes of [the
fancied] necessity, and not to have allowed Himself to be shut up to
yielding to that necessity, by permitting anything besides that which
became Him. For it would have been much better, more consistent, and
more God-like, to cut off at the beginning the principle of this kind
of necessity, than afterwards, as if moved by repentance, to endeavour
to extirpate the results of necessity when they had reached such a
development. And if the Father of all be a slave to necessity, and
must yield to fate, while He unwillingly tolerates the things which
are done, but is at the same time powerless to do anything in
opposition to necessity and fate (like the Homeric Jupiter, who says
of necessity, "I have willingly given thee, yet with unwilling mind"),
then, according to this reasoning, the Bythus of whom they speak will
be found to be the slave of necessity and fate.



CHAP. VI. --THE ANGELS AND THE CREATOR OF THE WORLD COULD NOT HAVE
BEEN IGNORANT OF THE SUPREME GOD.



    1. How, again, could either the angels, or the Creator of the
world, have been ignorant of the Supreme God, seeing they were His
property, and His creatures, and were contained by Him? He might
indeed have been invisible to them on account of His superiority, but
He could by no means have been unknown to them on account of His
providence. For though it is true, as they declare, that they were
very far separated from Him through their inferiority [of nature],
yet, as His dominion extended over all of them, it behoved them to
know their Ruler, and to be aware of this in particular, that He who
created them is Lord of all. For since His invisible essence is
mighty, it confers on all a profound mental intuition and perception
of His most powerful, yea, omnipotent greatness. Wherefore, although
"no one knows the Father, except the Son, nor the Son except the
Father, and those to whom the Son will reveal Him,"(2) yet all
[beings] do know this one fact at least, because reason, implanted in
their minds, moves them, and reveals to them [the truth] that there is
one God, the Lord of all.

    2. And on this account all things have been [by general consent]
placed under the sway of Him who is styled the Most High, and the
Almighty. By calling upon Him, even before the coming of our Lord, men
were saved both from most wicked spirits, and from all kinds of
demons, and from every sort of apostate power. This was the case, not
as if earthly spirits or demons had seen Him, but because they knew of
the existence of Him who is God over all, at whose invocation they
trembled, as there does tremble every creature, and principality, and
power, and every being endowed with energy under His government. By
way of parallel, shall not those who live under the empire of the
Romans, although they have never seen the emperor, but are far
separated from him both by land and sea, know very well, as they
experience his rule, who it is that possesses the principal power in
the state? How then could it be, that those angels who were superior
to us [in nature], or even He whom they call the Creator of the world,
did not know the Almighty, when even dumb animals tremble and yield at
the invocation of His name? And as, although they have not seen Him,
yet all things are subject to the name of our Lord,(3) so must they
also be to His who made and established all things by His word, since
it was no other than He who formed the world. And for this reason do
the Jews even now put demons to flight by means of this very
adjuration, inasmuch as all beings fear the invocation of Him who
created them.

    3. If, then, they shrink from affirming that the angels are more
irrational than the dumb animals, they will find that it behoved
these, although they had not seen Him who is God over all, to know His
power and sovereignty. For it will appear truly ridiculous, if they
maintain that they themselves indeed, who dwell upon the earth, know
Him who is God over all whom they have never seen, but will not allow
Him who, according to their opinion, formed them and the whole world,
although He dwells in the heights and above the heavens, to know those
things with which they themselves, though they dwell below, are
acquainted. [This is the case], unless perchance they maintain that
Bythus lives in Tartarus below the earth, and that on this account
they have attained to a knowledge of Him before those angels who have
their abode on high. Thus do they rush into such an abyss of madness
as to pronounce the Creator of the world void of understanding. They
are truly deserving of pity, since with such utter folly they affirm
that He (the Creator of the world) neither knew His Mother, nor her
seed, nor the Pleroma of the AEons, nor the Propator, nor what the
things were which He made; but that these are images of those things
which are within the Pleroma, the Saviour having secretly laboured
that they should be so formed ['by the unconscious Demiurge], in
honour of those things which are above.



CHAP. VII.--CREATED THINGS ARE NOT THE IMAGES OF THOSE AEONS WHO ARE
WITHIN THE PLEROMA.



    1. While the Demiurge was thus ignorant of all things, they tell
us that the Saviour conferred honour upon the Pleroma by the creation
[which he summoned into existence] through means of his Mother,
inasmuch as he produced similitudes and images of those things which
are above. But I have already shown that it was impossible that
anything should exist beyond the Pleroma (in which external region
they tell us that images were made of those things which are within
the Pleroma), or that this world was formed by any other one than the
Supreme God. But if it is a pleasant thing to overthrow them on every
side, and to prove them vendors of falsehood; let us say, in
opposition to them, that if these things were made by the Saviour to
the honour of those which are above, after their likeness, then it
behoved them always to endure, that those things which have been
honoured should perpetually continue in honour. But if they do in fact
pass away, what is the use of this very brief period of honour,--an
honour which at one time had no existence, and which shall again come
to nothing? In that case I shall prove that the Saviour is rather an
aspirant after vainglory, than(1) one who honours those things which
are above, For what honour can those things which are temporal confer
on such as are eternal and endure for ever? or those which pass away
on such as remain? or those which are corruptible on such as are
incorruptible?--since, even among men who are themselves mortal, there
is no value attached to that honour which speedily passes away, but to
that which endures as long as it possibly can. But those things which,
as soon as they are made, come to an end, may justly be said rather to
have been formed for the contempt of such as are thought to be
honoured by them; and that that which is eternal is contumeliously
treated when its image is corrupted and dissolved. But what if their
Mother had not wept, and laughed, and been involved in despair? The
Saviour would not then have possessed any means of honouring the
Fulness, inasmuch as her last state of confusion(2) did not have
substance of its own by which it might honour the Propator.

    2. Alas for the honour of vainglory which at once passes away, and
no longer appears! There will be some(3) AEon, in whose case such
honour will not be thought at all to have had an existence, and then
the things which are above will be unhonoured; or it will be necessary
to produce once more another Mother weeping, and in despair, in order
to the honour of the Pleroma. What a dissimilar, and at the same time
blasphemous image! Do you tell me that an image of the Only-begotten
was produced by the former(4) of the world, whom(5) again ye wish to
be considered the Nous (mind) of the Father of all, and [yet maintain]
that this image was ignorant of itself, ignorant of
creation,--ignorant, too, of the Mother,--ignorant of everything that
exists, and of those things which were made by it; and are you not
ashamed while, in opposition to yourselves, you ascribe ignorance even
to the Only-begotten Himself? For if these things [below] were made by
the Saviour after the similitude of those which are above, while He
(the Demiurge) who was made after such similitude was in so great
ignorance, it necessarily follows that around Him, and in accordance
with Him, after whose likeness be that is thus ignorant was formed,
ignorance of the kind in question spiritually exists. For it is not
possible, since both were produced spiritually, and neither fashioned
nor composed, that in some the likeness was preserved, while in others
the likeness of the image was spoiled, that image which was here
produced that it might be according to the image of that production
which is above. But if it is not similar, the charge will then attach
to the Saviour, who produced a dissimilar image,--of being, so to
speak, an incompetent workman. For it is out of their power to affirm
that the Saviour had not the faculty of production, since they style
Him All Things. If, then, the image is dissimilar, he is a poor
workman, and the blame lies, according to their hypothesis, with the
Saviour. If, on the other hand, it is similar, then the same ignorance
will be found to exist in the Nous (mind) of their Propator, that is,
in the Only-begotten. The Nous of the Father, in that case, was
ignorant of Himself; ignorant, too, of the Father; ignorant, moreover,
of those very things which were formed by Him. But if He has
knowledge, it necessarily follows also that he who was formed after
his likeness by the Saviour should know the things which are like; and
thus, according to their own principles, their monstrous blasphemy is
overthrown.

    3. Apart from this, however, how can those things which belong to
creation, various, manifold, and innumerable as they are, be the
images of those thirty AEons which are within the Pleroma, whose
names, as these men fix them, I have set forth in the book which
precedes this? And not only will they be unable to adapt the [vast]
variety of creation at large to the [comparative] smallness of their
Pleroma, but they cannot do this even with respect to any one part of
it, whether [that possessed by] celestial or terrestrial beings, or
those that live in the waters. For they themselves testify that their
Pleroma consists of thirty AEons; but any one will undertake to show
that, in a single department of those [created beings] which have been
mentioned, they reckon that there are not thirty, but many thousands
of species. How then can those things, which constitute such a
multiform creation, which are opposed in nature to each other, and
disagree among themselves, and destroy the one the other, be the
images and likenesses of the thirty AEons of the Pleroma, if indeed,
as they declare, these being possessed of one nature, are of equal and
similar properties, and exhibit no differences [among themselves]? For
it was incumbent, if these things are images of those AEons,--inasmuch
as they declare that some men are wicked by nature, and some, on the
other hand, naturally good,--to point out such differences also among
their AEons, and to maintain that some of them were produced naturally
good, while some were naturally evil, so that the supposition of the
likeness of those things might harmonize with the AEons. Moreover,
since there are in the world some creatures that are gentle, and
others that are fierce, some that are innocuous, while others are
hurtful and destroy the rest; some have their abode on the earth,
others in the water, others in the air, and others in the heaven; in
like manner, they are bound to show that the AEons possess such
properties, if indeed the one are the images of the others. And
besides; "the eternal fire which the Father has prepared for the devil
and his angels,"(2)-- they ought to show of which of those AEons that
are above it is the image; for it, too, is reckoned part of the
creation.

    4. If, however, they say that these things are the images of the
Enthymesis of that AEon who fell into passion, then, first of all,
they will act impiously against their Mother, by declaring her to be
the first cause of evil and corruptible images. And then, again, how
can those things which are manifold, and dissimilar, and contrary in
their nature, be the images of one and the same Being? And if they say
that the angels of the Pleroma are numerous, and that those things
which are many are the images of these--not in this way either will
the account they give be satisfactory. For, in the first place, they
are then bound to point out differences among the angels of the
Pleroma, which are mutually opposed to each other, even as the images
existing below are of a contrary nature among themselves. And then,
again, since there are many, yea, innumerable angels who surround the
Creator, as all the prophets acknowledge,--[saying, for instance,]
"Ten thousand times ten thousand stood beside Him, and many thousands
of thousands ministered unto Him,"(2)--then, according(3) to them, the
angels of the Pleroma will have as images the angels of the Creator,
and the entire creation remains in the image of the Pleroma, but so
that the thirty AEons no longer correspond to the manifold variety of
the creation.

    5. Still further, if these things [below] were made after the
similitude of those [above], after the likeness of which again will
those then be made? For if the Creator of the world did not form these
things directly from His own(4) conception, but, like an architect of
no ability, or a boy receiving his first lesson, copied them from
archetypes furnished by others, then whence did their Bythus obtain
the forms of that creation which He at first produced? It clearly
follows that He must have received the model from some other one who
is above Him, and that one, in turn, from another. And none the less
[for these suppositions], the talk about images, as about gods, will
extend to infinity, if we do not at once fix our mind on one
Artificer, and on one God, who of Himself formed those things which
have been created. Or is it really the case that, in regard to mere
men, one will allow that they have of themselves invented what is
useful for the purposes of life, but will not grant to that God who
formed the world, that of Himself He created the forms of those things
which have been made, and imparted to it its orderly arrangement?

    6. But, again, how can these things [below] be images of those
[above], since they are really contrary to them, and can in no respect
have sympathy with them? For those things which are contrary to each
other may indeed be destructive of those to which they are contrary,
but can by no means be their images--as, for instance, water and fire;
or, again, light and darkness, and other such things, can never be the
images of one another. In like manner, neither can those things which
are corruptible and earthly, and of a compound nature, and transitory,
be the images of those which, according to these men, are spiritual;
unless these very things themselves be allowed to be compound, limited
in space, and of a definite shape, and thus no longer spiritual, and
diffused, and spreading into vast extent, and incomprehensible. For
they must of necessity be possessed of a definite figure, and confined
within certain limits, that they may be true images; and then it is
decided that they are not spiritual. If, however, these men maintain
that they are spiritual, and diffused, and incomprehensible, how can
those things which are possessed of figure, and confined within
certain limits, be the images of such as are destitute of figure and
incomprehensible?

    7. If, again, they affirm that neither according to configuration
nor formation, but according to number and the order of production,
those things [above] are the images [of these below], then, in the
first place, these things [below] ought not to be spoken of as images
and likenesses of those AEons that are above. For how can the things
which have neither the fashion nor shape of those [above] be their
images? And, in the next place, they would adapt both the numbers and
productions of the AEons above, so as to render them identical with
and similar to thoseth at belong to the creation [below]. But now,
since they refer to only thirty AEons, and declare that the vast
multitude of things which are embraced within the creation [below] are
images of those that are but thirty, we may justly condemn them as
utterly destitute of sense.



CHAP. VIII.--CREATED THINGS ARE NOT A SHADOW OF THE PLEROMA.



    1. If, again, they declare that these things [below] are a shadow
of those [above], as some of them are bold enough to maintain, so that
in this respect they are images, then it will be necessary for them to
allow that those things which are above are possessed of bodies. For
those bodies which are above do cast a shadow, but spiritual
substances do not, since they can in no degree darken others. If,
however, we also grant them this point (though it is, in fact, an
impossibility), that there is a shadow belonging to those essences
which are spiritual and lucent, into which they declare their Mother
descended; yet, since those things [which are above] are eternal, and
that shadow which is cast by them endures for ever, [it follows that]
these things [below] are also not transitory, but endure along with
those which cast their shadow over them. If, on the other hand, these
things [below] are transitory, it is a necessary consequence that
those [above] also, of which these are the shadow, pass away; while;
if they endure, their shadow likewise endures.

    2. If, however, they maintain that the shadow spoken of does not
exist as being produced by the shade of [those above], but simply in
this respect, that [the things below] are far separated from those
[above], they will then charge the light of their Father with weakness
and insufficiency, as if it cannot extend so far as these things, but
fails to fill that which is empty, and to dispel the shadow, and that
when no one is offering any hindrance. For, according to them, the
light of their Father will be changed into darkness and buried in
obscurity, and will come to an end in those places which are
characterized by emptiness, since it cannot penetrate and fill all
things. Let them then no longer declare that their Bythus is the
fulness of all things, if indeed he has neither filled nor illuminated
that which is vacuum and shadow; or, on the other hand, let them cease
talking of vacuum and shadow, if the light of their Father does in
truth fill all things.

    3. Beyond the primary Father, then--that is, the God who is over
all--there can neither be any Pleroma into which they declare the
Enthymesis of that AEon who suffered passion, descended (so that the
Pleroma itself, or the primary God, should not be limited and
circumscribed by that which is beyond, and should, in fact, be
contained by it); nor can vacuum or shadow have any existence, since
the Father exists beforehand, so that His light cannot fail, and find
end in a vacuum. It is, moreover, irrational and impious to conceive
of a place in which He who is, according to them, Propator, and
Proarche, and Father of all, and of this Pleroma, ceases and has an
end. Nor, again, is it allowable, for the reasons(1) already stated,
to allege that some other being formed so vast a creation in the bosom
of the Father, either with or without His consent. For it is equally
impious and infatuated to affirm that so great a creation was(2)
formed by angels, or by some particular production ignorant of the
true God in that territory which is His own. Nor is it possible that
those things which are earthly and material could have been formed
within their Pleroma, since that is wholly spiritual. And further, it
is not even possible that those things which belong to a multiform
creation, and have been formed with mutually opposite qualities [could
have been created] after the image of the things above, since these
(i.e., the AEons) are said to be few, and of a like formation, and
homogeneous. Their talk, too, about the shadow of kenoma--that is, of
a vacuum--has in all points turned out false. Their figment, then, [in
what way soever viewed,] has been proved groundless,(3) and their
doctrines untenable. Empty, too, are those who listen to them, and are
verily descending into the abyss of perdition.



CHAP. IX.--THERE IS BUT ONE CREATOR OF THE WORLD, GOD THE FATHER: THIS
THE CONSTANT BELIEF OF THE CHURCH.



    1. That God is the Creator of the world is accepted even by those
very persons who in many ways speak against Him, and yet acknowledge
Him, styling Him the Creator, and an angel, not to mention that all
the Scriptures call out [to the same effect], and the Lord teaches us
of this Father(4) who is in heaven, and no other, as I shall show in
the sequel of this work. For the present, however, that proof which is
derived from those who allege doctrines opposite to ours, is of itself
sufficient,--all men, in fact, consenting to this truth: the ancients
on their part preserving with special care, from the tradition of the
first-formed man, this persuasion, while they celebrate the praises of
one God, the Maker of heaven and earth; others, again, after them,
being reminded of this fact by the prophets of God, while the very
heathen learned it from creation itself. For even creation reveals Him
who formed it, and the very work made suggests Him who made it, and
the world manifests Him who ordered it. The Universal Church,
moreover, through the whole world, has received this tradition from
the apostles.



    2. This God, then, being acknowledged, as I have said, and
receiving testimony from all to the fact of His existence, that Father
whom they conjure into existence is beyond doubt untenable, and has no
witnesses [to his existence]. Simon Magus was the first who said that
he himself was God over all, and that the world was formed by his
angels. Then those who succeeded him, as I have shown in the first
book,(5) by their several opinions, still further depraved [his
teaching] through their impious and irreligious doctrines against the
Creator. These [heretics now referred to],(6) being the disciples of
those mentioned, render such as assent to them worse than the heathen.
For the former "serve the creature rather than the Creator,"(7) and
"those which are not gods,"(8) notwithstanding that they ascribe the
first place in Deity to that God who was the Maker of this universe.
But the latter maintain that He, [i.e., the Creator of this world,] is
the fruit of a defect, and describe Him as being of an animal nature,
and as not knowing that Power which is above Him, while He also
exclaims, "I am God, and besides Me there is no other God."(9)
Affirming that He lies, they are themselves liars, attributing all
sorts of wickedness to Him; and conceiving of one who is not above
this Being as really having an existence, they are thus convicted by
their own views of blasphemy against that God who really exists, while
they conjure into existence a god who has no existence, to their own
condemnation. And thus those who declare themselves "perfect," and as
being possessed of the knowledge of all things, are found to be worse
than the heathen, and to entertain more blasphemous opinions even
against their own Creator.



CHAP. X.--PERVERSE INTERPRETATIONS OF SCRIPTURE BY THE HERETICS: GOD
CREATED ALL THINGS OUT OF NOTHING, AND NOT FROM PRE-EXISTENT MATTER.



    1. It is therefore in the highest degree irrational, that we
should take no account of Him who is truly God, and who receives
testimony from all, while we inquire whether there is above Him that
[other being] who really has no existence, and has never been
proclaimed by any one.  For that nothing has been clearly spoken
regarding Him, they themselves furnish testimony; for since they, with
wretched success, transfer to that being who has been conceived of by
them, those parables [of Scripture] which, whatever the form in which
they have been spoken, are sought after [for this purpose], it is
manifest that they now generate another [god], who was never
previously sought after. For by the fact that they thus endeavour to
explain ambiguous passages of Scripture (ambiguous, however, not as if
referring to another god, but as regards the dispensations of [the
true] God), they have constructed another god, weaving, as I said
before, ropes of sand, and affixing a more important to a less
important question. For no question can be solved by means of another
which itself awaits solution; nor, in the opinion of those possessed
of sense, can an ambiguity be explained by means of another ambiguity,
or enigmas by means of another greater enigma, but things of such
character receive their solution from those which are manifest, and
consistent and clear.

    2. But these [heretics], while striving to explain passages of
Scripture and parables, bring forward another more important, and
indeed impious question, to this effect, "Whether there be really
another god above that God who was the Creator of the world?" They are
not in the way of solving the questions [which they propose]; for how
could they find means of doing so? But they append an important
question to one of less consequence, and thus insert [in their
speculations] a difficulty incapable of solution. For in order that
they may(1) know "knowledge" itself (yet not learning this fact, that
the Lord, when thirty years old, came to the baptism of truth), they
do impiously despise that God who was the Creator, and who sent Him
for the salvation of men. And that they may be deemed capable of
informing us whence is the substance of matter, while they believe not
that God, according to His pleasure, in the exercise of His own will
and power, formed all things (so that those things which now are
should have an existence) out of what did not previously exist, they
have collected [a multitute of] vain discourses. They thus truly
reveal their infidelity; they do not believe in that which really
exists, and they have fallen away into [the belief of] that which has,
in fact, no existence.

    3. For, when they tell us that all moist substance proceeded from
the tears of Achamoth, all lucid substance from her smile, all solid
substance from her sadness, all mobile substance from her terror, and
that thus they have sublime knowledge on account of which they are
superior to others,--how can these things fail to be regarded as
worthy of contempt, and truly ridiculous? They do not believe that God
(being powerful, and rich in all resources) created matter itself,
inasmuch as they know not how much a spiritual and divine essence can
accomplish. But they do believe that their Mother, whom they style a
female from a female, produced from her passions aforesaid the so vast
material substance of creation.  They inquire, too, whence the
substance of creation was supplied to the Creator; but they do not
inquire whence [were supplied] to their Mother (whom they call the
Enthymesis and impulse of the AEon that went astray) so great an
amount of tears, or perspiration, or sadness, or that which produced
the remainder of matter.

    4. For, to attribute the substance of created things to the power
and will of Him who is God of all, is worthy both of credit and
acceptance. It is also agreeable [to reason], and there may be well
said regarding such a belief, that "the things which are impossible
with men are possible with God."(2) While men, indeed, cannot make
anything out of nothing, but only out of matter already existing, yet
God is in this point proeminently superior to men, that He Himself
called into being the substance of His creation, when previously it
had no existence. But the assertion that matter was produced from the
Enthymesis of an AEon going astray, and that the AEon [referred to]
was far separated from her Enthymesis, and that, again, her passion
and feeling, apart from herself, became matter--is incredible,
infatuated, impossible, and untenable.



CHAP. XI.--THE HERETICS, FROM THEIR DISBELIEF OF THE TRUTH, HAVE
FALLEN INTO AN ABYSS OF ERROR: REASONS FOR INVESTIGATING THEIR
SYSTEMS.



    1. They do not believe that He, who is God above all, formed by
His Word, in His own territory, as He Himself pleased, the various and
diversified [works of creation which exist], inasmuch as He is the
former of all things, like a wise architect, and a most powerful
monarch. But they believe that angels, or some power separate from
God, and who was ignorant of Him, formed this universe. By this
course, therefore, not yielding credit to the truth, but wallowing in
falsehood, they have lost the bread of true life, and have fallen into
vacuity(3) and an abyss of shadow. They are like the dog of AEsop,
which dropped the bread, and made an attempt at seizing its Shadow,
thus losing the [real] food. It is easy to prove from the very words
of the Lord, that He acknowledges one Father and Creator of the world,
and Fashioner of man, who was proclaimed by the law and the prophets,
while He knows no other, and that this One is really God over all; and
that He teaches that that adoption of sons pertaining to the Father,
which is eternal life, takes place through Himself, conferring it [as
He does] on all the righteous.  2. But since these men delight in
attacking us, and in their true character of cavillers assail us with
points which really tell not at all against us, bringing forward in
opposition to us a multitude of parables and [captious] questions, I
have thought it well, on the other side, first of all to put to them
the following inquiries concerning their own doctrines, to exhibit
their improbability, and to put an end to their audacity. After this
has been done, [I intend] to bring forward the discourses of the Lord,
so that they may not only be rendered destitute of the means of
attacking us, but that, since they will be unable reasonably to reply
to those questions which are put, they may see that their plan of
argument is destroyed; so that, either returning to the truth, and
humbling themselves, and ceasing from their multifarious phantasies,
they may propitiate God for those. blasphemies they have uttered
against Him, and obtain salvation; or that, if they still persevere in
that system of vainglory which has taken possession of their minds,
they may at least find it necessary to change their kind of argument
against us.



CHAP. XII.--THE TRIACONTAD OF THE HERETICS ERRS BOTH BY DEFECT AND
EXCESS: SOPHIA COULD NEVER HAVE PRODUCED ANYTHING APART FROM HER
CONSORT; LOGOS AND SIGE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONTEMPORARIES.



    1. We may(1) remark, in the first place, regarding their
Triacontad, that the whole of it marvellously falls to ruin on both
sides, that is, both as respects defect and excess. They say that to
indicate it the Lord came to be baptized at the age of thirty years.
But this assertion really amounts to a manifest subversion of their
entire argument. As to defect, this happens as follows: first of all,
because they reckon the Propator among the other AEons. For the Father
of all ought not to be counted with other productions; He who was not
produced with that which was produced; He who was unbegotten with that
which was born; He whom no one comprehends with that which is
comprehended by Him, and who is on this account [Himself]
incomprehensible; and He who is without figure with that which has a
definite shape. For inasmuch as He is superior to the rest, He ought
not to be numbered with them, and that so that He who is impassible
and not in error should be reckoned with an AEon subject to passion,
and actually in error. For I have shown in the book which immediately
precedes this, that, beginning with Bythus, they reckon up the
Tricontad to Sophia, whom they describe as the erring AEon; and I have
also there set forth the names of their [AEons]; but if He be not
reckoned, there are no longer, on their own showing, thirty
productions of AEons, but these then become only twenty-nine.

    2. Next, with respect to the first production Ennoea, whom they
also term Sige, from whom again they describe Nous and Aletheia as
having been sent forth, they err in both particulars. For it is
impossible that the thought (Ennoea) of any one, or his silence
(Sige), should be understood apart from himself; and that, being sent
forth beyond him, it should possess a special figure of its own. But
if they assert that the (Ennoea) was not sent forth beyond Him, but
continued one with the Propator, why then do they reckon her with the
other AEons--with those who were not one [with the Father], and are on
this account ignorant of His greatness? If, however, she was so united
(let us take this also into consideration), there is then an absolute
necessity, that from this united and inseparable conjunction, which
constitutes but one being, there(2) should proceed an unseparated and
united production, so that it should not be dissimilar to Him who sent
it forth. But if this be so, then just as Bythus and Sige, so also
Nous and Aletheia will form one and the same being, ever cleaving
mutually together. And inasmuch as the one cannot be conceived of
without the other, just as water cannot [be conceived of] without [the
thought of] moisture, or fire without [the thought of] heat, or a
stone without [the thought] of hardness (for these things are mutually
bound together, and the one cannot be separated from the other, but
always co-exists with it), so it behoves Bythus to be united in the
same way with Ennoea, and Nous with Aletheia. Logos and Zoe again, as
being sent forth by those that are thus united, ought themselves to be
united, and to constitute only one being. But, according to such a
process of reasoning, Homo and Ecclesia too, and indeed all the
remaining conjunctions of the AEons produced, ought to be united, and
always to coexist, the one with the other. For there is a necessity in
their opinion, that a female AEon should exist side by side with a
male one, inasmuch as she is, so to speak, [the forthputting of] his
affection.

    3. These things being so, and such opinions being proclaimed by
them, they again venture, without a blush, to teach that the younger
AEon of the Duodecad, whom they also style Sophia, did, apart from
union with her consort, whom they call Theletus, endure passion, and
separately, without any assistance from him, gave birth to a
production which they name "a female from a female." They thus rush
into such utter frenzy, as to form two most clearly opposite opinions
respecting the same point. For if Bythus is ever one with Sige, Nous
with Aletheia, Logos with Zoe, and so on, as respects the rest, how
could Sophia, without union with her consort, either suffer or
generate anything? And if, again, she did really. suffer passion apart
from him, it necessarily follows that the other conjunctions also
admit of disjunction and separation among themselves,--a thing which I
have already shown to be impossible. It is also impossible, therefore,
that Sophia suffered passion apart from Theletus; and thus, again,
their whole system of argument is overthrown. For they have yet(1)
again derived the whole of remaining [material substance], like the
composition of a tragedy, from that passion which they affirm she
experienced apart from union with her consort.

    4. If, however, they impudently maintain, in order to preserve
from ruin their vain imaginations, that the rest of the conjunctions
also were disjoined and separated from one another on account of this
latest conjunction, then [I reply that], in the first place, they rest
upon a thing which is impossible. For how can they separate the
Propator from his Ennoea, or Nous from Aletheia, or Logos from Zoe,
and so on with the rest? And how can they themselves maintain that
they tend again to unity, and are, in fact, all at one, if indeed
these very conjunctions, which are within the Pleroma, do not preserve
unity, but are separate from one another; and that to such a degree,
that they both endure passion and perform the work of generation
without union one with another, just as hens do apart from intercourse
with cocks.

    5. Then, again, their first and first-begotten Ogdoad will be
overthrown as follows: They must admit that Bythus and Sige, Nous and
Aletheia, Logos and Zoe, Anthropos and Ecclesia, do individually dwell
in the same Pleroma. But it is impossible that Sige (silence) can
exist in the presence of Logos (speech), or again, that Logos can
manifest himself in the presence of Sige. For these are mutually
destructive of each other, even as light and darkness can by no
possibility exist in the same place: for if light prevails, there
cannot be darkness; and if darkness, there cannot be light, since,
where light appears, darkness is put to flight. In like manner, where
Sige is, there cannot be Logos; and where Logos is, there certainly
cannot be Sige. But if they say that Logos simply exists within(2)
(unexpressed), Sige also will exist within, and will not the less be
destroyed by the Logos within. But that he really is not merely
conceived of in the mind, the very order of the production of their
(AEons) shows.



    6. Let them not then declare that the first and principal Ogdoad
consists of Logos and Sige, but let them [as a matter of necessity]
exclude either Sige or Logos; and then their first and principal
Ogdoad is at an end. For if they describe the conjunctions [of the
AEons] as united, then their whole argument fails to pieces. Since, if
they were united, how could Sophia have generated a defect without
union with her consort? If, on the other hand, they maintain that, as
in production, each of the AEons possesses his own peculiar substance,
then how can Sige and Logos manifest themselves in the same place? So
far, then, with respect to defect.

    7. But again, their Triacontad is overthrown as to excess by the
following considerations. They represent Horos (whom they call by a
variety of names which I have mentioned in the preceding book) as
having been produced by Monogenes just like the other AEons. Some of
them maintain that this Horos was produced by Monogenes, while others
affirm that he was sent forth by the Propator himself in His own
image. They affirm further, that a production was formed by
Monogenes--Christ and the Holy Spirit; and they do not reckon these in
the number of the Pleroma, nor the Saviour either, whom they also
declare to be Totum(3) (all things). Now, it is evident even to a
blind man, that not merely thirty productions, as they maintain, were
sent forth, but four more along with these thirty. For they reckon the
Propator himself in the Pleroma, and those too, who in succession were
produced by one another. Why is it, then, that those [other beings]
are not reckoned as existing with these in the same Pleroma, since
they were produced in the same manner? For what just reason can they
assign for not reckoning along with the other AEons, either Christ,
whom they describe as having, according to the Father's will, been
produced by Monogenes, or the Holy Spirit, or Horos, whom they also
call Soter(4) (Saviour), and not even the Saviour Himself, who came to
impart assistance and form to their Mother? Whether is this as if
these latter were weaker than the former, and therefore unworthy of
the name of AEons, or of being numbered among them, or as if they were
superior and more excellent? But how could they be weaker, since they
were produced for the establishment and rectification of the others?
And then, again, they cannot possibly be superior to the first and
principal Tetrad, by which they were also produced; for it, too, is
reckoned in the number above mentioned. These latter beings, then,
ought also to have been numbered in the Pleroma of the or that should
be deprived of the honour of those AEons which bear this appellation
(the Tetrad).

    8. Since, therefore, their Triacontad is thus brought to nought,
as I have shown, both with respect to defect and excess (for in
dealing with such a number, either excess or defect [to any extent]
will render the number untenable, and how much more so great
variations?), it follows that what they maintain respecting their
Ogdoad and Duodecad is a mere fable which cannot stand. Their whole
system, moreover, falls to the ground, when their very foundation is
destroyed and dissolved into Bythus,(1) that is, into what has no
existence. Let them, then, henceforth seek to set forth some other
reasons why the Lord came to be baptized at the age of thirty years,
and [explain in some other way] the Duodecad of the apostles; and [the
fact stated regarding] her who suffered from an issue of blood; and
all the other points respecting which they so madly labour in vain.



CHAP. XIII.--THE FIRST ORDER OF PRODUCTION MAINTAINED BY THE HERETICS
IS ALTOGETHER INDEFENSIBLE.



    1. I now proceed to show, as follows, that the first order of
production, as conceived of by them, must be rejected. For they
maintain that Nous and Aletheia were produced from Bythus and his
Ennoea, which is proved to be a contradiction. For Nous is that which
is itself chief, and highest, and, as it were, the principle and
source of all understanding. Ennoea, again, which arises from him, is
any sort of emotion concerning any subject. It cannot be, therefore,
that Nous was produced by Bythus and Ennoea; it would be more like the
truth for them to maintain that Ennoea was produced as the daughter of
the Propator and this Nous. For Ennoea not the daughter of Nous, as
they assert, but Nous becomes the father of Ennoea. For how can Nous
have been produced by the Propator, when he holds the chief and
primary place of that hidden and invisible affection which is within
Him? By this affection sense is produced, and Ennoea, and Enthymesis,
and other things which are simply synonyms for Nous himself. As I have
said already, they are merely certain definite exercises in thought of
that very power concerning some particular subject. We understand the
[several] terms according to their(2) length and breadth of meaning,
not according to any [fundamental] change [of signification]; and the
[various exercises of thought] are limited by [the same sphere of]
knowledge, and are expressed together by [the same] term, the [very
same] sense remaining within, and creating, and administering, and
freely governing even by its own power, and as it pleases, the things
which have been previously mentioned.

    2. For the first exercise of that [power] respecting anything, is
styled Ennoea; but when it continues, and gathers strength, and takes
possession of the whole soul, it is called Enthymesis. This
Enthymesis, again, when it exercises itself a long time on the same
point, and has, as it were, been proved, is named Sensation. And this
Sensation, when it is much developed, becomes Counsel. The increase,
again, and greatly developed exercise of this Counsel becomes the
Examination of thought (Judgment); and this remaining in the mind is
most properly termed Logos (reason), from which the spoken Logos
(word) proceeds.(3) But all the [exercises of thought] which have been
mentioned are [fundamentally] one and the same, receiving their origin
from Nous, and obtaining [different] appellation according to their
increase. Just as the human body, which is at one time young, then in
the prime of life, and then old, has received [different] appellations
according to its increase and continuance, but not according to any
change of substance, or on account of any [real] loss of body, so is
it with those [mental exercises]. For, when one [mentally]
contemplates anything, he also thinks of it; and when he thinks of it,
he has also knowledge regarding it; and when he knows it, he also
considers it; and when he considers it, he also mentally handles it;
and when he mentally handles it, he also speaks of it. But, as I have
already said, it is Nous who governs all these [mental processes],
while He is himself invisible, and utters speech of himself by means
of those processes which have been mentioned, as it were by rays
[proceeding from Him], but He himself is not sent forth by any other.

    3. These things may properly be said to hold good in men, since
they are compound by nature, and consist of a body and a soul. But
those who affirm that Ennoea was sent forth from God, and Nous from
Ennoea, and then, in succession, Logos from these, are, in the first
place, to be blamed as having improperly used these productions; and,
in the next place, as describing the affections, and passions, and
mental tendencies of men, while they [thus prove them- 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. 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. They maintain that it
is more suitable to [the theory of] production--as being, in fact,
truth-like--that the Word was produced by man, and not man by the
Word; and that man existed prior to the Word, and that this is really
He who is God over all. And thus it is, as I have previously remarked,
that heaping together with a kind of plausibility all human feelings,
and mental exercises, and formation of intentions, and utterances of
words, they have lied with no plausibility at all against God. For
while they ascribe the things which happen to men, and whatsoever they
recognise themselves as experiencing, to the divine reason, they seem
to those who are ignorant of God to make statements suitable enough.
And by these human passions, drawing away their intelligence, while
they describe the origin and production of the Word of God in the
fifth place, they assert that thus they teach wonderful mysteries,
unspeakable and sublime, known to no one but themselves. It was, [they
affirm,] concerning these that the Lord said, "Seek, and ye shall
find,"(1) that is, that they should inquire how Nous and Aletheia
proceeded from Bythus and Sage; whether Logos and Zoe again derive
their origin from these and then, whether Anthropos and Ecclesia
proceed from Logos and Zoe.



CHAP. XIV.-- VALENTINUS AND HIS FOLLOWERS DERIVED THE PRINCIPLES OF
THEIR SYSTEM FROM THE HEATHEN; THE NAMES ONLY ARE CHANGED.



    1. Much more like the truth, and more pleasing, is the account
which Antiphanes,(2) one of the ancient comic poets, gives in his
Theogony as to the origin of all things. For he speaks Chaos as being
produced from Night and Silence; relates that then Love(3) sprang from
Chaos and Night; from this again, Light; and that from this, in his
opinion, were derived all the rest of the first generation of the
gods. After these he next introduces a second generation of gods, and
the creation of the world; then he narrates the formation of mankind
by the second order of the gods. These men (the heretics), adopting
this fable as their own, have ranged their opinions round it, as if by
a sort of natural process, changing only the names of the things
referred to, and setting forth the very same beginning of the
generation of all things, and their production. In place of Night and
Silence they substitute Bythus and Sige; instead of Chaos, they put
Nous; and for Love (by whom, says the comic poet, all other things
were set in order) they have brought forward the Word; while for the
primary and greatest gods they have formed the AEons; and in place of
the secondary gods, they tell us of that creation by their mother
which is outside of the Pleroma, calling it the second Ogdoad. They
proclaim to us, like the writer referred to, that from this (Ogdoad)
came the creation of the world and the formation of man, maintaining
that they alone are acquainted with these ineffable and unknown
mysteries. Those things which are everywhere acted in the theatres by
comedians with the clearest voices they transfer to their own system,
teaching them undoubtedly through means of the same arguments, and
merely changing the names.

    2. And not only are they convicted of bringing forward, as if
their own [original ideas], those things which are to be found among
the comic poets, but they also bring together the things which have
been said by all those who were ignorant of God, and who are termed
philosophers; and sewing together, as it were, a motley garment out of
a heap of miserable rags, they have, by their subtle manner of
expression, furnished themselves with a cloak which is really not
their own. They do, it is true, introduce a new kind of doctrine,
inasmuch as by a new sort of art it has been substituted [for the
old]. Yet it is in reality both old and useless, since these very
opinions have been sewed together out of ancient dogmas redolent of
ignorance and irreligion. For instance, Thales(4) of Miletus affirmed
that water was the generative and initial principle of all things. Now
it is just the same thing whether we say water or Bythus. The poet
Homer,(5) again, held the opinion that Oceanus, along with mother
Tethys, was the origin of the gods: this idea these men have
transferred to Bythus and Sige. Anaximander laid it down that
infinitude is the first principle of all things, having seminally in
itself the generation of them all, and from this he declares the
immense worlds [which exist] were formed: this, too, they have dressed
up anew, and referred to Bythus and their AEons. Anaxagoras, again,
who has also been surnamed "Atheist," gave it as his opinion that
animals were formed from seeds falling down from heaven upon earth.
This thought, too, these men have transferred to "the seed" of their
Mother, which they maintain to be themselves; thus acknowledging at
once, in the judgment of such as are possessed of sense, that they
themselves are the offspring of the irreligious Anaxagoras.

    3. Again, adopting the [ideas of] shade and vacuity from
Democritus and Epicurus, they have fitted these to their own views,
following upon those [teachers] who had already talked a great deal
about a vacuum and atoms, the one of which they called that which is,
and the other that which is not. In like manner, these men call those
things which are within the Pleroma real existences, just as those
philosophers did the atoms; while they maintain that those which are
without the Pleroma have no true existence, even as those did
respecting the vacuum. They have thus banished themselves in this
world (since they are here outside of the Pleroma) into a place which
has no existence. Again, when they maintain that these things [below]
are images of those which have a true existence [above], they again
most manifestly rehearse the doctrine of Democritus and Plato. For
Democritus was the first who maintained that numerous and diverse
figures were stamped, as it were, with the forms [of things above],
and descended from universal space into this world. But Plato, for his
part, speaks of matter, and exemplar,(1) and God. These men, following
those distinctions, have styled what he calls ideas, and exemplar, the
images of those things which are above; while, through a mere change
of name, they boast themselves as being discoverers and contrivers of
this kind of imaginary fiction.

    4. This opinion, too, that they hold the Creator formed the world
out of previously existing matter, both Anaxagoras, Empedocles, and
Plato expressed before them; as, forsooth, we learn they also do under
the inspiration of their Mother. Then again, as to the opinion that
everything of necessity passes away to those things out of which they
maintain it was also formed, and that God is the slave of this
necessity, so that He cannot impart immortality to what is mortal, or
bestow incorruption on what is corruptible, but every one passes into
a substance similar in nature to itself, both those who are named
Stoics from the portico (<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. From the same source, too, they strive to bring into vogue
those conjunctions which proceed from unity. Marcus boasts of such
views as if they were his own, and as if he were seen to have
discovered something more novel than others, while he simply sets
forth the Tetrad of Pythagoras as the originating principle and mother
of all things.

    7. But I will merely say, in opposition to these men--Did all
those who have been mentioned, with whom you have been proved to
coincide in expression, know, or not know, the truth? If they knew it,
then the descent of the Saviour into this world was superfluous. For
why [in that case] did He descend? Was it that He might bring that
truth which was [already] known to the knowledge of those who knew it?
If, on the other hand, these men did not know it, then how is it that,
while you express yourselves in the same terms as do those who knew
not the truth, ye boast that yourselves alone possess that knowledge
which is above all things, although they who are ignorant of God
[likewise] possess it? Thus, then, by a complete perversion(1) of
language, they style ignorance of the truth knowledge: and Paul well
says [of them, that [they make use of] "novelties of words of false
knowledge."(2) For that knowledge of theirs is truly found to be
false. If, however, taking an impudent course with respect to these
points, they declare that men indeed did not know the truth, but that
their Mother,(3) the seed of the Father, proclaimed the mysteries of
truth through such men, even as also through the prophets, while the
Demiurge was ignorant [of the proceeding], then I answer, in the first
place, that the things which were predicted were not of such a nature
as to be intelligible to no one; for the men themselves knew what they
were saying, as did also their disciples, and those again succeeded
these. And, in the next place, if either the Mother or her seed knew
and proclaimed those things which were of the truth (and the Father(4)
is truth), then on their theory the Saviour spoke falsely when He
said, "No one knoweth the Father but the Son,"(5) unless indeed they
maintain that their seed or Mother is No-one.

    8. Thus far, then, by means of [ascribing to their AEons] human
feelings, and by the fact that they largely coincide in their language
with many of those who are ignorant of God, they have been seen
plausibly drawing a certain number away [from the truth]. They lead
them on by the use of those [expressions] with which they have been
familiar, to that sort of discourse which treats of all things,
setting forth the production of the Word of God, and of Zoe, and of
Nous, and bringing into the world, as it were, the [successive]
emanations of the Deity. The views, again, which they propound,
without either plausibility or parade, are simply lies from beginning
to end. Just as those who, in order to lure and capture any kind of
animals, place their accustomed food before them, gradually drawing
them on by means of the familiar aliment, until at length they seize
it, but, when they have taken them captive, they subject them to the
bitterest of bendage, and drag them along with violence whithersoever
they please; so also do these men gradually and gently persuading
[others], by means of their plausible speeches, to accept of the
emission which has been mentioned, then bring forward things which are
not consistent, and forms of the remaining emissions which are not
such as might have been expected. They declare, for instance, that
[ten](6) AEons were sent forth by Logos and Zoe, while from Anthropos
and Ecclesia there proceeded twelve, although they have neither proof,
nor testimony, nor probability, nor anything whatever of such a nature
[to support these assertions]; and with equal folly and audacity do
they wish it to be believed that from Logos and Zoe, being AEons, were
sent forth Bythus and Mixis, Ageratos and Henosis, Autophyes and
Hedone, Acinetos and Syncrasis, Monogenes and Macaria. Moreover, [as
they affirm,] there were sent forth, in a similar way, from Anthropos
and Ecclesia, being AEons, Paracletas and Pistis, Patricos and Elpis,
Metricos and Agape, Ainos and Synesis, Ecclesiasticus and Macariotes,
Theletos and Sophia.

    9. The passions and error of this Sophia, and how she ran the risk
of perishing through her investigation [of the nature] of the Father,
as they relate, and what took place outside of the Pleroma, and from
what sort of a defect they teach that the Maker of the world was
produced, I have set forth in the preceding book, describing in it,
with all diligence, the opinions of these heretics. [I have also
detailed their views] respecting Christ, whom they describe as having
been produced subsequently to all these, and also regarding Soter,
who, [according to them,] derived his being from those AEons who were
formed within the Pleroma.(7) But I have of necessity mentioned their
names at present, that from these the absurdity of their falsehood may
be made manifest, and also the confused nature of the nomenclature
they have devised. For they themselves detract from [the dignity of]
their AEons by a multitude of names of this sort. They give out names
plausible and credible to the heathen, [as being similar] to those who
are called their twelve gods,(1) and even these they will have to be
images of their twelve AEons. But the images [so called] can produce
names [of their own] much more seemly, and more powerful through their
etymology to indicate divinity [than are those of their fancied
prototypes].



CHAP. XV.--NO ACCOUNT CAN BE GIVEN OF THESE

PRODUCTIONS.



    1. But let us return to the fore-mentioned question as to the
production [of the AEons]. And, in the first place, let them tell us
the reason of the production of the AEons being of such a kind that
they do not come in contact with any of those things which belong to
creation. For they maintain that those things [above] were not made on
account of creation, but creation on account of them; and that the
former are not images of the latter, but the latter of the former. As,
therefore, they render a reason for the images, by saying that the
month has thirty days on account of the thirty AEons, and the day
twelve hours, and the year twelve months, on account of the twelve
AEons which are within the Pleroma, with other such nonsense of the
same kind, let them now tell us also the reason for that production of
the AEons, why it was of such a nature, for what reason the first and
first-begotten Ogdoad was sent forth, and not a Pentad, or a Triad, or
a Septenad, or any one of those which are defined by a different
number? Moreover, how did it come to pass, that from Logos and Zoe
were sent forth ten AEons, and neither more nor less; while again from
Anthropos and Ecclesia proceeded twelve, although these might have
been either more or less numerous?

    2. And then, again, with reference to the entire Pleroma, what
reason is there that it should be divided into these three--an Ogdoad,
a Decad, and a Duodecad--and not into some other number different from
these? Moreover, with respect to the division itself, why has it been
made into three parts, and not into four, or five, or six, or into
some other number among those which have no connection with such
numbers(2) as belong to creation? For they describe those [AEons
above] as being more ancient than these [created things below], and it
behoves them to possess their principle [of being] in themselves, one
which existed before creation, and not after the pattern of creation,
all exactly agreeing as to the point.(3)

    3. The account which we give of creation is one harmonious with
that regular order [of things prevailing in the world], for this
scheme of ours is adapted to the(4) things which have [actually] been
made; but it is a matter of necessity that they, being unable to
assign any reason belonging to the things themselves, with regard to
those beings that existed before [creation], and were perfected by
themselves, should fall into the greatest perplexity. For, as to the
points on which they interrogate us as knowing nothing of creation,
they themselves, when questioned in turn respecting the Pleroma,
either make mention of mere human feelings, or have recourse to that
sort of speech which bears only upon that harmony observable in
creation, improperly giving us replies concerning things which are
secondary, and not concerning those which, as they maintain, are
primary. For we do not question them concerning that harmony which
belongs to creation, nor concerning human feelings; but because they
must acknowledge, as to their octiform, deciform, and duodeciform
Pleroma (the image of which they declare creation to be), that their
Father formed it of that figure vainly and thoughtlessly, and must
ascribe to Him deformity, if He made anything without a reason. Or,
again, if they declare that the Pleroma was so produced in accordance
with the foresight of the Father, for the sake of creation, as if He
had thus symmetrically arranged its very essence, then it follows that
the Pleroma can no longer be regarded as having been formed on its own
account, but for the sake of that [creation] which was to be its image
as possessing its likeness (just as the clay model is not moulded for
its own sake, but for the sake of the statue in brass, or gold, or
silver about to be formed), then creation will have greater honour
than the Pleroma, if, for its sake, those things [above] were
produced.



CHAP. XVI.--THE CREATOR OF THE WORLD EITHER PRODUCED OF HIMSELF THE
IMAGES OF THINGS TO BE MADE, OR THE PLEROMA WAS FORMED AFTER THE IMAGE
OF SOME PREVIOUS SYSTEM; AND SO ON AD INFINITUM.



    1. But if they will not yield assent to any one of these
conclusions, since in that case they would be proved by us as
incapable of rendering any reason for such a production of their
Pleroma, they will of necessity be shut up to this--that they confess
that, above the Pleroma, there was some other system more spiritual
and more powerful, after the image of which their Pleroma was formed.
For if the Demiurge did not of himself construct that figure of
creation which exists, but made it after the form of those things
which are above, then from whom did their Bythus--who, to be sure,
brought it about that the Pleroma should be possessed of a
configuration of this kind--receive the figure of those things which
existed before Himself? For it must needs be, either that the
intention [of creating] dwelt in that god who made the world, so that
of his own power, and from himself, he obtained the model of its
formation; or, if any departure is made from this being, then there
will arise a necessity for constantly asking whence there came to that
one who is above him the configuration of those things which have been
made; what, too, was the number of the productions; and what the
substance of the model itself? If, however, it was in the power of
Bythus to impart of himself such a configuration to the Pleroma, then
why may it not have been in the power of the Demiurge to form of
himself such a world as exists? And then, again, if creation be an
image of those things [above], why should we not affirm that those
are, in turn, images of others above them, and those above these
again, of others, and thus go on supposing innumerable images of
images?

    2. This difficulty presented itself to Basilides after he had
utterly missed the truth, and was conceiving that, by an infinite
succession of those beings that were formed from one another, he might
escape such perplexity. When he had proclaimed that three hundred and
sixty-five heavens were formed through succession and similitude by
one another, and that a manifest proof [of the existence] of these was
found in the number of the days of the year, as I stated before; and
that above these there was a power which they also style Unnameable,
and its dispensation--he did not even in this way escape such
perplexity. For, when asked whence came the image of its configuration
to that heaven which is above all, and from which he wishes the rest
to be regarded as having been formed by means of succession, he will
say, from that dispensation which belongs to the Unnameable. He must
then say, either that the Unspeakable formed it of himself, or he will
find it necessary to acknowledge that there is some other power above
this being, from whom his unnameable One derived such vast numbers of
configurations as do, according to him, exist.

    3. How much safer and more accurate a course is it, then, to
confess at once that which is true: that this God, the Creator, who
formed the world, is the only God, and that there is no other God
besides Him--He Himself receiving from Himself the model and figure of
those things which have been made--than that, after wearying ourselves
with such an impious and circuitous description, we should be
compelled, at some point or another, to fix the mind on some One, and
to confess that from Him proceeded the configuration of things
created.

    4. As to the accusation brought against us by the followers of
Valentinus, when they declare that we continue in that Hebdomad which
is below, as if we could not lift our minds on high, nor understand
those things which are above, because we do not accept their monstrous
assertions: this very charge do the followers of Basilides bring in
turn against them, inasmuch as they (the Valentinians) keep circling
about those things which are below, [going] as far as the first and
second Ogdoad, and because they unskilfully imagine that, immediately
after the thirty AEons, they have discovered Him who is above all
things Father, not following out in thought their investigations to
that Pleroma which is above the three hundred and sixty-five heavens,
which(1) is above forty-five Ogdoads. And any one, again, might bring
against them the same charge, by imagining four thousand three hundred
and eighty heavens, or AEons, since the days of the year contain that
number of hours. If, again, some one adds also the nights, thus
doubling the hours which have been mentioned, imagining that [in this
way] he has discovered a great multitude of Ogdoads, and a kind of
innumerable company(2) of AEons, and thus, in opposition to Him who is
above all things Father, conceiving himself more perfect than all
[others], he will bring the same charge against all, inasmuch as they
are not capable of rising to the conception of such a multitude of
heavens or AEons as he has announced, but are either so deficient as
to remain among those things which are below, or continue in the
intermediate space.



CHAP. XVII.--INQUIRY INTO THE PRODUCTION OF THE AEONS: WHATEVER ITS
SUPPOSED NATURE, IT IS IN EVERY RESPECT INCONSISTENT; AND ON THE
HYPOTHESIS OF THE HERETICS, EVEN NOUS AND THE FATHER HIMSELF WOULD BE
STAINED WITH IGNORANCE.



    1. That system, then, which has respect to their Pleroma, and
especially that part of it which refers to the primary Ogdoad being
thus burdened with so great contradictions and perplexities, let me
now go on to examine the remainder of their scheme. [In doing so] on
account of their madness, I shall be making inquiry respecting things
which have no real existence; yet it is necessary to do this, since
the treatment of this subject has been entrusted to me, and since I
desire all men to come to the knowledge of the truth, as well as
because thou thyself hast asked to receive from me full and complete
means for overturning [the views of] these men.

    2. I ask, then, in what manner were the rest of the AEons
produced? Was it so as to be united with Him who produced them, even
as the solar rays are with the sun; or was it actually(1) and
separately, so that each of them possessed an independent existence
and his own special form, just as has a man from another man, and one
herd of cattle from another? Or was it after the manner of
germination, as branches from a tree? And were they of the same
substance with those who produced them, or did they derive their
substance from some other [kind of] substance? Also, were they
produced at the same time, so as to be contemporaries; or after a
certain order, so that some of them were older, and others younger?
And, again, are they uncompounded and uniform, and altogether equal
and similar among themselves, as spirit and light are produced; or are
they compounded and different, unlike [to each other] in their
members?

    3. If each of them was produced, after the manner of men, actually
and according to its own generation, then either those thus generated
by the Father will be of the same substance with Him, and similar to
their Author; or if(2) they appear dissimilar, then it must of
necessity be acknowledged that they are [formed of some different
substance. Now, if the beings generated by the Father be similar to
their Author, then those who have been produced must remain for ever
impossible, even as is He who produced them; but if, on the other
hand, they are of a different substance, which is capable of passion,
then whence came this dissimilar substance to find a place within the
incorruptible Pleroma? Further, too, according to this principle, each
one of them must be understood as being completely separated from
every other, even as men are not mixed with nor united the one to the
other, but each having a distinct shape of his own, and a definite
sphere of action, while each one of them, too, is formed of a
particular size,--qualities characteristic of a body, and not of a
spirit. Let them therefore no longer speak of the Pleroma as being
spiritual, or of themselves as "spiritual," if indeed their AEons sit
feasting with the Father, just as if they were men, and He Himself is
of such a configuration as those reveal Him to be who were produced by
Him.

    4. If, again, the AEons were derived from Logos, Logos from Nous,
and Nous from Bythus, just as lights are kindled from a light--as, for
example, torches are from a torch--then they may no doubt differ in
generation and size from one another; but since they are of the same
substance with the Author of their production, they must either all
remain for ever impossible, or their Father Himself must participate
in passion. For the torch which has been kindled subsequently cannot
be possessed of a different kind of light from that which preceded it.
Wherefore also their lights, when blended in one, return to the
original identity, since that one light is then formed which has
existed even from the beginning. But we cannot speak, with respect to
light itself, of some part being more recent in its origin, and
another being more ancient (for the whole is but one light); nor can
we so speak even in regard to those torches which have received the
light (for these are all contemporary as respects their material
substance, for the substance of torches is one and the same), but
simply as to [the time of] its being kindled, since one was lighted a
little while ago, and another has just now been kindled.

    5. The defect, therefore, of that passion which has regard to
ignorance, will either attach alike to their whole Pleroma, since [all
its members] are of the same substance; and the Propator will share in
this defect of ignorance--that is, will be ignorant of Himself; or, on
the other hand, all those lights which are within the Pleroma will
alike remain for ever impassible.  Whence, then, comes the passion of
the youngest AEon, if the light of the Father is that from which all
other lights have been formed, and which is by nature impassible? And
how can one AEon be spoken of as either younger or older among
themselves, since there is but one light in the entire Pleroma? And if
any one calls them stars, they will all nevertheless appear to
participate in the same nature. For if "one star differs from another
star in glory,"(3) but not in qualities, nor substance, nor in the
fact of being passible or impassible; so all these, since they are
alike derived from the light of the Father, must either be naturally
impossible and immutable, or they must all, in common with the light
of the Father, be passible, and are capable of the varying phases of
corruption.

    6. The same conclusion will follow, although they affirm that the
production of AEons sprang from Logos, as branches from a tree, since
Logos has his generation from their Father. For all [the AEons] are
formed of the same substance with the Father, differing from one
another only in size, and not in nature, and filling up the greatness
of the Father, even as the fingers com- 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!  10. But, ye miserable sophists, how could
the Nous of the Father, or rather the very Father Himself, since He is
Nous and perfect in all things, have produced his own Logos as an
imperfect and blind AEon, when He was able also to produce along with
him the knowledge of the Father? As ye affirm that Christ was
generated after the rest, and yet declare that he was produced
perfect, much more then should Logos, who is anterior to him in age,
be produced by the same Nous, unquestionably perfect, and not blind;
nor could he, again, have produced AEons still blinder than himself,
until at last your Sophia, always utterly blinded, gave birth to so
vast a body of evils. And your Father is the cause of all this
mischief; for ye declare the magnitude and power of your Father to be
the causes of ignorance, assimilating Him to Bythus, and assigning
this as a name to Him who is the unnameable Father. But if ignorance
is an evil, and ye declare all evils to have derived their strength
from it, while ye maintain that the greatness and power of the Father
is the cause of this ignorance, ye do thus set Him forth as the author
of [all] evils. For ye state as the cause of evil this fact, that [no
one] could contemplate His greatness. But if it was really impossible
for the Father to make Himself known from the beginning to those
[beings] that were formed by Him, He must in that case be held free
from blame, inasmuch as He could not remove the ignorance of those who
came after Him. But if, at a subsequent period, when He so willed it,
He could take away that ignorance which had increased with the
successive productions as they followed each other, and thus become
deeply seated in the AEons, much more, had He so willed it might He
formerly have prevented that ignorance, which as yet was not, from
coining into existence.

    11. Since therefore, as soon as He so pleased, He did become known
not only to the AEons, but also to these men who lived in these latter
times; but, as He did not so please to be known from the beginning, He
remained unknown--the cause of ignorance is, according to you, the
will of the Father. For if He foreknew that these things would in
future happen in such a manner, why then did He not guard against the
ignorance of these beings before it had obtained a place among them,
rather than afterwards, as if under the influence of repentance, deal
with it through the production of Christ? For the knowledge which
through Christ He conveyed to all, He might long before have imparted
through Logos, who was also the first-begotten of Monogenes. Or if,
knowing them beforehand, He willed that these things should happen [as
they have done], then the works of ignorance must endure for ever, and
never pass away. For the things which have been made in accordance
with the will of your Propator must continue along with the will of
Him who willed them; or if they pass away, the will of Him also who
decreed that they should have a being will pass away along with them.
And why did the AEons find rest and attain perfect knowledge through
learning [at last] that the Father is altogether(2) incomprehensible?
They might surely have possessed this knowledge before they became
involved in passion; for the greatness of the Father did not suffer
diminution from the beginning, so that these might(3) know that He was
altogether incomprehensible. For if, on account of His infinite
greatness, He remained unknown, He ought also on account of His
infinite love to have preserved those impassible who were produced by
Him, since nothing hindered, and expediency rather required, that they
should have known from the beginning that the Father was altogether
incomprehensible.



CHAP. XVIII.--SOPHIA WAS NEVER REALLY IN IGNORANCE OR PASSION; HER
ENTHYMESIS COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SEPARATED FROM HERSELF, OR EXHIBITED
SPECIAL TENDENCIES OF ITS OWN.



    1. How can it be regarded as otherwise than absurd, that they also
affirm this Sophia (wisdom) to have been involved in ignorance, and
degeneracy, and passion? For these things are alien and contrary to
wisdom, nor can they ever be qualities belonging to it. For wherever
there is a want of foresight, and an ignorance of the course of
utility, there wisdom does not exist. Let them therefore no longer
call this suffering AEon, Sophia, but let them give up either her name
or her sufferings. And let them, moreover, not call their entire
Pleroma spiritual, if this AEon had a place within it when she was
involved in such a tumult of passion. For even a vigorous soul, not to
say a spiritual substance, would not pass through any such experience.

    2. And, again, how could her Enthymesis, going forth [from her]
along with the passion, have become a separate existence? For
Enthymesis (thought) is understood in connection with some person, and
can never have an isolated existence by itself. For a bad Enthymesis
is destroyed and absorbed by a good one, even as a state of disease is
by health. What, then, was the sort of Enthymesis which preceded that
of passion? [It was this]: to investigate the [nature of] the Father,
and to consider His greatness. But what did she afterwards become
persuaded of, and so was restored to health? [This, viz.], that the
Father is incomprehensible, and that He is past finding out. It was
not, then, a proper feeling that she wished to know the Father, and on
this account she became passible; but when she became persuaded that
He is unsearchable, she was restored to health. And even Nous himself,
who was inquiring into the [nature of] the Father, ceased, according
to them, to continue his researches, on learning that the Father is
incomprehensible.

    3. How then could the Enthymesis separately conceive passions,
which themselves also were her affections? For affection is
necessarily connected with an individual: it cannot come into being or
exist apart by itself. This opinion [of theirs], however, is not only
untenable, but also opposed to that which was spoken by our Lord:
"Seek, and ye shall find."(1) For the Lord renders His disciples
perfect by their seeking after and finding the Father; but that Christ
of theirs, who is above, has rendered them perfect, by the fact that
He has commanded the AEons not to seek after the Father, persuading
them that, though they should labour hard, they would not find Him.
And they(2) declare that they themselves are perfect, by the fact that
they maintain they have found their Bythus; while the AEons [have been
made perfect] through means of this, that He is unsearchable who was
inquired after by them.

    4. Since, therefore, the Enthymesis herself could not exist
separately, apart from the AEon, [it is obvious that] they bring
forward still greater falsehood concerning her passion, when they
further proceed to divide and separate it from her, while they declare
that it was the substance of matter. As if God were not light, and as
if no Word existed who could convict them, and overthrow their
wickedness. For it is certainly true, that whatsoever the AEon
thought, that she also suffered; and what she suffered, that she also
thought. And her Enthymesis was, according to them, nothing else than
the passion of one thinking how she might comprehend the
incomprehensible. And thus Enthymesis (thought) was the passion; for
she was thinking of things impossible. How then could affection and
passion be separated and set apart from the Enthymesis, so as to
become the substance of so vast a material creation, when Enthymesis
herself was the passion, and the passion Enthymesis? Neither,
therefore, can Enthymesis apart from the AEon, nor the affections
apart from Enthymesis, separately possess substance; and thus once
more their system breaks down and is destroyed.

    5. But how did it come to pass that the AEon was both dissolved
[into her component parts], and became subject to passion? She was
undoubtedly of the same substance as the Pleroma; but the entire
Pleroma was of the Father. Now, any substance, when brought in contact
with what is of a similar nature, will not be dissolved into nothing,
nor will be in danger of perishing, but will rather continue and
increase, such as fire in fire, spirit in spirit, and water in water;
but those which are of a contrary nature to each other do, [when they
meet,] suffer and are changed and destroyed. And, in like manner, if
there had been a production of light, it would not suffer passion, or
recur any danger in light like itself, but would rather glow with the
greater brightness, and increase, as the day does from [the increasing
brilliance of] the sun; for they maintain that Bythus [himself] was
the image of their father(3) (Sophia). Whatever animals are alien [in
habits] and strange to each other, or are mutually opposed in nature,
fall into danger [on meeting together], and are destroyed; whereas, on
the other hand, those who are accustomed to each other, and of a
harmonious disposition, suffer no peril from being together in the
same place, but rather secure both safety and life by such a fact. If,
therefore, this AEon was produced by the Pleroma of the same substance
as the whole of it, she could never have undergone change, since she
was consorting with beings similar to and familiar with herself, a
spiritual essence among those that were spiritual. For fear, terror,
passion, dissolution, and such like, may perhaps occur through the
struggle of contraries among such beings as we are, who are possessed
of bodies; but among spiritual beings, and those that have the light
diffused among them, no such calamities can possibly happen. But these
men appear to me to have endowed their AEon with the [same sort of]
passion as belongs to that character in the comic poet Menunder,(4)
who was himself deeply in love, but an object of hatred [to his
beloved]. For those who have invented such opinions have rather had an
idea and mental conception of some unhappy lover among men, than of a
spiritual and divine substance.

    6. Moreover, to meditate how to search into [the nature of] the
perfect Father, and to have a desire to exist within Him, and to have
a comprehension of His [greatness], could not entail the stain of
ignorance or passion, and that upon a spiritual AEon; but would rather
[give rise to] perfection, and impassibility, and truth. For they do
not say that even they, though they be but men, by meditating on Him
who was before them,--and while now, as it were, comprehending the
perfect, and being placed within the knowledge of Him,--are thus
involved in a passion of perplexity, but rather attain to the
knowledge and apprehension of truth. For they affirm that the Saviour
said, "Seek, and ye shall find," to His disciples with this view, that
they should seek after Him who, by means of imagination, has been
conceived of by them as being above the Maker of all--the ineffable
Bythus; and they desire themselves to be regarded as "the perfect;"
because they have sought and found the perfect One, while they are
still on earth. Yet they declare that that AEon who was within the
Pleroma, a wholly spiritual being, by seeking after the Propator, and
endeavouring to find a place within His greatness, and desiring to
have a comprehension of the truth of the Father, fell down into [the
endurance of] passion, and such a passion that, unless she had met
with that Power who upholds all things, she would have been dissolved
into the general substance [of the AEons], and thus come to an end of
her [personal] existence.

    7. Absurd is such presumption, and truly an opinion of men totally
destitute of the truth. For, that this AEon is superior to themselves,
and of greater antiquity, they themselves acknowledge, according to
their own system, when they affirm that they are the fruit of the
Enthymesis of that AEon who suffered passion, so that this AEon is the
father of their mother, that is, their own grandfather. And to them,
the later grandchildren, the search after the Father brings, as they
maintain, truth, and perfection, and establishment, and deliverance
from unstable matter, and reconciliation to the Father; but on their
grandfather this same search entailed ignorance, and passion, and
terror, and perplexity, from which [disturbances] they also declare
that the substance of matter was formed. To say, therefore, that the
search after and investigation of the perfect Father, and the desire
for communion and union with Him, were things quite beneficial to
them, but to an AEon, from whom also they derive their origin, these
things were the cause of dissolution and destruction, how can such
assertions be otherwise viewed than as totally inconsistent, foolish,
and irrational? Those, too, who listen to these teachers, truly blind
themselves, while they possess blind guides, justly [are left to] fall
along with them into the gulf of ignorance which lies below them.



CHAP. XIX.--ABSURDITIES OF THE HERETICS AS TO THEIR OWN ORIGIN: THEIR
OPINIONS RESPECTING THE DEMIURGE SHOWN TO BE EQUALLY UNTENABLE AND
RIDICULOUS.



    1. But what sort of talk also is this concerning their seed--that
it was conceived by the mother according to the configuration of those
angels who wait upon the Saviour,--shapeless, without form, and
imperfect; and that it was deposited in the Demiurge without his
knowledge, in order that through his instrumentality it might attain
to perfection and form in that soul which he had, [so to speak,]
filled with seed? This is to affirm, in the first place, that those
angels who wait upon their Saviour are imperfect, and with out figure
or form; if indeed that which was conceived according to their
appearance was generated any such kind of being [as has been
described].

    2. Then, in the next place, as to their saying that the Creator
was ignorant of that deposit of seed which took place into him, and
again, of that impartation of seed which was made by him to man, their
words are futile and vain, and are in no way susceptible of proof. For
how could he have been ignorant of it, if that seed had possessed any
substance and peculiar properties? If, on the other hand, it was
without substance and without quality, and so was really nothing,
then, as a matter of course, he was ignorant of it. For those things
which have a certain motion of their own, and quality, either of heat,
or swiftness, or sweetness, or which differ from others in brilliance,
do not escape the notice even of men, since they mingle in the sphere
of human action: far less can they [be hidden from] God, the Maker of
this universe. With reason, however, [is it said, that] their seed was
not known to Him, since it is without any quality of general utility,
and without the substance requisite for any action, and is, in fact, a
pure nonentity. It really seems to me, that, with a view to such
opinions, the Lord expressed Himself thus: "For every idle word that
men speak, they shall give account on the day of judgment."(1) For all
teachers of a like character to these, who fill men's ears with idle
talk, shall, when they stand at the throne of judgment, render an
account for those things which they have vainly imagined and falsely
uttered against the Lord, proceeding, as they have done, to such a
height of audacity as to declare of themselves that, on account of the
substance of their seed, they are acquainted with the spiritual
Pleroma, because that man who dwells within reveals to them the true
Father; for the animal nature required(2) to be disciplined by means
of the senses. But [they hold that] the Demiurge, while receiving into
himself the whole of this seed, through its being deposited in him by
the Mother, still remained utterly ignorant of all things, and had no
understanding of anything connected with the Pleroma.  3. And that
they are the truly "spiritual," inasmuch as a certain particle of the
Father of the universe has been deposited in their souls, since,
according to their assertions, they have souls formed of the same
substance as the Demiurge himself, yet that he, although he received
from the Mother, once for all, the whole [of the divine] seed, and
possessed it in himself, still remained of an animal nature, and had
not the slightest understanding of those things which are above, which
things they boast that they themselves understand, while they are
still on earth;--does not this crown all possible absurdity? For to
imagine that the very same seed conveyed knowledge and perfection to
the souls of these men, while it only gave rise to ignorance in the
God who made them, is an opinion that can be held only by those
utterly frantic, and totally destitute of common sense.

    4. Further, it is also a most absurd and groundless thing for them
to say that the seed was, by being thus deposited, reduced to form and
increased, and so was prepared for all the reception of perfect
rationality. For there will be in it an admixture of matter--that
substance which they hold to have been derived from ignorance and
defect; [and this will prove itself] more apt and useful than was the
light of their Father, if indeed, when born, according to the
contemplation of that [light], it was without form or figure, but
derived from this [matter], form, and appearance, and increase, and
perfection. For if that light which proceeds from the Pleroma was the
cause to a spiritual being that it possessed neither form, nor
appearance, nor its own special magnitude, while its descent to this
world added all these things to it, and brought it to perfection, then
a sojourn here (which they also term darkness) would seem much more
efficacious and useful than was the light of their Father. But how can
it be regarded as other than ridiculous, to affirm that their mother
ran the risk of being almost extinguished in matter, and was almost on
the point of being destroyed by it, had she not then with difficulty
stretched herself outwards, and leaped, [as it were,] out of herself,
receiving assistance from the Father; but that her seed increased in
this same matter, and received a form, and was made fit for the
reception of perfect rationality; and this, too, while "bubbling up"
among substances dissimilar and unfamiliar to itself, according to
their own declaration that the earthly is opposed to the spiritual,
and the spiritual to the earthly? How, then, could "a little
particle,"(1) as they say, increase, and receive shape, and reach
perfection, in the midst of substances contrary to and unfamiliar to
itself?

    5. But further, and in addition to what has been said, the
question occurs, Did their mother, when she beheld the angels, bring
forth the seed all at once, or only one by one [in succession]? If she
brought forth the whole simultaneously and at once, that which was
thus produced cannot now be of an infantile character: its descent,
therefore, into those men who now exist must be superfluous.(2) But if
one by one, then she did not form her conception according to the
figure of those angels whom she beheld; for, contemplating them all
together, and once for all, so as to conceive by them, she ought to
have brought forth once for all the offspring of those from whose
forms she had once for all conceived.

    6. Why was it, too, that, beholding the angels along with the
Saviour, she did indeed conceive their images, but not that of the
Saviour, who is far more beautiful than they? Did He not please her;
and did she not, on that account, conceive after His likeness?(3) How
was it, too, that the Demiurge, whom they can call an animal being,
having, as they maintain, his own special magnitude and figure, was
produced perfect as respects his substance; while that which is
spiritual, which also ought to be more effective than that which is
animal, was sent forth imperfect, and he required to descend into a
soul, that in it he might obtain form, and thus becoming perfect,
might be rendered fit for the reception of perfect reason? If, then,
he obtains form in mere earthly and animal men, he can no longer be
said to be after the likeness of angels whom they call lights, but
[after the likeness] of those men who are here below. For he will not
possess in that case the likeness and appearance of angels, but of
those souls in whom also he receives shape; just as water when poured
into a vessel takes the form of that vessel, and if on any occasion it
happens to congeal in it, it will acquire the form of the vessel in
which it has thus been frozen, since souls themselves possess the
figure(4) of the body [in which they dwell]; for they themselves have
been adapted to the vessel [in which they exist], as I have said
before. If, then, that seed [referred to] is here solidified and
formed into a definite shape, it will possess the figure of a man. and
not the form of the angels. How is it possible, therefore, that that
seed should be after images of the angels, seeing it has obtained a
form after the likeness of men? Why, again, since it was of a
spiritual nature, had it any need of descending into flesh? For what
is carnal stands in need of that which is spiritual, if indeed it is
to be saved, that in it it may be sanctified and cleared from all
impurity, and that what is mortal may be swallowed up by
immortality;(1) but that which is spiritual has no need whatever of
those things which are here below. For it is not we who benefit it,
but it that improves us.

    7. Still more manifestly is that talk of theirs concerning their
seed proved to be false, and that in a way which must be evident to
every one, by the fact that they declare those souls which have
received seed from the Mother to be superior to all others; wherefore
also they have been honoured by the Demiurge, and constituted princes,
and kings, and priests. For if this were true, the high priest
Caiaphas, and Annas, and the rest of the chief priests, arid doctors
of the law, and rulers of the people, would have been the first to
believe in the Lord, agreeing as they did with respect(2) to that
relationship; and even before them should have been Herod the king.
But since neither he, nor the chief priests, nor the rulers, nor the
eminent of the people, turned to Him [in faith], but, on the contrary,
those who sat begging by the highway, the deaf, and the blind, while
He was rejected and despised by others, according to what Paul
declares, "For ye see your calling, brethen, that there are not many
wise men among you, not many noble, not many mighty; but those things
of the world which were despised hath God chosen."(3) Such souls,
therefore, were not superior to others on account of the seed
deposited in them, nor on this account were they honoured by the
Demiurge.

    8. As to the point, then, that their system is weak and untenable
as well as utterly chimerical, enough has been said. For it is not
needful, to use a common proverb, that one should drink up the ocean
who wishes to learn that its water is salt. But, just as in the case
of a statue which is made of clay, but coloured on the outside that it
may be thought to be of gold, while it really is of clay, any one who
takes out of it a small particle, and thus laying it open reveals the
clay, will set free those who seek the truth from a false opinion; in
the same way have I (by exposing not a small part only, but the
several heads of their system which are of the greatest importance)
shown to as many as do not wish wittingly to be led astray, what is
wicked, deceitful, seductive, and pernicious, connected with the
school of the Valentinians, and all those other heretics who
promulgate(4) wicked opinions respecting the Demiurge, that is, the
Fashioner and Former of this universe, and who is in fact the only
true God--exhibiting, [as I have done,] how easily their views are
overthrown.

    9. For who that has any intelligence, and possesses only a small
proportion of truth, can tolerate them, when they affirm that there is
another god above the Creator; and that there is another Monogenes as
well as another Word of God, whom also they describe as having been
produced in [a state of] degeneracy; and another Christ, whom they
assert to have been formed, along with the Holy Spirit, later than the
rest of the AEons; and another Saviour, who, they say, did not proceed
from the Father of all, but was a kind of joint production of those
AEons who were formed in [a state of] degeneracy, and that He was
produced of necessity on account of this very degeneracy? It is thus
their opinion that, unless the AEons had been in a state of ignorance
and degeneracy, neither Christ, nor the Holy Spirit, nor Horos, nor
the Saviour, nor the angels, nor their Mother, nor her seed, nor the
rest of the fabric of the world, would have been produced at all; but
the universe would have been a desert, and destitute of the many good
things which exist in it. They are therefore not only chargeable with
impiety against the Creator, declaring Him the fruit of a defect, but
also against Christ and the Holy Spirit, affirming that they were
produced on account of that defect; and, in like manner, that the
Saviour [was produced] subsequently to [the existence of] that defect.
And who will tolerate the remainder of their vain talk, which they
cunningly endeavour to accommodate to the parables, and have in this
way plunged both themselves, and those who give credit to them, in the
profoundest depths of impiety?



CHAP. XX.--FUTILITY OF THE ARGUMENTS ADDUCED TO DEMONSTRATE THE
SUFFERINGS OF THE TWELFTH AEON, FROM THE PARABLES, THE TREACHERY OF
JUDAS, AND THE PASSION OF OUR SAVIOUR.



    1. That they improperly and illogically apply both the parables
and the actions of the Lord to their falsely-devised system, I prove
as follows: They endeavour, for instance, to demonstrate that passion
which, they say, happened in the case of the twelfth AEon, from this
fact, that the passion of the Saviour was brought about by the twelfth
apostle, and happened in the twelfth month. For they hold that He
preached [only] for one year after His baptism. They maintain also
that the same thing was clearly set forth in the case of her who
suffered from the issue of blood. For the woman suffered during twelve
years, and through touching the hem of the Saviour's garment she was
made whole by that power which went forth from the Saviour, and which,
they affirm, had a previous existence. For that Power who suffered was
stretching herself outwards and flowing into immensity, so that she
was in danger of being dissolved into the general substance [of the
AEons]; but then, touching the primary Tetrad, which is typified by
the hem of the garment, she was arrested, and ceased from her passion.

    2. Then, again, as to their assertion that the passion of the
twelfth AEon was proved through the conduct of Judas, how is it
possible that Judas can be compared [with this AEon] as being an
emblem of her--he who was expelled from the number of the twelve,(1)
and never restored to his place? For that AEon, whose type they
declare Judas to be, after being separated from her Enthymesis, was
restored or recalled [to her former position]; but Judas was deprived
[of his office], and cast out, while Matthias was ordained in his
place, according to what is written, "And his bishopric let another
take."(2) They ought therefore to maintain that the twelfth AEon was
cast out of the Pleroma, and that another was produced, or sent forth
to fill her place; if, that is to say, she is pointed at in Judas.
Moreover, they tell us that it was the AEon herself who suffered, but
Judas was the betrayer, [and not the sufferer.] Even they themselves
acknowledge that it was the suffering Christ, and not Judas, who came
to [the endurance of] passion. How, then, could Judas, the betrayer of
Him who had to suffer for our salvation, be the type and image of that
AEon who suffered?

    3. But, in truth, the passion of Christ was neither similar to the
passion of the AEon, nor did it take place in similar circumstances.
For the AEon underwent a passion of dissolution and destruction, so
that she who suffered was in danger also of being destroyed. But the
Lord, our Christ, underwent a valid, and not a merely(3) accidental
passion; not only was He Himself not in danger of being destroyed, but
He also established fallen man(4) by His own strength, and recalled
him to incorruption. The AEon, again, underwent passion while she was
seeking after the Father, and was notable to find Him; but the Lord
suffered that He might bring those who have wandered from the Father,
back to knowledge and to His fellowship. The search into the greatness
of the Father became to her a passion leading to destruction; but the
Lord, having suffered, and bestowing the knowledge of the Father,
conferred on us salvation. Her passion, as they declare, gave origin
to a female offspring, weak, infirm, unformed, and ineffective; but
His passion gave rise to strength and power. For the Lord, through
means of suffering, "ascending into the lofty place, led captivity
captive, gave gifts to men,"(5) and conferred on those that believe in
Him the power "to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and on all the
power of the enemy,"(6) that is, of the leader of apostasy. Our Lord
also by His passion destroyed death, and dispersed error, and put an
end to corruption, and destroyed ignorance, while He manifested life
and revealed truth, and bestowed the gift of incorruption. But their
AEon, when she had suffered, established(7) ignorance, and brought
forth a substance without shape, out of which all material works have
been produced--death, corruption, error, and such like.

    4. Judas, then, the twelfth in order of the disciples, was not a
type of the suffering AEon, nor, again, was the passion of the Lord;
for these two things have been shown to be in every respect mutually
dissimilar and inharmonious. This is the case not only as respects the
points which I have already mentioned, but with regard to the very
number. For that Judas the traitor is the twelfth in order, is agreed
upon by all, there being twelve apostles mentioned by name in the
Gospel. But this AEon is not the twelfth, but the thirtieth; for,
according to the views under consideration, there were not twelve
AEons only produced by the will of the Father, nor was she sent forth
the twelfth in order: they reckon her, [on the contrary,] as having
been produced in the thirtieth place. How, then, can Judas, the
twelfth in order, be the type and image of that AEon who occupies the
thirtieth place?

    5. But if they say that Judas in perishing was the image of her
Enthymesis, neither in this way will the image bear any analogy to
that truth which [by hypothesis] corresponds to it. For the Enthymesis
having been separated fromt he AEon, and itself afterwards receiving a
shape from Christ,(8) then being made a partaker of intelligence by
the Saviour, and having formed all things which are outside of the
Pleroma, after the image of those which are within the Pleroma, is
said at last to have been received by them into the Pleroma, and,
according to [the principle of] conjunction, to have been united to
that Saviour who was formed out of all. But Judas having been once for
all cast away, never returns into the number of the disciples;
otherwise a different person would not have been chosen to fill his
place. Besides, the Lord also declared regarding him, "Woe to the man
by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed;" (1) and, "It were better
for him if he had never been born;"(2) and he was called the "son of
perdition"(3) by Him. If, however, they say that Judas was a type of
the Enthymesis, not as separated from the AEon, but of the passion
entwined with her, neither in this way can the number twelve be
regarded as a [fitting] type of the number three. For in the one case
Judas was cast away, and Matthias was ordained instead of him; but in
the other case the AEon is said to have been in danger of dissolution
and destruction, and [there are also] her Enthymesis and passion: for
they markedly distinguish Enthymesis from the passion; and they
represent the AEon as being restored, and Enthymesis as acquiring
form, but the passion, when separated from these, as becoming matter.
Since, therefore, there are thus these three, the AEon, her
Enthymesis, and her passion, Judas and Matthias, being only two,
cannot be the types of them.



   CHAP. XXI.--THE TWELVE APOSTLES WERE NOT A TYPE OF THE AEONS.



    1. If, again, they maintain that the twelve apostles were a type
only of that group of twelve AEons which Anthropos in conjunction with
Ecclesia produced, then let them produce ten other apostles as a type
of those ten remaining AEons, who, as they declare, were produced by
Logos and Zoe. For it is unreasonable to suppose that the junior, and
for that reason inferior AEons, were set forth by the Saviour through
the election of the apostles, while their seniors, and on this account
their superiors, were not thus foreshown; since the Saviour (if, that
is to say, He chose the apostles with this view, that by means of them
He might show forth the AEons who are in the Pleroma) might have
chosen other ten apostles also, and likewise other eight before these,
that thus He might set forth the original and primary Ogdoad. He could
not,(4) in regard to the second [Duo] Decad, show forth [any emblem of
it] through the number of the apostles being [already] constituted a
type. For [He made choice of no such other number of disciples; but]
after the twelve apostles, our Lord is found to have sent seventy
others before Him.(5) Now seventy cannot possibly be the type either
of an Ogdoad, a Decad, or a Triacontad. What is the reason, then, that
the inferior AEons are, as I have said, represented by means of the
apostles; but the superior, from whom, too, the former derived their
being, are not prefigured at all? But if(6) the twelve apostles were
chosen with this object, that the number of the twelve AEons might be
indicated by means of them, then the seventy also ought to have been
chosen to be the type of seventy AEons; and in that case, they must
affirm that the AEons are no longer thirty, but eighty-two in number.
For He who made choice of the apostles, that they might be a type of
those AEons existing in the Pleroma, would never have constituted them
types of some and not of others; but by means of the apostles He would
have tried to preserve an image and to exhibit a type of those AEons
that exist in the Pleroma.

    2. Moreover we must not keep silence respecting Paul, but demand
from them after the type of what AEon that apostle has been handed
down to us, unless perchance [they affirm that he is a representative]
of the Saviour compounded of them [all], who derived his being from
the collected gifts of the whole, and whom they term All Things, as
having been formed out of them all. Respecting this being the poet
Hesiod has strikingly expressed himself, styling him Pandora--that is,
"The gift of all"--for this reason, that the best gift in the
possession of all was centred in him. In describing these gifts the
following account is given: Hermes (so(7) he is called in the Greek
language), 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 case of Pelops, whose flesh was cut in pieces by the Father, and
then collected and brought together, and compacted anew by all the
gods,(1) did she in this way indicate Pandora and these men having
their consciences seared(2) by her, declaring, as they maintain, the
very same things, are [proved] of the same family and spirit as the
others.



CHAP. XXII.--THE THIRTY AEONS ARE NOT TYPIFIED BY THE FACT THAT CHRIST
WAS BAPTIZED IN HIS THIRTIETH YEAR: HE DID NOT SUFFER IN THE TWELFTH
MONTH AFTER HIS BAPTISM, BUT WAS MORE THAN FIFTY YEARS OLD WHEN HE
DIED.



    1. I have shown that the number thirty fails them in every
respect; too few AEons, as they represent them, being at one time
found within the Pleroma, and then again too many [to correspond with
that number]. There are not, therefore, thirty AEons, nor did the
Saviour come to be baptized when He was thirty years old, for this
reason, that He might show forth the thirty silent(3) AEons of their
system, otherwise they must first of all separate and eject [the
Saviour] Himself from the Pleroma of all. Moreover, they affirm that
He suffered in the twelfth month, so that He continued to preach for
one year after His baptism; and they endeavour to establish this point
out of the prophet (for it is written, "To proclaim the acceptable
year of the Lord, and the day of retribution"(4)), being truly blind,
inasmuch as they affirm they have found out the mysteries of Bythus,
yet not understanding that which is called by Isaiah the acceptable
year of the Lord, nor the day of retribution. For the prophet neither
speaks concerning a day which includes the space of twelve hours, nor
of a year the length of which is twelve months. For even they
themselves acknowledge that the prophets have very often expressed
themselves in parables and allegories, and [are] not [to be
understood] according to the mere sound of the words.

    2. That, then, was called the day of retribution on which the Lord
will render to every one according to his works--that is, the
judgment. The acceptable year of the Lord, again, is this present
time, in which those who believe Him are called by Him, and become
acceptable to God--that is, the whole time from His advent onwards to
the consummation [of all things], during which He acquires to Himself
as fruits [of the scheme of mercy] those who are saved. For, according
to the phraseology of the prophet, the day of retribution follows the
[acceptable] year; and the prophet will be proved guilty of falsehood
if the Lord preached only for a year, and if he speaks of it. For
where is the day of retribution? For the year has passed, and the day
of retribution has not yet come; but He still "makes His sun to rise
upon the good and upon the evil, and sends rain upon the just and
unjust."(5) And the righteous suffer persecution, are afflicted, and
are slain, while sinners are possessed of abundance, and "drink with
the sound of the harp and psaltery, but do not regard the works of the
Lord."(6) But, according to the language [used by the prophet], they
ought to be combined, and the day of retribution to follow the
[acceptable] year. For the words are, "to proclaim the acceptable year
of the Lord, and the day of retribution." This present time,
therefore, in which men are called and saved by the Lord, is properly
understood to be denoted by "the acceptable year of the Lord;" and
there follows on this "the day of retribution," that is, the judgment.
And the time thus referred to is not called "a year" only, but is also
named "a day" both by the prophet and by Paul, of whom the apostle,
calling to mind the Scripture, says in the Epistle addressed to the
Romans, "As it is written, for thy sake we are killed all the day
long, we are counted as sheep for the slaughter."(7) But here the
expression "all the day long" is put for all this time during which we
suffer persecution, and are killed as sheep. As then this day does not
signify one which consists of twelve hours, but the whole time during
which believers in Christ suffer and are put to death for His sake, so
also the year there mentioned does not denote one which consists of
twelve months, but the whole time of faith during which men hear and
believe the preaching of the Gospel, and those become acceptable to
God who unite themselves to Him.

    3. But it is greatly to be wondered at, how it has come to pass
that, while affirming that they have found out the mysteries of God,
they have not examined the Gospels to ascertain how often after His
baptism the Lord went up, at the time of the passover, to Jerusalem,
in accordance with what was the practice of the Jews from every land,
and every year, that they should assemble at this period in Jerusalem,
and there celebrate the feast of the passover. First of all, after He
had made the water wine at Cana of Galilee, He went up to the festival
day of the passover, on which occasion it is written, "For many
believed in Him, when they saw the signs which He did,"(8) as John the
disciple of the Lord records. Then, again, withdrawing Himself [from
Judaea], He is found in Samaria; on which occasion, too, He convened
with the Samaritan woman, and while at a distance, cured the son of
the centurion by a word, saying, "Go thy way, thy son liveth."(1)
Afterwards He went up, the second time, to observe the festival day of
the passover(2) in Jerusalem; on which occasion He cured the paralytic
man, who had lain beside the pool thirty-eight years, bidding him
rise, take up his couch, and depart. Again, withdrawing from thence to
the other side of the sea of Tiberias,(3) He there seeing a great
crowd had followed Him, fed all that multitude with five loaves of
bread, and twelve baskets of fragments remained over and above. Then,
when He had raised Lazarus from the dead, and plots were formed
against Him by the Pharisees, He withdrew to a city called Ephraim;
and from that place, as it is written "He came to Bethany six days
before the passover,"(4) and going up from Bethany to Jerusalem, He
there ate the passover, and suffered on the day following. Now, that
these three occasions of the passover are not included within one
year, every person whatever must acknowledge. And that the special
month in which the passover was celebrated, and in which also the Lord
suffered, was not the twelfth, but the first, those men who boast that
they know all things, if they know not this, may learn it from Moses.
Their explanation, therefore, both of the year and of the twelfth
month has been proved false, and they ought to reject either their
explanation or the Gospel; otherwise [this unanswerable question
forces itself upon them], How is it possible that the Lord preached
for one year only?

    4. Being thirty years old when He came to be baptized, and then
possessing the full age of a Master,(5) He came to Jerusalem, so that
He might be properly acknowledged(6) by all as a Master. For He did
not seem one thing while He was another, as those affirm who describe
Him as being man only in appearance; but what He was, that He also
appeared to be. Being a Master, therefore, He also possessed the age
of a Master, not despising or evading any condition of humanity, nor
setting aside in Himself that law which He had(7) appointed for the
human race, but sanctifying every age, by that period corresponding to
it which belonged to Himself. For He came to save all through means of
Himself--all, I say, who through Him are born again to
God(8)--infants,(9) and children, and boys, and youths, and old men.
He therefore passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants,
thus sanctifying infants; a child for children, thus sanctifying those
who are of this age, being at the same time made to them an example of
piety, righteousness, and submission; a youth for youths, becoming an
example to youths, and thus sanctifying them for the Lord. So likewise
He was an old man for old men, that He might be a perfect Master for
all, not merely as respects the setting forth of the truth, but also
as regards age, sanctifying at the same time the aged also, and
becoming an example to them likewise. Then, at last, He came on to
death itself, that He might be "the first-born from the dead, that in
all things He might have the pre-eminence,"(10) the Prince of
life,(11) existing before all, and going before all.(12)

    5. They, however, that they may establish their false opinion
regarding that which is written, "to proclaim the acceptable year of
the Lord," maintain that He preached for one year only, and then
suffered in the twelfth month. [In speaking thus], they are forgetful
to their own disadvantage, destroying His whole work, and robbing Him
of that age which is both more necessary and more honourable than any
other; that more advanced age, I mean, during which also as a teacher
He excelled all others. For how could He have had disciples, if He did
not teach? And how could He have taught, unless He had reached the age
of a Master? For when He came to be baptized, He had not yet completed
His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age
(for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed it: "Now
Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old,"(13) when He
came to receive baptism); and, [according to these men,] He preached
only one year reckoning from His baptism. On completing His thirtieth
year He suffered, being in fact still a young man, and who had by no
means attained to advanced age. Now, that the first stage of early
life embraces thirty years,(1) and that this extends onwards to the
fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth and
fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which our Lord
possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as
the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in
Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, [affirming] that John
conveyed to them that information.(2) And he remained among them up to
the times of Trajan. (3) Some of them, moreover, saw not only John,
but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from
them, and bear testimony as to the [validity of] the statement. Whom
then should we rather believe? Whether such men as these, or
Ptolemaeus, who never saw the apostles, and who never even in his
dreams attained to the slightest trace of an apostle?

    6. But, besides this, those very Jews who then disputed with the
Lord Jesus Christ have most clearly indicated the same thing. For when
the Lord said to them, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day;
and he saw it, and was glad," they answered Him, "Thou art not yet
fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham?"(4) Now, such language is
fittingly applied to one who has already passed the age of forty,
without having as yet reached his fiftieth year, yet is not far from
this latter period. But to one who is only thirty years old it would
unquestionably be said, "Thou art not yet forty years old." For those
who wished to convict Him of falsehood would certainly not extend the
number of His years far beyond the age which they saw He had attained;
but they mentioned a period near His real age, whether they had truly
ascertained this out of the entry in the public register, or simply
made a conjecture from what they observed that He was above forty
years old, and that He certainly was not one of only thirty years of
age.  For it is altogether unreasonable to suppose that they were
mistaken by twenty years, when they wished to prove Him younger than
the times of Abraham. For what they saw, that they also expressed; and
He whom they beheld was not a mere phantasm, but an actual being(5) of
flesh and blood. He did not then wont much of being fifty years
old;(6) and, in accordance with that fact, they said to Him, "Thou art
not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham?" He did not
therefore preach only for one year, nor did He suffer in the twelfth
month of the year. For the period included between the thirtieth and
the fiftieth year can never be regarded as one year, unless indeed,
among their AEons, there be so long years assigned to those who sit in
their ranks with Bythus in the Pleroma; of which beings Homer the
poet, too, has spoken, doubtless being inspired by the Mother of their
[system of] error:--

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 a likeness [to what is
typified], and in this way to shadow forth by means of things present
those which are yet to come.

    2. And not only in the case of this woman have the years of her
infirmity (which they affirm to fit in with their figment) been
mentioned, but, lo! another woman was also healed, after suffering in
like manner for eighteen years; concerning whom the Lord said, "And
ought not this daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has bound during
eighteen years, to be set free on the Sabbath-day?"(1) If, then, the
former was a type of the twelfth Aeon that suffered, the latter should
also be a type of the eighteenth Aeon in suffering. But they cannot
maintain this; otherwise their primary and original Ogdoad will be
included in the number of Aeons who suffered together. Moreover, there
was also a certain other person(2) healed by the Lord, after he had
suffered for eight-and-thirty years: they ought therefore to affirm
that the Aeon who occupies the thirty-eighth place suffered. For if
they assert that the things which were done by the Lord were types of
what took place in the Pleroma, the type ought to be preserved
throughout. But they can neither adapt to their fictitious system the
case of her who was cured after eighteen years, nor of him who was
cured after thirty-eight years. Now, it is in every way absurd and
inconsistent to declare that the Saviour preserved the type in certain
cases, while He did not do so in others. The type of the woman,
therefore, [with the issue of blood] is shown to have no analogy to
their system of Aeons.(3)



CHAP. XXIV.--FOLLY OF THE ARGUMENTS DERIVED BY THE HERETICS FROM
NUMBERS, LETTERS, AND SYLLABLES.



    1. This very thing, too, still further demonstrates their opinion
false, and their fictitious system untenable, that they endeavour to
bring forward proofs of it, sometimes through means of numbers and the
syllables of names, sometimes also through the letter of syllables,
and yet again through those numbers which are, according to the
practice followed by the Greeks, contained in [different]
letters;--[this, I say,] demonstrates in the clearest manner their
overthrow or confusion,(4) as well as the untenable and perverse
character of their [professed] knowledge. For, transferring the name
Jesus, which belongs to another language, to the numeration of the
Greeks, they sometimes call it "Episemon,"(5) as having six letters,
and at other times "the Plenitude of the Ogdoads," as containing the
number eight hundred and eighty-eight. But His [corresponding] Greek
name, which is "Soter," that is, Saviour, because it does not fit in
with their system, either with respect to numerical value or as
regards its letters, they pass over in silence. Yet surely, if they
regard the names of the Lord, as, in accordance with the preconceived
purpose of the Father, by means of their numerical value and letters,
indicating number in the Pleroma, Soter, as being a Greek name, ought
by means of its letters and the numbers [expressed by these], in
virtue of its being Greek, to show forth the mystery of the Pleroma.
But the case is not so, because it is a word of five letters, and its
numerical value is one thousand four hundred and eight.(6) But these
things do not in any way correspond with their Pleroma; the account,
therefore, which they give of transactions in the Pleroma cannot be
true.

    2. Moreover, Jesus, which is a word belonging to the proper tongue
of the Hebrews, contains, as the learned among them declare, two
letters and a half,(7) and signifies that Lord who contains heaven and
earth;(8) for Jesus in the ancient Hebrew language means "heaven,"
while again "earth" is expressed by the words sura usser.(9) The word,
therefore, which contains heaven and earth is just Jesus. Their
explanation, then, of the Episemon is false, and their numerical
calculation is also manifestly overthrown. For, in their own language,
Soter is a Greek word of five letters; but, on the other hand, in the
Hebrew tongue, Jesus contains only two letters and a half. The total
which they reckon up, viz., eight hundred and eighty-eight, therefore
falls to the ground. And throughout, the Hebrew letters do not
correspond in number with the Greek, although these especially, as
being the more ancient and unchanging, ought to uphold the reckoning
connected with the names. For these ancient, original, and generally
called sacred letters(10) of the Hebrews are ten in number (but they
are written by means of fifteen(11)), the last letter being joined to
the first. And thus they write some of these letters according to
their natural sequence, just as we do, but others in a reverse
direction, from the right hand towards the left, thus tracing the
letters backwards. The name Christ, too, ought to be capable of being
reckoned up in harmony with the Aeons of their Pleroma, inasmuch as,
according to their statements, He was produced for the establishment
and rectification of their Pleroma. The Father, too, in the same way,
ought, both by means of letters and numerical value, to contain the
number of those Aeons who were produced by Him; Bythus, in like
manner, and not less Monogenes; but pre-eminently the name which is
above all others, by which God is called, and which in the Hebrew
tongue is expressed by Baruch,(1) [a word] which also contains two and
a half letters. From this fact, therefore, that the more important
names, both in the Hebrew and Greek languages, do not conform to their
system, either as respects the number of letters or the reckoning
brought out of them, the forced character of their calculations
respecting the rest becomes clearly manifest.

    3. For, choosing out of the law whatever things agree with the
number adopted in their system, they thus violently strive to obtain
proofs of its validity. But if it was really the purpose of their
Mother, or the Saviour, to set forth, by means of the Demiurge, types
of those things which are in the Pleroma, they should have taken care
that the types were found in things more exactly correspondent and
more holy; and, above all, in the case of the Ark of the Covenant, on
account of which the whole tabernacle of witness was formed. Now it
was constructed thus: its length(2) was two cubits and a half, its
breadth one cubit and a half, its height one cubit and a half; but
such a number of cubits in no respect corresponds with their system,
yet by it the type ought to have been, beyond everything else, clearly
set forth. The mercy-seat(3) also does in like manner not at all
harmonize with their expositions. Moreover, the table of shew-bread(4)
was two cubits in length, while its height was a cubit and a half.
These stood before the holy of holies, and yet in them not a single
number is of such an amount as contains an indication of the Tetrad,
or the Ogdoad, or of the rest of their Pleroma. What of the
candlestick,(5) too, which had seven(6) branches and seven lamps?
while, if these had been made according to the type, it ought to have
had eight branches and a like number of lamps, after the type of the
primary Ogdoad, which shines pre-eminently among the Aeons, and
illuminates the whole Pleroma. They have carefully enumerated the
curtains(7) as being ten, declaring these a type of the ten Aeons; but
they have forgotten to count the coverings of skin, which were
eleven(8) in number. Nor, again, have they measured the size of these
very curtains, each curtain(9) being eight-and-twenty cubits in
length. And they set forth the length of the pillars as being ten
cubits, with a reference to the Decad of Aeons. "But the breadth of
each pillar was a cubit and a half;"(10) and this they do not explain,
any more than they do the entire number of the pillars or of their
bars, because that does not suit the argument. But what of the
anointing oil,(11) which sanctified the whole tabernacle? Perhaps it
escaped the notice of the Saviour, or, while their Mother was
sleeping, the Demiurge of himself gave instructions as to its weight;
and on this account it is out of harmony with their Pleroma,
consisting,(12) as it did, of five hundred shekels of myrrh, five
hundred of cassia, two hundred and fifty of cinnamon, two hundred and
fifty of calamus, and oil in addition, so that it was composed of five
ingredients. The incense(13) also, in like manner, [was compounded] of
stacte, onycha, galbanum, mint, and frankincense, all which do in no
respect, either as to their mixture or weight, harmonize with their
argument. It is therefore unreasonable and altogether absurd [to
maintain] that the types were not preserved in the sublime and more
imposing enactments of the law; but in other points, when any number
coincides with their assertions, to affirm that it was a type of the
things in the Pleroma; while [the truth is, that] every number occurs
with the utmost variety in the Scriptures, so that, should any one
desire it, he might form not only an Ogdoad, and a Decad, and a
Duodecad, but any sort of number from the Scriptures, and then
maintain that this was a type of the system of error devised by
himself.

    4. But that this point is true, that that number which is called
five, which agrees in no respect with their argument, and does not
harmonize with their system, nor is suitable for a typical
manifestation of the things in the Pleroma, [yet has a wide
prevalence,(14)] will be proved as follows from the Scriptures. Soter
is a name of five letters; Pater, too, contains five letters; Agape
(love), too, consists of five letters; and our Lord, after(1) blessing
the five loaves, fed with them five thousand men. Five virgins(2) were
called wise by the Lord; and, in like manner, five were styled
foolish. Again, five men are said to have been with the Lord when He
obtained testimony(3) from the Father,--namely, Peter, and James, and
John, and Moses, and Elias. The Lord also, as the fifth person,
entered into the apartment of the dead maiden, and raised her up
again; for, says [the Scripture], "He suffered no man to go in, save
Peter and James,(4) and the father and mother of the maiden."(5) The
rich man in hell(6) declared that he had five brothers, to whom he
desired that one rising from the dead should go. The pool from which
the Lord commanded the paralytic man to go into his house, had five
porches. The very form of the cross, too, has five extremities,(7) two
in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle, on which [last] the
person rests who is fixed by the nails. Each of our hands has five
fingers; we have also five senses; our internal organs may also be
reckoned as five, viz., the heart, the liver, the lungs, the spleen,
and the kidneys. Moreover, even the whole person may be divided into
this number [of parts],--the head, the breast, the belly, the thighs,
and the feet. The human race passes through five ages first infancy,
then boyhood, then youth, then maturity,(8) and then old age. Moses
delivered the law to the people in five books. Each table which he
received from God contained five(9) commandments. The veil
covering(10) the holy of holies had five pillars. The altar of
burnt-offering also was five cubits in breadth.(11) Five priests were
chosen in the wilderness,--namely, Aaron,(12) Nadab, Abiud, Eleazar,
Ithamar. The ephod and the breastplate, and other sacerdotal
vestments, were formed out of five(13) materials; for they combined in
themselves gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen.
And there were five(14) kings of the Amorites, whom Joshua the son of
Nun shut up in a cave, and directed the people to trample upon their
heads. Any one, in fact, might collect many thousand other things of
the same kind, both with respect to this number and any other he chose
to fix upon, either from the Scriptures, or from the works of nature
lying under his observation.(15) But although such is the case, we do
not therefore affirm that there are five Aeons above the Demiurge; nor
do we consecrate the Peptad, as if it were some divine thing; nor do
we strive to establish things that are untenable, nor ravings [such as
they indulge in], by means of that vain kind of labour; nor do we
perversely force a creation well adapted by God [for the ends intended
to be served], to change itself into types of things which have no
real existence; nor do we seek to bring forward impious and abominable
doctrines, the detection and overthrow of which are easy to all
possessed of intelligence.

    5. For who can concede to them that the year has three hundred and
sixty-five days only, in order that there may be twelve months of
thirty days each, after the type of the twelve Aeons, when the type is
in fact altogether out of harmony [with the antitype]? For, in the one
case, each of the Aeons is a thirtieth part of the entire Pleroma,
while in the other they declare that a month is the twelfth part of a
year. If, indeed, the year were divided into thirty parts, and the
month into twelve, then a fitting type might be regarded as having
been found for their fictitious system. But, on the contrary, as the
case really stands, their Pleroma is divided into thirty parts, and a
portion of it into twelve; while again the whole year is divided into
twelve parts, and a certain portion of it into thirty. The Saviour
therefore acted unwisely in constituting the month a type of the
entire Pleroma, but the year a type only of that Duodecad which exists
in the Pleroma; for it was more fitting to divide the year into thirty
parts, even as the whole Pleroma is divided, but the month into
twelve, just as the Aeons are in their Pleroma. Moreover, they divide
the entire Pleroma into three portions,--namely, into an Ogdoad, a
Decad, and a Duodecad. But our year is divided into four
parts,--namely, spring, summer, autumn, and winter. And again, not
even do the months, which they maintain to be a type of the
Triacontad, consist precisely of thirty days, but some have more and
some less, inasmuch as five days remain to them as an overplus.(16)
The day, too, does not always consist precisely of twelve hours, but
rises from nine(17) to fifteen, and then falls again from fifteen to
nine. It cannot therefore be held that months of thirty days each were
so formed for the sake of [typifying] the Aeons; for, in that case,
they would have consisted precisely of thirty days: nor, again, the
days of these months, that by means of twelve hours they might
symbolize the twelve Aeons; for, in that case, they would always have
consisted precisely of twelve hours.

    6. But further, as to their calling material substances "on the
left hand," and maintaining that those things which are thus on the
left hand of necessity fall into corruption, while they also affirm
that the Saviour came to the lost sheep, in order to transfer it to
the right hand, that is, to the ninety and nine sheep which were in
safety, and perished not, but continued within the fold, yet were of
the left hand,(1) it follows that they must acknowledge that the
enjoyment(2) of rest did not imply salvation. And that which has not
in like manner the same number, they will be compelled to acknowledge
as belonging to the left hand, that is, to corruption. This Greek word
Agape (love), then, according to the letters of the Greeks, by means
of which reckoning is carried on among them, having a numerical value
of ninety-three,(3) is in like manner assigned to the place of rest on
the left hand. Aletheia (truth), too, having in like manner, according
to the principle indicated above, a numerical value of sixty-four,(4)
exists among material substances. And thus, in fine, they will be
compelled to acknowledge that all those sacred names which do not
reach a numerical value of one hundred, but only contain the numbers
summed by the left hand, are corruptible and material.



CHAP. XXV.--GOD IS NOT TO BE SOUGHT AFTER BY MEANS OF LETTERS,
SYLLABLES, AND NUMBERS; NECESSITY OF HUMILITY IN SUCH INVESTIGATIONS.



    1. If any one, however, say in reply to these things, What then?
Is it a meaningless and accidental thing, that the positions of names,
and the election of the apostles, and the working of the Lord, and the
arrangement of created things, are what they are?--we answer them:
Certainly not; but with great wisdom and diligence, all things have
clearly been made by God, fitted and prepared [for their special
purposes]; and His word formed both things ancient and those belonging
to the latest times; and men ought not to connect those things with
the number thirty,(5) but to harmonize them with what actually exists,
or with fight reason. Nor should they seek to prosecute inquiries
respecting God by means of numbers, syllables, and letters. For this
is an uncertain mode of proceeding, on account of their varied and
diverse systems, and because every sort of hypothesis may at the
present day be, in like manner, devised(6) by any one; so that(7) they
can derive arguments against the truth from these very theories,
inasmuch as they may be turned in many different directions. But, on
the contrary, they ought to adapt the numbers themselves, and those
things which have been formed, to the true theory lying before them.
For system(8) does not spring out of numbers, but numbers from a
system; nor does God derive His being from things made, but things
made from God. For all things originate from one and the same God.

    2. But since created things are various and numerous, they are
indeed well fitted and adapted to the whole creation; yet, when viewed
individually, are mutually opposite and inharmonious, just as the
sound of the lyre, which consists of many and opposite notes, gives
rise to one unbroken melody, through means of the interval which
separates each one from the others. The lover of truth therefore ought
not to be deceived by the interval between each note, nor should he
imagine that one was due to one artist and author, and another to
another, nor that one person fitted the treble, another the bass, and
yet another the tenor strings; but he should hold that one and the
same person [formed the whole], so as to prove the judgment, goodness,
and skill exhibited in the whole work and [specimen of] wisdom. Those,
too, who listen to the melody, ought to praise and extol the artist,
to admire the tension of some notes, to attend to the softness of
others, to catch the sound of others between both these extremes, and
to consider the special character of others, so as to inquire at what
each one aims, and what is the cause of their variety, never failing
to apply our rule, neither giving up the [one(9)] artist, nor casting
off faith in the one God who formed all things, nor blaspheming our
Creator.

    3. If, however, any one do not discover the cause of all those
things which become objects of investigation, let him reflect that man
is infinitely inferior to God; that he has received grace only in
part, and is not yet equal or similar to his Maker; and, moreover,
that he cannot have experience or form a conception of all things like
God; but in the same proportion as he who was formed but to-day, and
received the beginning of his creation, is inferior to Him who is
uncreated, and who is always the same, in that proportion is he, as
respects knowledge and the faculity of investigating the causes of all
things, inferior to Him who made him. For thou, O man, art not an
uncreated being, nor didst thou always co-exist(1) with God, as did
His own Word; but now, through His pre-eminent goodness, receiving the
beginning of thy creation, thou dost gradually learn from the Word the
dispensations of God who made thee.

    4. Preserve therefore the proper order of thy knowledge, and do
not, as being ignorant of things really good, seek to rise above God
Himself, for He cannot be surpassed; nor do thou seek after any one
above the Creator, for thou wilt not discover such, For thy Former
cannot be contained within limits; nor, although thou shouldst measure
all this [universe], and pass through all His creation, and consider
it in all its depth, and height, and length, wouldst thou be able to
conceive of any other above the Father Himself. For thou wilt not be
able to think Him fully out, but, indulging in trains of reflection
opposed to thy nature, thou wilt prove thyself foolish; and if thou
persevere in such a course, thou wilt fall into utter madness, whilst
thou deemest thyself loftier and greater than thy Creator, and
imaginest that thou canst penetrate beyond His dominions.



CHAP. XXVI.--"KNOWLEDGE PUFFETH UP, BUT LOVE EDIFIETH."



    1. It is therefore better and more profitable to belong to the
simple and unlettered class, and by means of love to attain to
nearness to God, than, by imagining ourselves learned and skilful, to
be found [among those who are] blasphemous against their own God,
inasmuch as they conjure up another God as the Father. And for this
reason Paul exclaimed, "Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth:"(2)
not that he meant to inveigh against a true knowledge of God, for in
that case he would have accused himself; but, because he knew that
some, puffed up by the pretence of knowledge, fall away from the love
of God, and imagine that they themselves are perfect, for this reason
that they set forth an imperfect Creator, with the view of putting an
end to the pride which they feel on account of knowledge of this kind,
he says, "Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth." Now there can be
no greater conceit than this, that any one should imagine he is better
and more perfect than He who made and fashioned him, and imparted to
him the breath of life, and commanded this very thing into existence.
It is therefore better, as I have said, that one should have no
knowledge whatever of any one reason why a single thing in creation
has been made, but should believe in God, and continue in His love,
than(3) that, puffed up through knowledge of this kind, he should fall
away from that love which is the life of man; and that he should
search after no other knowledge except [the knowledge of] Jesus Christ
the Son of God, who was crucified for us, than that by subtle
questions and hair-splitting expressions he should fall into
impiety.(4)

    2. For how would it be, if any one, gradually elated by attempts
of the kind referred to, should, because the Lord said that "even the
hairs of your head are all numbered,"(5) set about inquiring into the
number of hairs on each one's head, and endeavour to search out the
reason on account of which one man has so many, and another so many,
since all have not an equal number, but many thousands upon thousands
are to be found with still varying numbers, on this account that some
have larger and others smaller heads, some have bushy heads of hair,
others thin, and others scarcely any hair at all,--and then those who
imagine that they have discovered the number of the hairs, should
endeavour to apply that for the commendation of their own sect which
they have conceived? Or again, if any one should, because of this
expression which occurs in the Gospel, "Are not two sparrows sold for
a farthing? and not one of them falls to the ground without the will
of your Father,"(6) take occasion to reckon up the number of sparrows
caught daily, whether over all the world or in some particular
district, and to make inquiry as to the reason of so many having been
captured yesterday, so many the day before, and so many again on this
day, and should then join on the number of sparrows to his
[particular] hypothesis, would he not in that case mislead himself
altogether, and drive into absolute insanity those that agreed with
him, since men are always eager in such matters to be thought to have
discovered something more extraordinary than their masters?(7)

    3. But if any one should ask us whether every number of all the
things which have been made, and which are made, is known to God, and
whether every one of these [numbers] has, according to His providence,
received that special amount which it contains; and on our agreeing
that such is the case, and acknowledging that not one of the things
which have been, or are, or shall be made, escapes the knowledge of
God, but that through His providence every one of them has obtained
its nature, and rank, and number, and special quantity, and that
nothing whatever either has been or is produced in vain or
accidentally, but with exceeding suitability [to the purpose
intended], and in the exercise of transcendent knowledge, and that it
was an admirable and truly divine intellect(1) which could both
distinguish and bring forth the proper causes of such a system: if, [I
say,] any one, on obtaining our adherence and consent to this, should
proceed to reckon up the sand and pebbles of the earth, yea also the
waves of the sea and the stars of heaven, and should endeavour to
think out the causes of the number which he imagines himself to have
discovered, would not his labour be in vain, and would not such a man
be justly declared mad, and destitute of reason, by all possessed of
common sense? And the more he occupied himself beyond others in
questions of this kind, and the more he imagines himself to find out
beyond others, styling them unskilful, ignorant, and animal beings,
because they do not enter into his so useless labour, the more is he
[in reality] insane, foolish, struck as it were with a thunderbolt,
since indeed he does in no one point own himself inferior to God; but,
by the knowledge which he imagines himself to have discovered, he
changes God Himself, and exalts his own opinion above the greatness of
the Creator.



CHAP. XXVII.--PROPER MODE OF INTERPRETING PARABLES AND OBSCURE
PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE.



    1. A sound mind, and one which does not expose its possessor to
danger, and is devoted to piety and the love of truth, will eagerly
meditate upon those things which God has placed within the power of
mankind, and has subjected to our knowledge, and will make advancement
in [acquaintance with] them, rendering the knowledge of them easy to
him by means of daily study. These things are such as fall [plainly]
under our observation, and are clearly and unambiguously in express
terms set forth in the Sacred Scriptures. And therefore the parables
ought not to be adapted to ambiguous expressions. For, if this be not
done, both he who explains them will do so without danger, and the
parables will receive a like interpretation from all, and the body(2)
of truth remains entire, with a harmonious adaptation of its members,
and without any collision [of its several parts]. But to apply
expressions which are not clear or evident to interpretations of the
parables, such as every one discovers for himself as inclination leads
him, [is absurd.(3)] For in this way no one will possess the rule of
truth; but in accordance with the number of persons who explain the
parables will be found the various systems of truth, in mutual
opposition to each other, and setting forth antagonistic doctrines,
like the questions current among the Gentile philosophers.

    2. According to this course of procedure, therefore, man would
always be inquiring but never finding, because he has rejected the
very method of discovery. And when the Bridegroom(4) comes, he who has
his lamp untrimmed, and not burning with the brightness of a steady
light, is classed among those who obscure the interpretations of the
parables, forsaking Him who by His plain announcements freely imparts
gifts to all who come to Him, and is excluded from His
marriage-chamber. Since, therefore, the entire Scriptures, the
prophets, and the Gospels, can be clearly, unambiguously, and
harmoniously understood by all, although all do not believe them;
and(5) since they proclaim that one only God, to the exclusion of all
others, formed all things by His word, whether visible or invisible,
heavenly or earthly, in the water or under the earth, as I have
shown(6) from the very words of Scripture; and since the very system
of creation to which we belong testifies, by what falls under our
notice, that one Being made and governs it,--those persons will seem
truly foolish who blind their eyes to such a clear demonstration, and
will not behold the light of the announcement [made to them]; but they
put fetters upon themselves, and every one of them imagines, by means
of their obscure interpretations of the parables, that he has found
out a God of his own. For that there is nothing whatever openly,
expressly, and without controversy said in any part of Scripture
respecting the Father conceived of by those who hold a contrary
opinion, they themselves testify, when they maintain that the Saviour
privately taught these same things not to all, but to certain only of
His disciples who could comprehend them, and who understood what was
intended by Him through means of arguments, enigmas, and parables.
They come, [in fine,] to this, that they maintain there is one Being
who is proclaimed as God, and another as Father, He who is set forth
as such through means of parables and enigmas.  3. But since parables
admit of many interpretations, what lover of truth will not
acknowledge, that for them to assert God is to be searched out from
these, while they desert what is certain, indubitable, and true, is
the part of men who eagerly throw themselves into danger, and act as
if destitute of reason? And is not such a course of conduct not to
build one's house upon a rock(1) which is firm, strong, and placed in
an open position, but upon the shifting sand? Hence the overthrow of
such a building is a matter of ease.



CHAP. XXVII.--PERFECT KNOWLEDGE CANNOT BE ATTAINED IN THE PRESENT
LIFE: MANY QUESTIONS MUST BE SUBMISSIVELY LEFT IN THE HANDS OF GOD.



    1. Having therefore the truth itself as our rule and the testimony
concerning God set clearly before us, we ought not, by running after
numerous and diverse answers to questions, to cast away the firm and
true knowledge of God. But it is much more suitable that we, directing
our inquiries after this fashion, should exercise ourselves in the
investigation of the mystery and administration of the living God, and
should increase in the love of Him who has done, and still does, so
great things for us; but never should fall from the belief by which it
is most clearly proclaimed that this Being alone is truly God and
Father, who both formed this world, fashioned man, and bestowed the
faculty of increase on His own creation, and called him upwards from
lesser things to those greater ones which are in His own presence,
just as He brings an infant which has been conceived in the womb into
the light of the sun, and lays up wheat in the barn after He has given
it full strength on the stalk. But it is one and the same Creator who
both fashioned the womb and created the sun;and one and the same Lord
who both reared the stalk of corn, increased and multiplied the wheat,
and prepared the barn.

    2. If, however, we cannot discover explanations of all those
things in Scripture which are made the subject of investigation, yet
let us not on that account seek after any other God besides Him who
really exists. For this is the very greatest impiety. We should leave
things of that nature to God who created us, being most properly
assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken
by the Word of God and His Spirit; but we, inasmuch as we are inferior
to, and later in existence than, the Word of God and His Spirit, are
on that very account(2) destitute of the knowledge of His mysteries.
And there is no cause for wonder if this is the case with us as
respects things spiritual and heavenly, and such as require to be made
known to us by revelation, since many even of those things which lie
at our very feet (I mean such as belong to this world, which we
handle, and see, and are in close contact with) transcend out
knowledge, so that even these we must leave to God. For it is fitting
that He should excel all [in knowledge]. For how stands the case, for
instance, if we endeavour to explain the cause of the rising of the
Nile? We may say a great deal, plausible or otherwise, on the subject;
but what is true, sure, and incontrovertible regarding it, belongs
only to God. Then, again, the dwelling-place of birds--of those, I
mean, which come to us in spring, but fly away again on the approach
of autumn--though it is a matter connected with this world, escapes
our knowledge.  What explanation, again, can we give of the flow and
ebb of the ocean, although every one admits there must be a certain
cause [for these phenomena]? Or what can we say as to the nature of
those things which lie beyond it?(3) What, moreover, can we say as to
the formation of rain, lightning, thunder, gatherings of clouds,
vapours, the bursting forth of winds, and such like things; of tell as
to the storehouses of snow, hail, and other like things? [What do we
know respecting] the conditions requisite for the preparation of
clouds, or what is the real nature of the vapours in the sky? What as
to the reason why the moon waxes and wanes, or what as to the cause of
the difference of nature among various waters, metals, stones, and
such like things? On all these points we may indeed say a great deal
while we search into their causes, but God alone who made them can
declare the truth regarding them.

    3. If, therefore, even with respect to creation, there are some
things [the knowledge of] Which belongs only to God, and others which
come with in the range of our own knowledge, what ground is there for
complaint, if, in regard to those things which we investigate in the
Scriptures (which are throughout spiritual), we are able by the grace
of God to explain some of them, while we must leave others in the
hands of God, and that not only in the present world, but also in that
which is to come, so that God should for ever teach, and man should
for ever learn the things taught him by God? As the apostle has said
on this point, that, when other things have been done away, then these
three, "faith, hope, and charity, shall endure."(4) For faith, which
has respect to our Master, endures(5) unchangeably, assuring us that
there is but one true God, and that we should truly love Him for ever,
seeing that He alone is our Father; while we hope ever to be receiving
more and more from God, and to learn from Him, because He is good, and
possesses boundless riches, a kingdom without end, and instruction
that can never be exhausted. If, therefore, according to the rule
which I have stated, we leave some questions in the hands of God, we
shall both preserve our faith uninjured, and shall continue without
danger; and all Scripture, which has been given to us by God, shall be
found by us perfectly consistent; and the parables shall harmonize
with those passages which are perfectly plain; and those statements
the meaning of which is clear, shall serve to explain the parables;
and through the many diversified utterances [of Scripture] there shall
be heard(1) one harmonious melody in us, praising in hymns that God
who created all things. If, for instance, any one asks, "What was God
doing before He made the world?" we reply that the answer to such a
question lies with God Himself. For that this world was formed
perfect(2) by God, receiving a beginning in time, the Scriptures teach
us; but no Scripture reveals to us what God was employed about before
this event. The answer therefore to that question remains with God,
and it is not proper(3) for us to aim at bringing forward foolish,
rash, and blasphemous suppositions [in reply to it]; so, as by one's
imagining that he has discovered the origin of matter, he should in
reality set aside God Himself who made all things.

    4. For consider, all ye who invent such opinions, since the Father
Himself is alone called God, who has a real existence, but whom ye
style the Demiurge; since, moreover, the Scriptures acknowledge Him
alone as God; and yet again, since the Lord confesses Him alone as His
own Father, and knows no other, as I shall show from His very words,--
when ye style this very Being the fruit of defect, and the offspring
of ignorance, and describe Him as being ignorant of those things which
are above Him, with the various other allegations which you make
regarding Him,--consider the terrible blasphemy [ye are thus guilty
of] against Him who truly is God. Ye seem to affirm gravely and
honestly enough that ye believe in God; but then, as ye are utterly
unable to reveal any other God, ye declare this very Being in whom ye
profess to believe, the fruit of defect and the offspring of
ignorance. Now this blindness and foolish talking flow to you from the
fact that ye reserve nothing for God, but ye wish to proclaim the
nativity and production both of God Himself, of His Ennoea, of His
Logos, and Life, and Christ; and ye form the idea of these from no
other than a mere human experience; not understanding, as I said
before, that it is possible, in the case of man, who is a compound
being, to speak in this way of the mind of man and the thought of man;
and to say that thought (ennoea) springs from mind (sensus), intention
(enthymesis) again from thought, and word (logos) from intention (but
which logos?(4) for there is among the Greeks one logos which is the
principle that thinks, and another which is the instrument by means of
which thought is expressed); and [to say] that a man sometimes is at
rest and silent, while at other times he speaks and is active. But
since God is(5) all mind, all reason, all active spirit, all light,
and always exists one and the same, as it is both beneficial for us to
think of God, and as we learn regarding Him from the Scriptures, such
feelings and divisions [of operation] cannot fittingly be ascribed to
Him. For our tongue, as being carnal, is not sufficient to minister to
the rapidity of the human mind, inasmuch as that is of a spiritual
nature, for which reason our word is restrained(6) within us, and is
not at once expressed as it has been conceived by the mind, but is
uttered by successive efforts, just as the tongue is able to serve it.

    5. But God being all Mind, and all Logos, both speaks exactly what
He thinks, and thinks exactly what He speaks. For His thought is
Logos, and Logos is Mind, and Mind comprehending all things is the
Father Himself. He, therefore, who speaks of the mind of God, and
ascribes to it a special origin of its own, declares Him a compound
Being, as if God were one thing, and the original Mind another. So,
again, with respect to Logos, when one attributes to him the third(7)
place of production from the Father; on which supposition he is
ignorant of His greatness; and thus Logos has been far separated from
God. As for the prophet, he declares respecting Him, "Who shall
describe His generation?"(8) But ye pretend to set forth His
generation from the Father, and ye transfer the production of the word
of men which takes place by means of a tongue to the Word of God, and
thus are righteously exposed by your own selves as knowing neither
things human nor divine.

    6. But, beyond reason inflated [with your own wisdom], ye
presumptuously maintain that ye are acquainted with the unspeakable
mysteries of God; while even the Lord, the very Son of God, allowed
that the Father alone knows the very day and hour of judgment, when He
plainly declares, "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man,
neither the Son, but the Father only."(1) If, then, the Son was not
ashamed to ascribe the knowledge of that day to the Father only, but
declared what was true regarding the matter, neither let us be ashamed
to reserve for God those greater questions which may occur to us. For
no man is superior to his master.(2) If any one, therefore, says to
us, "How then was the Son produced by the Father?" we reply to him,
that no man understands that production, or generation, or calling, or
revelation, or by whatever name one may describe His generation, which
is in fact altogether indescribable. Neither Valentinus, nor Marcion,
nor Saturninus, nor Basilides, nor angels, nor archangels, nor
principalities, nor powers [possess this knowledge], but the Father
only who begat, and the Son who was begotten. Since therefore His
generation is unspeakable, those who strive to set forth generations
and productions cannot be in their right mind, inasmuch as they
undertake to describe things which are indescribable. For that a word
is uttered at the bidding of thought and mind, all men indeed well
understand. Those, therefore, who have excogitated [the theory of]
emissions have not discovered anything great, or revealed any abstruse
mystery, when they have simply transferred what all understand to the
only-begotten Word of God; and while they style Him unspeakable and
unnameable, they nevertheless set forth the production and formation
of His first generation, as if they themselves had assisted at His
birth, thus assimilating Him to the word of mankind formed by
emissions.

    7. But we shall not be wrong if we affirm the same thing also
concerning the substance of matter, that God produced it. For we have
learned from the Scriptures that God holds the supremacy over all
things. But whence or in what way He produced it, neither has
Scripture anywhere declared; nor does it become us to conjecture, so
as, in accordance with our own opinions, to form endless conjectures
concerning God, but we should leave such knowledge in the hands of God
Himself. In like manner, also, we must leave the cause why, while all
things were made by God, certain of His creatures sinned and revolted
from a state of submission to God, and others, indeed the great
majority, persevered, and do still persevere, in [willing] subjection
to Him who formed them, and also of what nature those are who sinned,
and of what nature those who persevere,--[we must, I say, leave the
cause of these things] to God and His Word, to whom alone He said,
"Sit at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool."(3)
But as for us, we still dwell upon the earth, and have not yet sat
down upon His throne. For although the Spirit of the Saviour that is
in Him "searcheth all things, even the deep things of God,"(4) yet as
to us "there are diversities of gifts, differences of administrations,
and diversities of operations;"(5) and we, while upon the earth, as
Paul also declares, "know in part, and prophesy in part."(6) Since,
therefore, we know but in part, we ought to leave all sorts of
[difficult] questions in the hands of Him who in some measure, [and
that only,] bestows grace on us. That eternal fire, [for instance,] is
prepared for sinners, both the Lord has plainly declared, and the rest
of the Scriptures demonstrate. And that God fore-knew that this would
happen, the Scriptures do in like manner demonstrate, since He
prepared eternal fire from the beginning for those who were
[afterwards] to transgress [His commandments]; but the cause itself of
the nature of such transgressors neither has any Scripture informed
us, nor has an apostle told us, nor has the Lord taught us. It becomes
us, therefore, to leave the knowledge of this matter to God, even as
the Lord does of the day and hour [of judgment], and not to rush to
such an extreme of danger, that we will leave nothing in the hands of
God, even though we have received only a measure of grace [from Him in
this world]. But when we investigate points which are above us, and
with respect to which we cannot reach satisfaction, [it is absurd(7)]
that we should display such an extreme of presumption as to lay open
God, and things which are not yet discovered,(8) as if already we had
found out, by the vain talk about emissions, God Himself, the Creator
of all things, and to assert that He derived His substance from
apostasy and ignorance, so as to frame an impious hypothesis in
opposition to God.

    8. Moreover, they possess no proof of their system, which has but
recently been invented by them, sometimes resting upon certain
numbers, sometimes on syllables, and sometimes, again, on names; and
there are occasions, too, when, by means of those letters which are
contained in letters, by parables not properly interpreted, or by
certain [baseless] conjectures, they strive to establish that fabulous
account which they have devised. For if any one should inquire the
reason why the Father, who has fellowship with the Son in all things,
has been declared by the Lord alone to know the hour and the day [of
judgment], he will find at present no more suitable, or becoming, or
safe reason than this (since, indeed, the Lord is the only true
Master), that we may learn through Him that the Father is above all
things. For "the Father," says He, "is greater than I."(1) The Father,
therefore, has been declared by our Lord to excel with respect to
knowledge; for this reason, that we, too, as long as we are connected
with the scheme of things in this world, should leave perfect
knowledge, and such questions [as have been mentioned], to God, and
should not by any chance, while we seek to investigate the sublime
nature of the Father, fall into the danger of starting the question
whether there is another God above God.(2)

    9. But if any lover of strife contradict what I have said, and
also what the apostle affirms, that "we know in part, and prophesy in
part,"(3) and imagine that he has acquired not a partial, but a
universal, knowledge of all that exists,--being such an one as
Valentinus, or Ptolemaeus, or Basilides, or any other of those who
maintain that they have searched out the deep(4) things of God,--let
him not (arraying himself in vainglory) boast that he has acquired
greater knowledge than others with respect to those things which are
invisible, or cannot be placed under our observation; but let him, by
making diligent inquiry, and obtaining information from the Father,
tell us the reasons (which we know not) of those things which are in
this world,--as, for instance, the number of hairs on his own head,
and the sparrows which are captured day by day, and such other points
with which we are not previously acquainted,--so that we may credit
him also with respect to more important points. But if those who are
perfect do not yet understand the very things in their hands, and at
their feet, and before their eyes, and on the earth, and especially
the rule followed with respect to the hairs of their head, how can we
believe them regarding things spiritual, and super-celestial,(5) and
those which, with a vain confidence, they assert to be above God? So
much, then, I have said concerning numbers, and names, and syllables,
and questions respecting such things as are above our comprehension,
and concerning their improper expositions of the parables: [I add no
more on these points,] since thou thyself mayest enlarge upon them.



CHAP. XXIX.--REFUTATION OF THE VIEWS OF THE HERETICS AS TO THE FUTURE
DESTINY OF THE SOUL AND BODY.



    1. Let us return, however, to the remaining points of their
system. For when they declare(6) that, at the consummation of all
things, their mother shall re-enter the Pleroma, and receive the
Saviour as her consort; that they themselves, as being spiritual, when
they have got rid of their animal souls, and become intellectual
spirits, will be the consorts of the spiritual angels; but that the
Demiurge, since they call him animal, will pass into the place of the
Mother; that the souls of the righteous shall psychically repose in
the intermediate place;--when they declare that like will be gathered
to like, spiritual things to spiritual, while material things continue
among those that are material, they do in fact contradict themselves,
inasmuch as they no longer maintain that souls pass, on account of
their nature, into the intermediate place to those substances which
are similar to themselves, but [that they do so] on account of the
deeds done [in the body], since they affirm that those of the
righteous do pass [into that abode], but those of the impious continue
in the fire. For if it is on account of their nature that all souls
attain to the place of enjoyment,(7) and all belong to the
intermediate place simply because they are souls, as being thus of the
same nature with it, then it follows that faith is altogether
superfluous, as was also the descent(8) of the Saviour [to this
world]. If, on the other hand, it is on account of their righteousness
[that they attain to such a place of rest], then it is no longer
because they are souls but because they are righteous. But if souls
would have(9) perished unless they had been righteous, then
righteousness must have power to save the bodies also [which these
souls inhabited]; for why should it not save them, since they, too,
participated in righteousness? For if nature and substance are the
means of salvation, then all souls shall be saved; but if
righteousness and faith, why should these not save those bodies which,
equally with the souls, will enter(10) into immortality? For
righteousness will appear, in matters of this kind, either impotent or
unjust, if indeed it saves some substances through participating in
it, but not others.

    2. For it is manifest that those acts which are deemed righteous
are performed in bodies. Either, therefore, all souls will of
necessity pass into the intermediate place, and there will never be a
judgment; or bodies, too, which have participated in righteousness,
will attain to the place of enjoyment, along with the souls which have
in like manner participated, if indeed righteousness is powerful
enough to bring thither those substances which have participated in
it. And then the doctrine concerning the resurrection of bodies which
we believe, will emerge true and certain [from their system]; since,
[as we hold,] God, when He resuscitates our mortal bodies which
preserved righteousness, will render them incorruptible and immortal.
For God is superior to nature, and has in Himself the disposition [to
show kindness], because He is good; and the ability to do so, because
He is mighty; and the faculty of fully carrying out His purpose,
because He is rich and perfect.

    3. But these men are in all points inconsistent with themselves,
when they decide that all souls do not enter into the intermediate
place, but those of the righteous only. For they maintain that,
according to nature and substance, three sorts [of being] were
produced by the Mother: the first, which proceeded from perplexity,
and weariness, and fear--that is material substance; the second from
impetuosity(1)--that is animal substance; but that which she brought
forth after the vision of those angels who wait upon Christ, is
spiritual substance. If, then, that substance(2) which she brought
forth will by all means enter into the Pleroma because it is
spiritual, while that which is material will remain below because it
is material, and shall be totally consumed by the fire which bums
within it, why should not the whole animal substance go into the
intermediate place, into which also they send the Demiurge? But what
is it which shall enter within their Pleroma? For they maintain that
souls shall continue in the intermediate place, while bodies, because
they possess material substance, when they have been resolved into
matter, shall be consumed by that fire which exists in it; but their
body being thus destroyed, and their soul remaining in the
intermediate place, no part of man will any longer be left to enter in
within the Pleroma. For the intellect of man--his mind, thought,
mental intention, and such like--is nothing else than his soul; but
the emotions and operations of the soul itself have no substance apart
from the soul. What part of them, then, will still remain to enter
into the Pleroma? For they themselves, in as far as they are souls,
remain in the intermediate place; while, in as far as they are body,
they will be consumed with the rest of matter.



CHAP. XXX.--ABSURDITY OF THEIR STYLING THEMSELVES SPIRITUAL, WHILE THE
DEMIURGE IS DECLARED TO BE ANIMAL.



    1. Such being the state of the case, these infatuated men declare
that they rise above the Creator (Demiurge); and, inasmuch as they
proclaim themselves superior to that God who made and adorned the
heavens, and the earth, and all things that are in them, and maintain
that they themselves are spiritual, while they are in fact shamefully
carnal on account of their so great impiety,--affirming that He, who
has made His angels(3) spirits, and is clothed with light as with a
garment, and holds the circle(4) of the earth, as it were, in His
hand, in whose sight its inhabitants are counted as grasshoppers, and
who is the Creator and Lord of all spiritual substance, is of an
animal nature,--they do beyond doubt and verily betray their own
madness; and, as if truly struck with thunder, even more than those
giants who are spoken of in [heathen] fables, they lift up their
opinions against God, inflated by a vain presumption and unstable
glory,--men for whose purgation all the hellebore(5) on earth would
not suffice, so that they should get rid of their intense folly.

    2. The superior person is to be proved by his deeds. In what way,
then, can they show themselves superior to the Creator (that I too,
through the necessity of the argument in hand, may come down to the
level of their impiety, instituting a comparison between God and
foolish men, and, by descending to their argument, may often refute
them by their own doctrines; but in thus acting may God be merciful to
me, for I venture on these statements, not with the view of comparing
Him to them, but of convicting and overthrowing their insane
opinions)--they, for whom many foolish persons entertain so great an
admiration, as if, forsooth, they could learn from them something more
precious than the truth itself! That expression of Scripture, "Seek,
and ye shall find,"(6) they interpret as spoken with this view, that
they should discover themselves to be above the Creator, styling
themselves greater and better than God, and calling themselves
spiritual, but the Creator animal; and [affirming] that for this
reason they rise upwards above God, for that they enter in within the
Pleroma, while He remains in the intermediate place. Let them, then,
prove themselves by their deeds superior to the Creator; for the
superior person ought to be proved not by what is said, but by what
has a real existence.

    3. What work, then, will they point to as having been accomplished
through themselves by the Saviour, or by their Mother, either greater,
or more glorious, or more adorned with wisdom, than those which have
been produced by Him who was the disposer of all around us? What
heavens have they established? what earth have they founded? what
stars have they called into existence? or what lights of heaven have
they caused to shine? within what circles, moreover, have they
confined them? or, what rains, or frosts, or snows, each suited to the
season, and to every special climate, have they brought upon the
earth? And again, in opposition to these, what heat or dryness have
they set over against them? or, what rivers have they made to flow?
what fountains have they brought forth? with what flowers and trees
have they adorned this sublunary world? or, what multitude of animals
have they formed, some rational, and others irrational, but all
adorned with beauty? And who can enumerate one by one all the
remaining objects which have been constituted by the power of God, and
are governed by His wisdom? or who can search out the greatness of
that God who made them? And what can be told of those existences which
are above heaven, and which do not pass away, such as Angels,
Archangels, Thrones, Dominions, and Powers innumerable? Against what
one of these works, then, do they set themselves in opposition? What
have they similar to show, as having been made through themselves, or
by themselves, since even they too are the Workmanship and creatures
of this [Creator]? For whether the Saviour or their Mother (to use
their own expressions, proving them false by means of the very terms
they themselves employ) used this Being, as they maintain, to make an
image of those things which are within the Pleroma, and of all those
beings which she saw waiting upon the Saviour, she used him (the
Demiurge) as being [in a sense] superior to herself, and better fitted
to accomplish her purpose through his instrumentality; for she would
by no means form the images of such important beings through means of
an inferior, but by a superior, agent.

    4. For, [be it observed,] they themselves, according to their own
declarations, were then existing, as a spiritual conception, in
consequence of the contemplation of those beings who were arranged as
satellites around Pandora. And they indeed continued useless, the
Mother accomplishing nothing through their instrumentality,(1)--an
idle conception, owing their being to the Saviour, and fit for
nothing, for not a thing appears to have been done by them. But the
God who, according to them, was produced, while, as they argue,
inferior to themselves (for they maintain that he is of an animal
nature), was nevertheless the active agent in all things, efficient,
and fit for the work to be done, so that by him the images of all
things were made; and not only were these things which are seen formed
by him, but also all things invisible, Angels, Archangels,
Dominations, Powers, and Virtues,--[by him, I say,] as being the
superior, and capable of ministering to her desire. But it seems that
the Mother made nothing whatever through their instrumentality, as
indeed they themselves acknowledge; so that one may justly reckon them
as having been an abortion produced by the painful travail of their
Mother. For no accoucheurs performed their office upon her, and
therefore they were cast forth as an abortion, useful for nothing, and
formed to accomplish no work of the Mother. And yet they describe
themselves as being superior to Him by whom so vast and admirable
works have been accomplished and arranged, although by their own
reasoning they are found to be so wretchedly inferior!

    5. It is as if there were two iron tools, or instruments, the one
of which was continually in the workman's hands and in constant use,
and by the use of which he made whatever he pleased, and displayed his
art and skill, but the other of which remained idle and useless, never
being called into operation, the workman never appearing to make
anything by it, and making no use of it in any of his labours; and
then one should maintain that this useless, and idle, and unemployed
tool was superior in nature and value to that which the artisan
employed in his work, and by means of which he acquired his
reputation. Such a man, if any such were found, would justly be
regarded as imbecile, and not in his right mind. And so should those
be judged of who speak of themselves as being spiritual and superior,
and of the Creator as possessed of an animal nature, and maintain that
for this reason they will ascend on high, and penetrate within the
Pleroma to their own husbands (for, according to their own statements,
they are themselves feminine), but that God [the Creator] is of an
inferior nature, and therefore remains in the intermediate place,
while all the time they bring forward no proofs of these assertions:
for the better man is shown by his works, and all works have been
accomplished by the Creator; but they, having nothing worthy of reason
to point to as having been produced by themselves, are labouring under
the greatest and most incurable madness.

    6. If, however, they labour to maintain that, while all material
things, such as the heaven, and the whole world which exists below it,
were indeed formed by the Demiurge, yet all things of a more spiritual
nature than these,--those, namely, which are above the heavens, such
as Principalities, Powers, Angels, Archangels, Dominations,
Virtues,--were produced by a spiritual process of birth (which they
declare themselves to be), then, in the first place, we prove from the
authoritative Scriptures(1) that all the things which have been
mentioned, visible and invisible, have been made by one God. For these
men are not more to be depended on than the Scriptures; nor ought we
to give up the declarations of the Lord, Moses, and the rest of the
prophets, who have proclaimed the truth, and give credit to them, who
do indeed utter nothing of a sensible nature, but rave about untenable
opinions. And, in the next place, if those things which are above the
heavens were really made through their instrumentality, then let them
inform us what is the nature of things invisible, recount the number
of the Angels, and the ranks of the Archangels, reveal the mysteries
of the Thrones, and teach us the differences between the Dominations,
Principalities, Powers, and Virtues. But they can say nothing
respecting them; therefore these beings were not made by them. If, on
the other hand, these were made by the Creator, as was really the
case, and are of a spiritual and holy character, then it follows that
He who produced spiritual beings is not Himself of an animal nature,
and thus their fearful system of blasphemy is overthrown.

    7. For that there are spiritual creatures in the heavens, all the
Scriptures loudly proclaim; and Paul expressly testifies that there
are spiritual things when he declares that he was caught up into the
third heaven,(2) and again, that he was carried away to paradise, and
heard unspeakable words which it is not lawful for a man to utter. But
what did that profit him, either his entrance into paradise or his
assumption into the third heaven, since all these things are still but
under the power of the Demiurge, if, as some venture to maintain, he
had already begun(3) to be a spectator and a hearer of those mysteries
which are affirmed to be above the Demiurge? For if it is true that he
was becoming acquainted with that order of things which is above the
Demiurge, he would by no means have remained in the regions of the
Demiurge, and that so as not even thoroughly to explore even these
(for, according to their manner of speaking, there still lay before
him four heavens,(4) if he were to approach the Demiurge, and thus
behold the whole seven lying beneath him); but he might have been
admitted, perhaps, into the intermediate place, that is, into the
presence of the Mother, that he might receive instruction from her as
to the things within the Pleroma. For that inner man which was in him,
and spoke in him, as they say, though invisible, could have attained
not only to the third heaven, but even as far as the presence of their
Mother. For if they maintain that they themselves, that is, their
[inner] man, at once ascends above the Demiurge, and departs to the
Mother, much more must this have occurred to the [inner] man of the
apostle; for the Demiurge would not have hindered him, being, as they
assert, himself already subject to the Saviour. But if he had tried to
hinder him, the effort would have gone for nothing. For it is not
possible that he should prove stronger than the providence of the
Father, and that when the tuner man is said to be invisible even to
the Demiurge. But since he (Paul) has described that assumption of
himself up to the third heaven as something great and pre-eminent, it
cannot be that these men ascend above the seventh heaven, for they are
certainly not superior to the apostle. If they do maintain that they
are more excellent than he, let them prove themselves so by their
works, for they have never pretended to anything like [what he
describes as occurring to himself]. And for this reason he added,
"Whether in the body, or whether out of the body, God knoweth,"(5)
that the body might neither be thought to be a partaker in that
vision,(6) as if it could have participated in those things which it
had seen and heard; nor, again, that any one should say that he was
not carried higher on account of the weight of the body; but it is
therefore thus far permitted even without the body to behold spiritual
mysteries which are the operations of God, who made the heavens and
the earth, and formed man, and placed him in paradise, so that those
should be spectators of them who, like the apostle, have reached a
high degree of perfection in the love of God.

    8. This Being, therefore, also made spiritual things, of which, as
far as to the third heaven, the apostle was made a spectator, and
heard un- 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 God of all, but that that name belongs only to the
Almighty;--[all these arguments, I say,] will in like manner apply
against those who are of the school of Marcion, and Simon, and
Meander, or whatever others there may be who, like them, cut off that
creation with which we are connected from the Father. The arguments,
again, which I have employed against those who maintain that the
Father of all no doubt contains all things, but that the creation to
which we belong was not formed by Him, but by a certain other power,
or by angels having no knowledge of the Propator, who is surrounded as
a centre by the immense extent of the universe, just as a stain is by
the [surrounding] cloak; when I showed that it is not a probable
supposition that any other being than the Father of all formed that
creation to which we belong,--these same arguments will apply against
the followers of Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, and the rest of
the Gnostics, who express similar opinions. Those statements, again,
which have been made with respect to the emanations, and the Aeons,
and the [supposed state of] degeneracy, and the inconstant character
of their Mother, equally overthrow Basilides, and all who are falsely
styled Gnostics, who do, in fact, just repeat the same views under
different names, but do, to a greater extent than the former,(1)
transfer those things which lie outside(2) of the truth to the system
of their own doctrine. And the remarks I have made respecting numbers
will also apply against all those who misappropriate things belonging
to the truth for the support of a system of this kind. And all that
has been said respecting the Creator (Demiurge) to show that he alone
is God and Father of all, and whatever remarks may yet be made in the
following books, I apply against the heretics at large. The more
moderate and reasonable among them thou wilt convert and convince, so
as to lead them no longer to blaspheme their Creator, and Maker, and
Sustainer, and Lord, nor to ascribe His origin to defect and
ignorance; but the fierce, and terrible, and irrational [among them]
thou wilt drive far from thee, that you may no longer have to endure
their idle loquaciousness.

    2. Moreover, those also will be thus confuted who belong to Simon
and Carpocrates, and if there be any others who are said to perform
miracles--who do not perform what they do either through the power of
God, or in connection with the truth, nor for the well-being of men,
but for the sake of destroying and misleading mankind, by means of
magical deceptions, and with universal deceit, thus entailing greater
harm than good on those who believe them, with respect to the point on
which they lead them astray. For they can neither confer sight on the
blind, nor hearing on the deaf, nor chase away all sorts of
demons--[none, indeed,] except those that are sent into others by
themselves, if they can even do so much as this. Nor can they cure the
weak, or the lame, or the paralytic, or those who are distressed in
any other part of the body, as has often been done in regard to bodily
infinity. Nor can they furnish effective remedies for those external
accidents which may occur. And so far are they from being able to
raise the dead, as the Lord raised them, and the apostles did by means
of prayer, and as has been frequently done in the brotherhood on
account of some necessity--the entire Church in that particular
locality entreating [the boon] with much fasting and prayer, the
spirit of the dead man has returned, and he has been bestowed in
answer to the prayers of the saints--that they do not even believe
this can be possibly be done, [and hold] that the resurrection from
the dead(3) is simply an acquaintance with that truth which they
proclaim.

    3. Since, therefore, there exist among them error and misleading
influences, and magical illusions are impiously wrought in the sight
of men; but in the Church, sympathy, and compassion, and stedfastness,
and truth, for the aid and encouragement of mankind, are not only
displayed(4) without fee or reward, but we ourselves lay out for the
benefit of others our own means; and inasmuch as those who are cured
very frequently do not possess the things which they require, they
receive them from us;--[since such is the case,] these men are in this
way undoubtedly proved to be utter aliens from the divine nature, the
beneficence of God, and all spiritual excellence. But they are
altogether full of deceit of every kind, apostate inspiration,
demoniacal working, and the phantasms of idolatry, and are in reality
the predecessors of that dragon(5) who, by means of a deception of the
same kind, will with his tail cause a third part of the stars to fall
from their place, and will cast them down to the earth. It behoves us
to flee from them as we would from him; and the greater the display
with which they are said to perform [their marvels], the more
carefully should we watch them, as having been endowed with a greater
spirit of wickedness. If any one will consider the prophecy referred
to, and the daily practices of these men, he will find that their
manner of acting is one and the same with the demons.



CHAP. XXXII.--FURTHER EXPOSURE OF THE WICKED AND BLASPHEMOUS DOCTRINES
OF THE HERETICS.



    1. Moreover, this impious opinion of theirs with respect to
actions--namely, that it is inCumbent on them to have experience of
all kinds of deeds, even the most abominable--is refuted by the
teaching of the Lord, with whom not only is the adulterer rejected,
but also the man who desires to commit adultery;(1) and not only is
the actual murderer held guilty of having killed another to his own
damnation, but the man also who is angry with his brother without a
cause: who commanded [His disciples] not only not to hate men, but
also to love their enemies; and enjoined them not only not to swear
falsely, but not even to swear at all; and not only not to speak evil
of their neighbours, but not even to style any one "Raca" and "fool;"
[declaring] that otherwise they were in danger of hell-fire; and not
only not to strike, but even, when themselves struck, to present the
other cheek [to those that maltreated them]; and not only not to
refuse to give up the property of others, but even if their own were
taken away, not to demand it back again from those that took it; and
not only not to injure their neighbours, nor to do them any evil, but
also, when themselves wickedly dealt with, to be long-suffering, and
to show kindness towards those [that injured them], and to pray for
them, that by means of repentance they might be saved--so that we
should in no respect imitate the arrogance, lust, and pride of others.
Since, therefore, He whom these men boast of as their Master, and of
whom they affirm that He had a soul greatly better and more highly
toned than others, did indeed, with much earnestness, command certain
things to be done as being good and excellent, and certain things to
be abstained from not only in their actual perpetration, but even in
the thoughts which lead to their performance, as being wicked,
pernicious, and abominable,--how then can they escape being put to
confusion, when they affirm that such a Master was more highly toned
[in spirit] and better than others, and yet manifestly give
instruction of a kind utterly opposed to His teaching? And, again, if
there were really no such thing as good and evil, but certain things
were deemed righteous, and certain others unrighteous, in human
opinion only, He never would have expressed Himself thus in His
teaching: "The righteous shall shine forth as the sun in the kingdom
of their Father;"(2) but He shall send the unrighteous, and those who
do not the works of righteousness, "into everlasting fire, where their
worm shall not die, and the fire shall not be quenched."(3)

    2. When they further maintain that it is cumbent on them to have
experience of every kind(4) of work and conduct, so that, if it be
possible, accomplishing all during one manifestation in this life,
they may [at once] pass over to the state of perfection, they are, by
no chance, found striving to do those things which wait upon virtue,
and are laborious, glorious, and skilful,(5) which also are approved
universally as being good. For if it be necessary to go through every
work and every kind of operation, they ought, in the first place, to
learn all the arts: all of them, [I say,] whether referring to theory
or practice, whether they be acquired by self-denial, or are mastered
through means of labour, exercise, and perseverance; as, for example,
every kind of music, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and all such as
are occupied with intellectual pursuits: then, again, the whole study
of medicine, and the knowledge of plants, so as to become acquainted
with those which are prepared for the health of man; the art of
painting and sculpture, brass and marble work, and the kindred arts:
moreover, [they have to study] every kind of country labour, the
veterinary art, pastoral occupations, the various kinds of skilled
labour, which are said to pervade the whole circle of [human]
exertion; those, again, connected with a maritime life, gymnastic
exercises, hunting, military and kingly pursuits, and as many others
as may exist, of which, with the utmost labour, they could not learn
the tenth, or even the thousandth part, in the whole course of their
lives. The fact indeed is, that they endeavour to learn none of these,
although they maintain that it is incumbent on them to have experience
of every kind of work; but, turning aside to voluptuousness, and lust,
and abominable actions, they stand self-condemned when they are tried
by their own doctrine. For, since they are destitute of all those
[virtues] which have been mentioned, they will [of necessity] pass
into the destruction of fire. These men, while they boast of Jesus as
being their Master, do in fact emulate the philosophy of Epicurus and
the indifference of the Cynics, [calling Jesus their Master,] who not
only turned His disciples away from evil deeds, but even from [wicked]
words and thoughts, as I have already shown.

    3. Again, while they assert that they possess souls from the same
sphere as Jesus, and that they are like to Him, sometimes even
maintaining that they are superior; while [they affirm that they were]
produced, like Him, for the performance of works tending to the
benefit and establishment of mankind, they are found doing nothing of
the same or a like kind [with His actions], nor what can in any
respect be brought into comparison with them. And if they have in
truth accomplished anything [remarkable] by means of magic, they
strive [in this way] deceitfully to lead foolish people astray, since
they confer no real benefit or blessing on those over whom they
declare that they exert] supernatural] power; but, bringing forward
mere boys(1) [as the subjects on whom they practise], and deceiving
their sight, while they exhibit phantasms that instantly cease, and do
not endure even a moment of time,(2) they are proved to be like, not
Jesus our Lord, but Simon the magician. It is certain,(3) too, from
the fact that the Lord rose from the dead on the third day, and
manifested Himself to His disciples, and was in their sight received
up into heaven, that, inasmuch as these men die, and do not rise
again, nor manifest themselves to any, they are proved as possessing
souls in no respect similar to that of Jesus.

    4. If, however, they maintain that the Lord, too, performed such
works simply in appearance, we shall refer them to the prophetical
writings, and prove from these both that all things were thus(4)
predicted regarding Him, and did take place undoubtedly, and that He
is the only Son of God. Wherefore, also, those who are in truth His
disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform
[miracles], so as to promote the welfare of other men, according to
the gift which each one has received from Him. For some do certainly
and truly drive out devils, so that those who have thus been cleansed
from evil spirits frequently both believe [in Christ], and join
themselves to the Church. Others have foreknowledge of things to come:
they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal
the sick by laying their hands upon them, and they are made whole.
Yea, moreover, as I have said, the dead even have been raised up, and
remained(5) among us for many years. And what shall I more say? It is
not possible to name the number of the gifts which the Church,
[scattered] throughout the whole world, has received from God, in the
name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and
which she exerts day by day for the benefit of the Gentiles, neither
practising deception upon any, nor taking any reward(6) from them Ion
account of such miraculous interpositions]. For as she has received
freely(7) from God, freely also does she minister [to others].

    5. Nor does she perform anything by means of angelic
invocations,(8) or by incantations, or by any other wicked curious
art; but, directing her prayers to the Lord, who made all things, in a
pure, sincere, and straightforward spirit, and calling upon the name
of our Lord Jesus Christ, she has been accustomed to work(9) miracles
for the advantage of mankind, and not to lead them into error. If,
therefore, the name of our Lord Jesus Christ even now confers benefits
[upon men], and cures thoroughly and effectively all who anywhere
believe on Him, but not that of Simon, or Menander, or Carpocrates, or
of any other man whatever, it is manifest that. when He was made man,
He held fellowship with His own creation, and(10) did all things truly
through the power of God, according to the will of the Father of all,
as the prophets had foretold. But what these things were, shall be
described in dealing with the proofs to be found in the prophetical
writings.



CHAP. XXXIII.--ABSURDITY OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRANSMIGRATION OF
SOULS.



    1. We may subvert their doctrine as to transmigration from body to
body by this fact, that souls remember nothing whatever of the events
which took place in their previous states of existence. For if they
were sent forth with this object, that they should have experience of
every kind of action, they must of necessity retain a remembrance of
those things which have been previously accomplished, that they might
fill up those in which they were still deficient, and not by always
hovering, without intermission, round the same pursuits, spend their
labour wretchedly in vain (for the mere union of a body [with a soul]
could not altogether extinguish the memory and contemplation of those
things which had formerly been experienced(11)), and especially as
they came [into the world] for this very purpose. For as, when the
body is asleep and at rest, whatever things the soul sees by herself,
and does in a vision, recollecting many of these, she also
communicates them to the body; and as it happens that, when one
awakes, perhaps after a long time, he relates what he saw in a dream,
so also would he undoubtedly remember those things which he did before
he came into this particular body. For if that which is seen only for
a very brief space of time, or has been conceived of simply in a
phantasm, and by the soul alone, through means of a dream, is
remembered after she has mingled again with the body, and been
dispersed through all the members, much more would she remember those
things in connection with which she stayed during so long a time, even
throughout the whole period of a bypast life.

    2. With reference to these objections, Plato, that ancient
Athenian, who also was the first(1) to introduce this opinion, when he
could not set them aside, invented the [notion of] a cup of oblivion,
imagining that in this way he would escape this son of difficulty. He
attempted no kind of proof [of his supposition], but simply replied
dogmatically [to the objection in question], that when souls enter
into this life, they are caused to drink of oblivion by that demon who
watches their entrance [into the world], before they effect an
entrance into the bodies

[assigned them]. It escaped him, that [by speaking thus] he fell into
another greater perplexity. For if the cup of oblivion, after it has
been drunk, can obliterate the memory of all the deeds that have been
done, how, O Plato, dost thou obtain the knowledge of this fact (since
thy soul is now in the body), that, before it entered into the body,
it was made to drink by the demon a drug which caused oblivion? For if
thou hast a remembrance of the demon, and the cup, and the entrance
[into life], thou oughtest also to be acquainted with other things;
but if, on the other hand, thou art ignorant of them, then there is no
truth in the story of the demon, nor in the cup of oblivion prepared
with art.

    3. In opposition, again, to those who affirm that the body itself
is the drug of oblivion, this observation may be made: How, then, does
it come to pass, that whatsoever the soul sees by her own
instrumentality, both in dreams and by reflection or earnest mental
exertion, while the body is passive, she remembers, and reports to her
neighbours? But, again, if the body itself were [the cause of]
oblivion, then the soul, as existing in the body, could not remember
even those things which were perceived long ago either by means of the
eyes or the ears; but, as soon as the eye was turned from the things
looked at, the memory of them also would undoubtedly be destroyed. For
the soul, as existing in the very [cause of] oblivion, could have no
knowledge of anything else than that only which it saw at the present
moment. How, too, could it become acquainted with divine things, and
retain a remembrance of them while existing in the body, since, as
they maintain, the body itself is [the cause of] oblivion? But the
prophets also, when they were upon the earth, remembered likewise, on
their returning to their ordinary state of mind,(2) whatever things
they spiritually saw or heard in visions of heavenly objects, and
related them to others. The body, therefore, does not cause the soul
to forget those things which have been spiritually witnessed; but the
soul teaches the body, and shares with it the spiritual vision which
it has enjoyed.

    4. For the body is not possessed of greater power than the soul,
since indeed the former is inspired, and vivified, and increased, and
held together by the latter; but the soul possesses(3) and rules over
the body. It is doubtless retarded in its velocity, just in the exact
proportion in which the body shares in its motion; but it never loses
the knowledge which properly belongs to it. For the body may be
compared to an instrument; but the soul is possessed of the reason of
an artist. As, therefore, the artist finds the idea of a work to
spring up rapidly in his mind, but can only carry it out slowly by
means of an instrument, owing to the want of perfect pliability in the
matter acted upon, and thus the rapidity of his mental operation,
being blended with the slow action of the instrument, gives rise to a
moderate kind of movement [towards the end contemplated]; so also the
soul, by being mixed up with the body belonging to it, is in a certain
measure impeded, its rapidity being blended with the body's slowness.
Yet it does not lose altogether its own peculiar powers; but while, as
it were, sharing life with the body, it does not itself cease to live.
Thus, too, while communicating other things to the body, it neither
loses the knowledge of them, nor the memory of those things which have
been witnessed.

    5. If, therefore, the soul remembers nothing(4) of what took place
in a former state of existence, but has a perception of those things
which are here, it follows that she never existed in other bodies, nor
did things of which she has no knowledge, nor [once] knew things which
she cannot [now mentally] contemplate. But, as each one of us receives
his body through the skilful working of God, so does he also possess
his soul. For God is not so poor or destitute in resources, that He
cannot confer its own proper soul on each individual body, even as He
gives it also its special character. And therefore, when the number
[fixed upon] is completed, [that number] which He had predetermined in
His own counsel, all those who have been enrolled for life [eternal]
shah rise again, having their own bodies, and having also their own
souls, and their own spirits, in which they had pleased God. Those, on
the other hand, who are worthy of punishment, shall go away into it,
they too having their own souls and their own bodies, in which they
stood apart from the grace of God. Both classes shall then cease from
any longer begetting and being begotten, from marrying and being given
in marriage; so that the number of mankind, corresponding to the
fore-ordination of God, being completed, may fully realize the scheme
formed by the Father.(1)



CHAP. XXXIV.--SOULS CAN BE RECOGNISED IN THE SEPARATE STATE, AND ARE
IMMORTAL ALTHOUGH THEY ONCE HAD A BEGINNING.



    1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not
only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that
they preserve the same form(2) [in their separate state] as the body
had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which
they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now
ceased,--in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man
and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this
account He states(3) that Dives knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham
in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his
own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to
relieve him--[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the
crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the answer
given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected
himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to
come into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and
to receive(4) the preaching of Him who was(5) to rise again from the
dead. By these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls
continue to exist that they do not pass from body to body, that they
possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain
the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of
prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls]
receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the
judgment.

    2. But if any persons at this point maintain that those souls,
which only began a little while ago to exist, cannot endure for any
length of time; but that they must, on the one hand, either be unborn,
in order that they may be immortal, or if they have had a beginning in
the way of generation, that they should die with the body itself--let
them learn that God alone, who is Lord of all, is without beginning
and without end, being truly and for ever the same, and always
remaining the same unchangeable Being. But all things which proceed
from Him, whatsoever have been made, and are made, do indeed receive
their own beginning of generation, and on this account are inferior to
Him who formed them, inasmuch as they are not unbegotten. Nevertheless
they endure, and extend their existence into a long series of ages in
accordance with the will of God their Creator; so that He grants them
that they should be thus formed at the beginning, and that they should
so exist afterwards.

    3. For as the heaven which is above us, the firmament, the sun,
the moon, the rest of the stars, and all their grandeur, although they
had no previous existence, were called into being, and continue
throughout a long course of time according to the will of God, so also
any one who thinks thus respecting souls and spirits, and, in fact,
respecting all created things, will not by any means go far astray,
inasmuch as all things that have been made had a beginning when they
were formed, but endure as long as God wills that they should have an
existence and continuance. The prophetic Spirit bears testimony to
these opinions, when He declares, "For He spake, and they were made;
He commanded, and they were created: He hath established them for
ever, yea, forever and ever."(6) And again, He thus speaks respecting
the salvation of man: "He asked life of Thee, and Thou gavest him
length of days for ever and ever;"(7) indicating that it is the Father
of all who imparts continuance for ever and ever on those who are
saved. For life does not arise from us, nor from our own nature; but
it is bestowed according to the grace of God. And therefore he who
shall preserve the life bestowed upon him, and give thanks to Him who
imparted it, shall receive also length of days for ever and ever. But
he who shall reject it, and prove himself ungrateful to his Maker,
inasmuch as he has been created, and has not recognised Him who
bestowed [the gift upon him], deprives himself of [the privilege of]
continuance for ever and ever.(1) And, for this reason, the Lord
declared to those who showed themselves ungrateful towards Him: "If ye
have not been faithful in that which is little, who will give you that
which is great?"(2) indicating that those who, in this brief temporal
life, have shown themselves ungrateful to Him who bestowed it, shall
justly not receive from Him length of days for ever and ever.

    4. But as the animal body is certainly not itself the soul, yet
has fellowship with the soul as long as God pleases; so the soul
herself is not life,(3) but partakes in that life bestowed upon her by
God. Wherefore also the prophetic word declares of the first-formed
man, "He became a living soul,"(4) teaching us that by the
participation of life the soul became alive; so that the soul, and the
life which it possesses, must be understood as being separate
existences. When God therefore bestows life and perpetual duration, it
comes to pass that even souls which did not previously exist should
henceforth endure [for ever], since God has both willed that they
should exist, and should continue in existence. For the will of God
ought to govern and rule in all things, while all other things give
way to Him, are in subjection, and devoted to His service. Thus far,
then, let me speak concerning the creation and the continued duration
of the soul.



CHAP. XXXV.--REFUTATION OF BASILIDES, AND OF THE OPINION THAT THE
PROPHETS UTTERED THEIR PREDICTIONS UNDER THE INSPIRATION OF DIFFERENT
GODS.



    1. Moreover, in addition to what has been said, Basilides himself
will, according to his own principles, find it necessary to maintain
not only that there are three hundred and sixty-five heavens made in
succession by one another, but that an immense and innumerable
multitude of heavens have always been in the process of being made,
and are being made, and will continue to be made, so that the
formation of heavens of this kind can never cease. For if from the
efflux(5) of the first heaven the second was made after its likeness,
and the third after the likeness of the second, and so on with all the
remaining subsequent ones, then it follows, as a matter of necessity,
that from the efflux of our heaven, which he indeed terms the last,
another be formed like to it, and from that again a third; and thus
there can never cease, either the process of efflux from those heavens
which have been already made, or the manufacture of [new] heavens, but
the operation must go on ad infinitum, and give rise to a number of
heavens which will be altogether indefinite.

    2. The remainder of those who are falsely termed Gnostics, and who
maintain that the prophets uttered their prophecies under the
inspiration of different gods, will be easily overthrown by this fact,
that all the prophets proclaimed one God and Lord, and that the very
Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things which are therein; while
they moreover announced the advent of His Son, as I shall demonstrate
from the Scriptures themselves, in the books which follow.

    3. If, however, any object that, in the Hebrew language, diverse
expressions [to represent God] occur in the Scriptures, such as
Sabaoth, Eloe, Adonai, and all other such terms, striving to prove
from these that there are different powers and gods, let them learn
that all expressions of this kind are but announcements and
appellations of one and the same Being. For the term Eloe in the
Jewish language denotes God, while Eloeim(6) and Eloeuth in the Hebrew
language signify "that which contains all." As to the appellation
Adonai, sometimes it denotes what is nameable(7) and admirable; but at
other times, when the letter Daleth in it is doubled, and the word
receives an initial(8) guttural sound--thus Addonai--[it signifies],
"One who bounds and separates the land from the water," so that the
water should not subsequently(9) submerge the land. In like manner
also, Sabaoth,(10) when it [is spelled by a Greek Omega in the last
syllable [Sabaoth], denotes "a voluntary agent;" but when it is
spelled with a Greek Omicron--as, for instance, Sabaoth--it expresses
"the first heaven." In the same way, too, the word Jaoth,(11) when the
last syllable is made long and aspirated, denotes "a predetermined
measure;" but when it is written shortly by the Greek letter Omicron,
namely Jaoth, it signifies "one who puts evils to flight." All the
other expressions likewise bring out(1) the title of one and the same
Being; as, for example (in English(2)), The Lord of Powers, The Father
of all, God Almighty, The Most High, The Creator, The Maker, and such
like. These are not the names and titles of a succession of different
beings, but of one and the same, by means of which the one God and
Father is revealed, He who contains all things, and grants to all the
boon of existence.

    4. Now, that the preaching of the apostles, the authoritative
teaching of the Lord, the announcements of the prophets, the dictated
utterances of the apostles,(3) and the ministration of the law--all of
which praise one and the same Being, the God and Father of all, and
not many diverse beings, nor one deriving his substance from different
gods or powers, but [declare] that all things [were formed] by one and
the same Father (who nevertheless adapts this works] to the natures
and tendencies of the materials dealt with), things visible and
invisible, and, in short, all things that have been made [were
created] neither by angels, nor by any other power, but by God alone,
the Father--are all in harmony with our statements, has, I think, been
sufficiently proved, while by these weighty arguments it has been
shown that there is but one God, the Maker of all things. But that I
may not be thought to avoid that series of proofs which may be derived
from the Scriptures of the Lord (since, indeed, these Scriptures do
much more evidently and clearly proclaim this very point), I shall,
for the benefit of those at least who do not bring a depraved mind to
bear upon them, devote a special book to the Scriptures referred to,
which shall fairly follow them out [and explain them], and I shall
plainly set forth from these divine Scriptures proofs to [satisfy] all
the lovers of truth.(4)