Miscellanies

^A extent? If it is the former, what is the use of letters? But if the latter, whether for the learned or for the unlearned? It would certainly be ridiculous to reject the writing of the learned, while admitting those who compose works that are not of that sort. But are we to allow Theopompus and Timaeus to compose myths and blasphemies; and furthermore Epicurus, who is the prince and author of impiety; and even Hipponax and Archilochus to write so shamefully, ^B yet forbid the man who proclaims the truth to leave behind an advantage for those who come after him? For I consider it both beautiful and honorable to leave behind good children for those who are to come; for children are offspring of the body, but words are offspring of the soul; consequently, we call those who have instructed us ^C our fathers. ^D

Stromata, Book One

The title of these books, which antiquity praises so often, is: *Titus Flavius Clemens’ Stromata of Gnostical Notes according to the True Philosophy*. But if we follow Photius, who notes in an ancient codex that he found the true inscription to be: *Titus Flavius Clemens, presbyter of Alexandria’s Stromata of Gnostical Notes according to the True Philosophy, books I–VIII*.

The occasion for the writing and the title was taken from the Gnostics—whom Epiphanius elegantly calls "condemnatory" or "nefarious" heretics of his time—who, because of the knowledge they claimed for themselves, had assumed this name, as St. Augustine also testifies. Irenaeus and others have written much about them. Clement therefore opposes to them the true *Gnosticon*, for the sake of forming and delineating which these books were written; yet he only begins to treat properly of his own true Gnostic in the second part of the sixth book, up to the other part of the seventh, where he deals with the passions, knowledge, speech, prayers, love toward God, toward truth, with benignity, sacrifices, and the contemplation of the true Gnostic. He imitates Plato here too; for as he describes the Republic, so does our author describe the Gnostic. This is clearly a unique concept for which no similar example can be provided, not even in the sacred writings. He is the kind of man the Stoics want their "wise man" to be, just as Clement wants his Gnostic to be, as he says in the sixth book, where he explicitly adds the reason for this, writing against not only Christians but also the Peripatetics, who do not approve of this, but rather commend "moderation of the passions" (*metriopatheia*) instead of the "passionlessness" (*apatheia*) which our Gnostic attains. Consequently, Clement’s Gnostic is set forth as an example of an ideal, fashioned only in discourse, but impossible to realize in action.

[Regarding the use of the term "fathers" for instructors]: "For he who is taught by someone in the Word is called a son of the instructor, and he is his father." St. Chrysostom, Homily 11, Tom. V: "It makes one not only a father through sowing, but also through instructing well." Hence blessed Paul, 1 Cor. iv, 15: "For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you do not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus, through the Gospel, I have begotten you."

^A We call those "fathers" who have instructed us by catechism. Human philosophy, however, is such that it willingly communicates itself. Thus Solomon says: "My son, if you receive the word of my commandment and hide it within yourself, your ear will hearken to wisdom." He signifies that the word which is sown is hidden, just as in the ground, in the soul of the learner; and this is a spiritual planting. Therefore he also adds: "And you will apply your heart to understanding; you will apply it to the admonition of your son." For soul to soul and spirit to spirit being conjoined, through the sowing of the word, they increase and vivify what has been cast into the soil; and a "son" is anyone who is being educated, insofar as he yields obedience to him by whom he is educated: "My son," he says, "do not forget my precepts." But if knowledge is not for all—the "donkey at a lyre," as those who use proverbs say—what is written is for the many. For pigs indeed take more delight in mud than in clean water. "For this reason," says the Lord, "I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, and do not understand" ^B—not that the Lord provides ignorance for them; for to think so is wicked; but that He has prophetically rebuked the ignorance that was already there, and indicated that they were not going to understand what was said. Now, however, the Savior Himself appears, distributing to His servants the existing resources according to the ability of the one who receives—and from their practice, those resources increase—and returning again, He sets up an account with them. When He had commended those who had increased His money, those who had been faithful in a few things, and promised to set them over many things, He commanded them to enter into the joy of the Lord. But as for him who had hidden the entrusted money instead of lending it out, and who returned the very same thing he had received, without any profit, "Wicked and lazy servant," He said, "you ought to have put my money with the bankers, and having come, I would have received my own." Because of these things, the useless servant "will be cast into the outer darkness." "You therefore," says Paul also, "be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus; and the things you have heard from me through many witnesses, commit these to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also." And again: "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth." If, then, both preach the word, one by writing and the other by voice, why should both not be accepted, having made faith active through love? As for the cause of not choosing the best...

God is completely alien to it, and is in no way its author. Now, the duty of the former is to lend out the word; that of the latter is to test it, and either to accept it or not—and the judgment is decided by those themselves. But one kind of knowledge is for preaching, and another is like that of a messenger; in whichever way it acts, whether through the hand or through the tongue, it is beneficial: "For he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. Let us not grow weary in doing good." For it contributes the greatest things to whoever happens upon it by divine providence: a beginning of faith, a readiness for establishing a right life, an appetite for truth, an impulse toward inquiry, a trace of knowledge—to say it in a few words, it gives material and occasion for salvation. Those, however, who have been reared genuinely in the words of truth, having accepted the viaticum of eternal life, are winged toward heaven. Very wondrously, therefore, the Apostle says: "In everything," he says, ^B "commending ourselves as ministers of God: as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, yet possessing all things. Our mouth is open to you." And I summon as witness, he says, writing to Timothy, "before God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, that you keep these things without prejudice, doing nothing according to partiality." It is necessary, therefore, that both these persons test themselves: the one, whether he is worthy to speak and to leave behind records; the latter, whether he is worthy to hear and to read. Just as some, when they have distributed the Eucharist, as is the custom, permit each one of the people to take his part. For conscience is the best guide for the accurate choosing and shunning of things. Its firm foundation is a right life together with appropriate learning; and to follow others who have already been proven and have conducted themselves rightly is optimal both for understanding the truth and for carrying out the commandments. "So that whoever eats the bread and drinks ^C the cup of the Lord unworthily, will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup." It follows, therefore, to consider, regarding those who have taken upon themselves the task of benefiting their neighbors, whether they have not leaped into teaching rashly, or out of some rivalry; whether they do not hunt for glory from the fact that they communicate their doctrine; whether they do not look only to this reward—the salvation of those who hear—and whether they do not speak to flatter; and whether they have escaped the reproach of bribery, he who speaks through records. "For neither at any time, as you know, did we come with flattering speech, or with a pretext of greed, God is witness, nor seeking glory from men, neither from you nor from others, when we could have been a burden as Christ's apostles; but we were gentle in your midst, as a nurse cherishes her own children." ^D According to this, those who partake of the divine words must also be kept under observation, lest they have come to this merely out of curiosity to inquire, as if they were examining the buildings of cities, rather than to see if they are of the number of those who look to the advantage of their neighbor.

^A For we have never, as you know, as the Apostle says, "been in speech of flattery, nor in pretext of avarice, God is witness, nor seeking glory from men, neither from you, nor from others, when we could have been a burden as Christ’s apostles; but we were gentle in your midst, as a nurse cherishes her own children." By the same token, those who are partakers of the divine words must be observed, to see whether they approach led by the vice of an overly curious mind, as if to view the buildings of cities, or whether they come upon hearing that those who are consecrated to Christ gladly share things necessary for sustenance. But such people are hypocrites, and for that reason they should be dismissed. If, however, anyone wishes not to appear righteous, but to be so, it behooves him that his conscience be optimal. ^B If, therefore, "the harvest indeed is great, but the laborers are few," it is truly necessary to urge that there be the greatest possible supply of laborers. Now agriculture is twofold: the one is without writings, the other is by writings. Whichever way the laborer of the Lord sows the noble wheat, and increases and reaps the ears, he will appear a truly divine husbandman. "Work," says the Lord, "not for the food which perishes, but for that which remains to eternal life." Nourishment is received both through food and through words; and truly blessed are "the peacemakers," who teach and transpose those who in this life and error are fought against by ignorance, into the peace which is in the Word and the life which is from God, and who feed those "who hunger after righteousness" with the distribution of bread. For souls also have their own foods; some increase through recognition and knowledge, while others pasture on Greek philosophy, of which, just as with nuts, not everything is edible. ^C "But he who plants and he who waters, being ministers of him who gives the increase, are one in ministry. And each will receive his own reward according to his own labor. For we are God’s fellow-workers, God’s husbandry, God’s building are you," according to the Apostle. Therefore, it should not be allowed for the hearers to make trial by comparison; nor should the word be delivered for examination to those who have been educated in the arts and powers of all kinds of speeches and in the force of inflated arguments, who already have their souls preoccupied and not yet emptied. But whoever has decided to feast from faith, he is firm for the reception of divine words, having possessed faith as a reasonable judgment. ^D From this follows an abundance of persuasion for him. And this was, after all, that prophetic saying: "If you do not believe, neither shall you understand." Shall we not, therefore, while we have time, "work that which is good toward all, especially toward those who are of the household of faith"? And let each of these, according to the blessed David, sing psalms in thanksgiving: "You shall sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shall be cleansed; you shall wash me, and I shall be whitened beyond snow; you shall make me hear gladness, and bones humbled shall rejoice. Turn your face from my sins; and blot out all my iniquities."

^A Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within my inward parts. Cast me not away from thy face; and take not thy holy Spirit from me. Restore to me the gladness of thy salvation; and confirm me with a principal spirit. He who speaks to those present tests them by time, judges by discernment, and distinguishes the one who is able to hear from others, observing the words, the ways, the characters, the life, the movements, the relations, the look, the utterance, the crossroads, the rock, 19 the trodden path, the fruitful land, the forest-choked region, the fertile and good and cultivated land, which is able to multiply the seed; but he who speaks through writings is purified before God, crying out these things in writing: “Not for the sake of gain, not for the sake of vainglory, not being overcome by impulse, not being enslaved by fear, not being puffed up by pleasure; but longing to enjoy the salvation of those who attain it, of which he does not even partake in the present, but wait- ^B ing in hope for the reward which will certainly be rendered by Him who has promised to pay the wage 20 to the laborers according to their worth.” But neither ought he who is being inscribed among the men 21 to covet a reward. For neither has he who boasted 22 of a good deed received the reward out of vainglory; but is not he who does something of what is required for the sake of a reward—either as a benefactor hastening to receive, or as an evildoer avoiding the punishment—held fast by worldly habit? But one must, as far as possible, imitate the Lord. And he would be such a one, who serves the will of God, having received freely, 23 giving freely, receiving a worthy reward, the conduct of life itself; “For the hire of a harlot,” 24 he says, “shall not enter into the holy place.” Indeed, it is forbidden to offer the price of a dog to the altar. But since evil food and teaching 25 have blunted the spiritual eye, let one walk toward the fitting light, toward the truth, which declares the unwritten things in writing. “You who thirst, go to the water,” says Isaiah; and, “Drink water from your own vessels,” Solomon exhorted. At any rate, in the Laws the philosopher from the Hebrews, Plato, 26 commands the farmers…

not to irrigate, nor to take water from others, unless they have first dug down on their own land to the point which is called “virginal,” and have found dry, waterless ground. For it is not just to refuse aid in poverty, but it is not good to provide for indolence; even though Pythagoras said that it is reasonable to help someone load a burden, but not to help them unload it. Moreover, the Scripture kindles the spark of the soul and draws the eye to contemplation, perhaps even injecting something—like a gardener grafting—and stirring up what is already within. “For many among us,” according to the divine Apostle, “are weak and sickly, and many sleep. But if we judge ourselves, we would not be judged.” ^B And now this work is fashioned for a demonstration of Scripture; but for me, these notes are stored up for old age as an antidote to forgetfulness, a mere phantom and sketch of those vivid and living words of blessed and truly remarkable men which I have been deemed worthy to hear. Of these, one was an Ionian from Greece, others from Magna Graecia; one of them from Coele-Syria. ^{C D}

Notes on the text above

I suspect, and the other a Hebrew from Palestine, whom I believe to be Theophilus, the Bishop of Caesarea, whom Baronius dated to the year of Christ 185. The same Baronius opines that the Assyrian was Bardesanes. But as for the Hebrew from Palestine, I would rather believe him to be Theodotus; I conjecture this from the fact that the epitome is entitled *Clement’s Epitome of Theodotus’s Oriental Teaching*. For Clement calls those things which he learned from his masters in the East "Oriental teaching." That the Theophilus of Caesarea is not meant here by Clement, two arguments persuade me: first, that Theophilus was a contemporary of Clement—for he flourished in the time of Pope Victor, as we learn from Eusebius. Second, that no ancient writer ever said that this Theophilus was a Hebrew or, what is the same thing, a Jew. Furthermore, regarding Bardesanes, he cannot be meant by Clement either; for Bardesanes was not an Assyrian, but an Osroenian; he originated from Edessa, which is the capital of Osroene.

^A and of this one, the one was of the Assyrians, and the other a Hebrew from Palestine from of old. ^B Having met with the last (though in power he was first), I rested in Egypt, having hunted out him who lay concealed. He was a bee in truth, for picking the flowers of the prophetic and apostolic meadow, he engendered for the souls of his hearers a certain uncorrupted fruit of knowledge (59). But those who were preserving the true tradition of the blessed teaching, directly from Peter and James, John and Paul, the holy apostles, the son receiving from the father—though few are they who are like their fathers—came at last by God’s will also to us, to deposit those seeds ancestral and apostolic; and I know well that they will exult, not—I mean, by such a phrase—feeling pain at this, but by that only, the one in accordance with the observation of the tradition. For the soul, I suppose, desiring to preserve the blessed tradition unimpaired, has this kind of tracing out: and "of a man (45) loving..." ^C (59) *Sicula revera apis, prophetici...* This Eusebius seems to have omitted as less necessary for his own design. Yet Valesius notes the following regarding it: "Eusebius should not have omitted these words of Clement. For from them it seems to be inferred that Pantaenus was of Sicilian origin. Do not these words of Clement aptly hint at this? etc." For since in the preceding words Clement designates Pantaenus, as Eusebius testifies, it is necessary that these too be referred to the same Pantaenus. Therefore, Clement calls him a "Sicilian bee" because he was of Sicilian origin. For why would he call him a Sicilian bee rather than an Attic one? P. Halloix, in his *Life of Pantaenus*, says that he was a Hebrew by race, and concludes this from the words of Clement. But Clement clearly implies the opposite. For he says that he heard the Hebrew in the East, but Pantaenus in Egypt.

(40) *Petri, Jacobi, Joannis et Pauli...* The author might be asked why he made mention of Peter, James, John, and Paul, while omitting the rest of the apostles. I answer that he did so because he believed that Christ had imparted the knowledge of the mysteries to these alone, and to the first three indeed before the ascension, but afterwards to Paul, who affirms in his Epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians that he was taught all the mysteries of the Christian religion by Christ himself, and not by any man, and that he was equal to any of the other apostles. ^D Eusebius, *Ecclesiastical History*, bk. VI, ch. 14: "The same Clement in the seventh book of the *Institutions* says these things concerning him (James): 'The Lord,' he says, 'after his resurrection imparted the gift of knowledge to James the Just, to John, and to Peter; these delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the Seventy.'" (41) *Te*. This abbreviation is missing in Eusebius. (42) *Kata*. *Spermata.* Hitherto Eusebius. (45) *Andros*. H. translates it as *paidos*, but since the Bible also acknowledges *andros*, Prov. xxix, a change does not seem to be required.

^A The Father will rejoice in wisdom. Wells ^B, when drawn, yield clearer water; but they turn to rot if no one partakes of them. And use keeps iron brighter; but lack of use generates rust upon it. To speak concisely, exercise produces a healthy state in both spirits and bodies. “No one ^C lights a lamp and puts it under a bushel, but on a lampstand, so that it may shine to those who have been deemed worthy of the same banquet.” For what use is knowledge that does not make him wise who is able to understand? Moreover, the Savior also “saves, and is always working, as He sees the Father.” A teacher [of something] learns more; and by speaking, he often hears along with those who listen to him. For there is one ^D instructor of both the one speaking and the one hearing, who waters both the mind and the word. And the Lord has not forbidden doing good on the Sabbath; rather, He has granted that the divine mysteries and that holy light be imparted to those who are capable of receiving them. Immediately He did not reveal to many things that were not for the many, but to the few to whom He knew it was fitting, and who were able to receive them and be molded according to them; but secret things, like God, are believed by word, not by scripture. Even if someone says it is written: “There is nothing hidden that will not be manifested, nor covered that will not be revealed,” let him hear from us that to the one who hears secretly, that which is secret will be manifested; through this logion, he has foretold that what is hidden will be revealed to the one who receives the things being transmitted in a hidden manner, just as the truth, and what is hidden from the many will become apparent to the few. For why do not all know the truth, and why has justice not been loved, if justice belongs to all? But in fact the mysteries are transmitted mystically, so that it may be in the mouth of the one speaking and be spoken; or rather, not in the voice, but in the understanding. “And God has given to the Church some apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.” The instruction, therefore, of these...

^B my commentaries is, I well know, weak if compared to that spirit full of grace which we were deemed worthy to hear; yet let it be an image, a reminder of the archetypes for him who has been struck by the thyrsus. “For speak to a wise man,” it says, “and he will be wiser; and it shall be added to him who has.” It does not promise to interpret the arcane sufficiently—far from it—but only to remind us, whether we have at any time forgotten, or lest we should forget. Many things, I know well, have slipped away from us through the length of time, having passed away unwritten. Wherefore, relieving the weakness of my memory, I have necessarily had recourse to this present sketch, providing a salutary memorial for my memory, a systematic exposition of chapters. There are indeed some things we do not even remember; for great was the power among those blessed men. There are also things ^C that have remained without notes through the length of time, which have now escaped us; and others, as many as were being extinguished, fading away in the mind itself, since such a service is not easy for the unexercised—these I revive by my notes. Some things I deliberately pass over, making an intelligent selection, fearing to write down what I also avoided saying—not out of envy (for that is not right), but fearing for those who might encounter them, lest they might take them in another direction and fall away, and we be found “offering a sword to a child,” as they say who use proverbs. For it is not possible that things which are written should not slip out, even if they remained unpublished by me. But unrolled, and using one and the same voice, namely that which is written, they answer the inquirer nothing more than what is set down; for it necessarily requires a helper, either the one who wrote it, or another who has walked in the same tracks. For the writing ^D also hints at what is for me; to some it will be manifest, to others it will only speak; it will try to speak even while hidden, and to reveal while concealing itself, and to show while silent. It will also lay out the things dogmatized by the prominent heresies; and it will contradict all those things which ought to be provided beforehand for the knowledge according to epoptic contemplation, which shall proceed for us according to the glorious and venerable rule of the tradition, advancing from the creation of the world, necessarily having to be grasped before physical contemplation, setting them forth and releasing the obstacles that stand in the way of the sequence; so that the ears may be ready for the reception of the Gnostic tradition, the earth having been cleansed from the thorns and all cultivation, for the planting of the vineyard; for the struggle is also the prelude, and [the mysteries are] the things before the mysteries.

^A And our commentaries will not shrink from using the most excellent parts of philosophy and other preparatory studies. “For it is not just for the sake of the Hebrews and those under the Law,” according to the Apostle, “that it is reasonable to become a Jew, but also for the sake of the Greeks, that we might gain all men.” And in the Epistle to the Colossians: “Admonishing,” he writes, “every man, and teaching in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ.”

The brilliance of contemplation is also fitting in another way for the outline of our commentaries. For the abundance of useful learning is like a certain seasoning ^B mixed into the athlete’s food—not for one seeking delicacies, but for one acquiring a good appetite and a love of distinction. Thus, when we sing, we modulate the intensity of our dignity. Just as those who wish to address a crowd through a herald often do so in order that what is said may be heard more clearly, so too here; for our discourse is directed to the many before it reaches the very tradition itself. Therefore, we must set forth the opinions and statements that are shouted out on every side, by which the hearers will be the more easily turned around. ^C And, to speak briefly: among many small pearls, there is one; and in a large catch of fish, there is the finest fish. But with time and labor, the truth will shine forth, when a good helper is present; for it is through men that the greatest number of benefits are bestowed from God.

We all, therefore, who have used our eyes, behold the things that fall before them; but some things ^D [are looked at] for the sake of one thing, others for the sake of another. For instance, the butcher and the shepherd do not look at the sheep in the same way; for the one examines if it is fat, but the other watches for its noble breed. Let one man milk the sheep if he needs food. Let another shear it if he needs a covering. Thus, let the fruit of Greek learning also progress for me. For I do not think that anyone should consider a writing fortunate just because no one contradicts it; rather, that writing should be considered reasonable which no one can reasonably contradict. And [to be added]...

[not immediately ^A, if someone does not do something primarily, does he do it according to circumstance; but managing it in a god-wise manner, and accommodating himself, he will act. For neither does one who possesses virtue continue to need the path to virtue, nor does the man of full strength require restoration. For just as ^B farmers, having irrigated the land beforehand, so we also, with the drinkable water of the words among the Greeks, irrigate the earthy part of them, so that it may receive the spiritual seed cast upon it, and be able to nourish it easily. The Stromateis will contain the truth mixed with the dogmas of philosophy, or rather veiled and hidden, just as the edible meat of a nut is covered by its shell; for it is fitting, I think, that the seeds of the truth be guarded only by those who are tillers of the faith. Nor does it escape me what is bruited about by some, who are ignorantly fearful, saying that one ought to concern oneself with the most necessary things that hold the faith together; and to pass over those from without, ^C which are superfluous, vainly wearing us down and detaining us in matters that contribute nothing to the end. But some also think that philosophy has entered into life to the detriment of men, as a great evil, coming from some wicked inventor. But I, in these very books, shall demonstrate throughout that malice has an evil nature and could never be the tiller of any good thing, thus hinting that philosophy is in some measure a work of divine providence.

[The Stromateis]

objection of certain people who complain that he inserts so much from philosophy into his books.*

As regards these commentaries which, when the occasion has required, have embraced the opinion of the Greeks, I reply thus to those who take pleasure in finding fault: First, even if philosophy were useless, if it is useful to confirm that it is useless, then it is useful. Furthermore, it is not possible for those who have perceived nothing beyond the mere words in the Greeks' doctrines to condemn the Greeks, before they have examined and understood them individually and in depth. For that refutation is most trustworthy which follows experience, since a certain knowledge of the things you have condemned will stand in the place of a most perfect demonstration. ^A Moreover, many things which do not contribute to the end still bring adornment to the craftsman. And otherwise, a varied and manifold learning commends the person who propounds the principal dogmas to the faith of the hearers, engendering in the disciples an admiration for him and leading them to the truth. ^B Such diversion makes for credibility, through which discerning people accept the truth which has been traduced by the vulgar—that philosophy itself does not bring ruin to life, as some have falsely slandered it, as though it were the artificer of false things and evil works, when it is a clear image of the truth, a divine gift given to the Greeks; nor are we led away from the faith by it as if deceived by certain illusions, but rather, protected by a greater bulwark, we have gained a sort of associate exercise, by which faith receives a fuller demonstration. Indeed, even when contrary dogmas are compared with one another, the truth shines forth more brightly. From this follows knowledge. ^C And so philosophy is not introduced for its own sake, but because of the fruits which result from knowledge; for through knowledge the persuasion of a true perception of the things grasped by the mind is confirmed for us. I pass over that these books, pieced together into one body with varied and manifold learning, desire to conceal the seeds of knowledge artfully. Just as, therefore, he who is possessed by the desire for the hunt—having sought, tracked, searched, and sent out the dogs that pursue by course—captures the wild beast, so also does the truth appear sweet when it has been sought and procured with labor. Why then did it seem good to you to arrange your commentaries in this way? ^D Because the danger is great that one might dance out the word—which is truly the secret of the true philosophy—to those who are willing to contradict everything without restraint and not in justice.

^A They cast away all names and words, by no means decently, deceiving both themselves and those who are attached to them. "For Hebrews seek signs," as the Apostle says, "but Greeks seek wisdom" (1 Cor. 1, 22).

CHAPTER III.

Against the sophists and the boasters of useless knowledge.

Magna is the host of those of this sort: some of them, enslaved to pleasures, and wishing not to believe, mock the truth which is worthy of all veneration, holding its barbarism in derision. Others, lifting themselves up, strive to find handles for slandering our discourses, preparing contentious questions, hunters of petty phrases, emulators of certain trifles, litigators, and patchers-together of quarrels, as that Abderite says: ^B

*A turning tongue of men is there, and many are the tales* *Of all manner of things; and a broad law of words is here and there.* *And,* *Such a word as thou shalt speak, such a one shalt thou also hear.*

On this art, therefore, the miserable sophists pride themselves, prattling with certain of their melodic trifles. Since they labor their whole lives about the choice of names and the certain composition and connection of phrases, they appear more talkative than turtledoves, not—as it seems to me—in a manly fashion soothing and tickling those whose ears itch: ^C

*A river of idle words, but not a drop of sense.*

And surely, just as with old shoes, other parts of them are weak and fall apart, but there remains to them alone—

a tongue. ^A Beautifully, then, the Athenian attacks them, and Solon writes:

*To the tongue you look, and to the crafty man’s verse.* *But to the work being done you look not at all.* *Each one of you walks in the tracks of a fox,* *But in all of you dwells a shallow mind.*

^B This is what that saving voice signifies: *“The foxes have holes, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head”* (Matth. VIII, 20; Luc. IX, 58). For, I think, it is only in the one who believes, who is perfectly separated from the rest of the people—whom Scripture calls "beasts"—that the Head of all things, the Ruler, the kind and gentle Word, rests; He ^C *“who catches the wise in their own craftiness”* (Job V, 13; 1 Cor. III, 19). For the Lord alone knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain (Psal. XCIII, 11); Scripture here clearly calling the sophists "wise," those who busy themselves with words and superfluous arts. Whence the Greeks themselves have also given the derivative name "wise" and at the same time "sophists" to those who are meddlesome about anything whatever (82). Cratinus, at all events, having listed poets in his *Archilochians* (83), said:

*What kind of sophists are you ever scrutinizing.*

Iophon (85) too, in the same way, the comic poet in his *Aulodic Satyrs*, speaking of rhapsodes and certain others, says:

*..... For there enters* *A vast crowd of sophists.*

Regarding these and those like them, who have practiced empty words, divine Scripture says beautifully: ^D *“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the understanding of the prudent I will set aside”* (Isa. XXIX, 14; 1 Cor. I, 19).

Human arts, no less than the knowledge of divine things, proceed from God.

Homer also calls the craftsman "wise" (86); and concerning the Margites, if that work is indeed by Homer (87), he writes thus:

The gods did not make him a digger, nor a plowman, Nor wise in any other way; he lacked every craft.

For Hesiod, having said that the cithara-player Linus was skilled in every kind of wisdom, does not blush to call the sailor "wise" as well, writing:

Knowing nothing of the sailor’s art.

The prophet Daniel also says, *“The mystery which the king asks, is not the power of the wise men, the magicians, the enchanters, the Gazarenes, to announce to the king; but there is a God in heaven who reveals”* (Dan. II, 27, 28). And he openly calls the Babylonians “wise.” ^B Now, that Scripture calls by the name of “wisdom” (89) all worldly knowledge or art, while there are other disciplines which human reason has devised additionally; and that every artificial and wise invention is from God, will be clear if we add this expression: *“And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, See, I have called* (90) *by name Beseleel the son of Uri, the son of Or, of the tribe of Judah; and I have filled him with the divine spirit of wisdom, and understanding, and knowledge, to devise and to architect in every work, to work in gold and silver and bronze, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and to work in stone, and the craft of wood-carving (91), until all the works”* (Exod. XXXI, 2-5). ^C Then he adds a general principle: *“And to every wise-hearted person I have given understanding”* (Ibid., 6); that is, to him who is capable of receiving it by labor and exercise. Again, it is written explicitly in the name of the Lord: *“And do you speak to all the wise in mind, whom I have filled with the spirit of perception”* (Exod. XXVIII, 3). Those who are wise in mind do indeed have a certain peculiar property of nature, but they receive the spirit of perception from Him who is the principal wisdom—twofold, in that they have made themselves ready; for some, pursuing the mechanic arts, or others…

^A enjoy the surplus of perception about the senses: the musician, as he is commonly called, by hearing; the potter by touch; the singer by voice; the perfume-maker by smell; the engraver of the imprints made in seals by sight. But those who spend their time in learning have a consensus supplied to them, through which poets arrive at meters, rhetoricians at diction, dialecticians at syllogisms, and philosophers at the contemplation pertinent to them. For this consensus is inventive and suggestive of thoughts, persuading one to apply oneself convincingly; and exercise afterwards increases and intensifies this application into scientific knowledge. Rightly, therefore, the Apostle said the “manifold” ^B wisdom of God, “in many parts and in many ways,” [b] through art, through knowledge, through faith, through prophecy, showing forth its own power for our benefit. “For all wisdom is from the Lord, and is with Him forever,” [c] as the Wisdom of Jesus says. [c] “If thou shalt call upon wisdom and perception with a loud voice, and seek her as silver treasures, and search them out eagerly, thou shalt understand the fear of God, and find divine perception.” [d] As a distinction against the perception which is in philosophy, the prophet has spoken this, which he teaches us to investigate with greatness of soul and magnificence, for the sake of progress toward the fear of God. He has therefore contrasted with it the perception in the fear of God, hinting at knowledge, saying: “For God gives wisdom from His own mouth, and perception at once and prudence, and stores up help for the just.” ^C For to those who have been justified by philosophy, help is stored up—as is also that consensus which leads to godliness toward God.

CAPUT V.

And indeed, before the coming of the Lord, philosophy was necessary to the Greeks for righteousness; but now it becomes useful for godliness, being a kind of preparatory education for those who reap the fruits of faith through demonstration. For “thy foot,” [e] he says, “shall not stumble,” if you refer the good things to the providence of God, whether they be Greek or our own. For God is the cause of all ^D good things: of some things primarily, as of the Old and New Testaments, and of others by consequence, as of philosophy. Perhaps, too, it was given to the Greeks primarily at that time, before the Lord had called the Greeks as well; for it acted as a pedagogue to the Greek world, just as the Law did to the Hebrews, “unto Christ.”

^A Philosophy, therefore, prepares the way for him who is being perfected by Christ. “Encircle wisdom,” says Solomon, “with a wall, and it will exalt you; and the crown of pleasure will protect you.” For when you have fortified yourself with philosophy, and with a prudent and upright way of living of this kind as with a breastplate, you will keep yourself inaccessible to the sophists. ^B Now there is indeed one way of truth, but into it, as into a perennial river, streams flow from elsewhere. It has therefore been divinely said: “Hear, my son, and receive my words, so that many ways of life may be yours; for I teach you the ways of wisdom, that the fountains may not fail you,” which gush forth from the same earth. And it does not merely recount several ways of salvation for one righteous person; but it brings in other “many ways of many righteous people,” signifying it thus: “But the ways of the righteous shine like light.” ^C And the commandments and the preliminary studies may also be ways and supports of life. “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often I have willed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks!” Jerusalem, moreover, is interpreted as “vision of peace.” It signifies, therefore, prophetically that those who have looked upon sacred things peacefully are being instructed for the calling in many ways. What then? Did He “will” it, yet was unable? How often, and where? Twice: through the prophets, and through the advent. The word “how often,” then, shows wisdom to be manifold, and it saves people entirely through every manner of quality and quantity, both in time and in eternity: “For the Spirit of the Lord has filled the world.” ^D If someone, using force, should say: “Do not pay heed to an evil woman; for honey drops from the lips of a harlot,” saying that this is Greek learning, let him hear what follows: “She for a time anoints your throat,” it says; but philosophy does not flatter. What harlot, then, does it signify? It clearly adds: “For the feet of folly lead those who use her down to Hades; and her steps are not firmly fixed.” Make your way, therefore, far distant from foolish pleasure: “Do not stand at the doors of the house of her who is folly, that you may not give your life away to others.” And it bears witness. Then you will repent in your last days, and later repentance will come to you in your old age.

bodily flesh has been worn away.” For this is the end of foolish pleasure. And as for these things, this is how they stand. But when he ^A says, “Do not spend much time with a strange woman,” he advises one to make use of secular education, but not to linger or remain in it. For they prepare for the word of the Lord and initially instruct those who have been given what is usefully suited to the times for each generation. For already ^B some, having been enticed by the lures of the handmaids, have been neglectful of the mistress, philosophy, and some of them have grown old in music, others in geometry, others in grammar, and most in rhetoric. But just as the ^C introductory subjects contribute to philosophy, their mistress, so too philosophy itself contributes to the acquisition of wisdom. For philosophy is the practice of wisdom, and wisdom is the science ^D of divine and human things, and of the causes of these. Therefore, wisdom is mistress.

The Introductory Education

^A And philosophy is the knowledge of divine and human things; "Go therefore," he says, "unto my handmaid," the intermediate education of the intermediate and encyclical sciences, "that you may first produce children from her; for afterwards you shall be able to enjoy also the unions with the mistress, the begetting of genuine children." And faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. She has indeed an Egyptian race, but she is called Agar. And this, being interpreted, is "sojourning." ^B Regarding the Cherubim, and "Sara is a symbol of my principate; for she is called my principate." For philosophy is the exercise of wisdom, while wisdom itself is the knowledge of divine and human things, and of their causes. For wisdom is the mistress of philosophy, just as she is the mistress of that instruction which precedes. For if philosophy professes restraint of the tongue and of the belly, and of those things that are under the belly, and is to be chosen for its own sake, it will appear much more venerable and excellent if it be practiced for the sake of the honor and knowledge of God. And the Scripture will provide testimony for the things said through these words: ^A Sara was once barren, and she was the wife of Abraham; but since Sara was not bearing, she permits her own handmaid, by name Agar the Egyptian, to Abraham for the procreation of children. Wisdom, therefore, which dwells with the faithful (for Abraham was reckoned faithful ^B and righteous) was still barren and childless in that generation, as having as yet borne nothing virtuous to Abraham. But it was fitting that he who was already having time for progress should have been joined first to worldly education (for Egypt is allegorized as the world), and later, having approached her also according to divine providence, should beget Isaac. And Philo interprets Agar indeed as "sojourning" (for it is said here, "Be not much with a strange woman"), but Sara as "my principate." It is possible, therefore, for him who has been first instructed by disciplines to come to wisdom, which most of all holds the principate, from which the Israelitic race grows. From which it is shown ^C that wisdom is teachable, to which Abraham attained, passing from the vision of heavenly things to the faith and righteousness according to God. And Isaac ^D signifies "the self-taught"; wherefore he is also found to be a type of Christ. This man is the husband of one wife, Rebecca, whom they translate as "patience"; but Jacob is said to have united with many, as being interpreted "one who exercises." And through many [index: entries preserved] And through more and different dogmas ^C the exercises are brought to completion, and the training according to discipline, regarding which Jacob appears to have been diligent; for by many and differing dogmas the exercises consist, of those leading, and of those preceding, ^D and of those following, sometimes having lesser labors, sometimes greater.

^A Israel (17), he is renamed, he who is in truth "insightful," as one might say, both well-practiced and ascetic. There might be some other meaning signified through the three forefathers, that there is a sovereign seal of knowledge, consisting of nature, and learning, and exercise. You might have another image of the things mentioned: Thamar (18) sitting at the crossroads, and providing the appearance of a harlot; whom the studious Judas—(19) which is interpreted "powerful"—who left nothing unexercised and unexamined, visited, and turned aside to her, saving the confession towards God. For this reason also Abraham, when Sarah was jealous of Agar who was gaining favor over her (20), as having chosen only the useful part of secular philosophy, says: «Behold, the servant is in your hands; use her as it is pleasing to you,» signifying that, "I welcome secular education, and as younger, and as a fellow-servant; but your science, as a perfect mistress, I honor and reverence." «And Sarah afflicted (21) her»: equal to, "She disciplined her." ^B For Israel is interpreted as "seeing God." When, therefore, the ascetic Jacob, even while struggling in the contests of virtue, was about to exchange ears for eyes, and words for deeds, and the attainments of perfection—the gift-bestowing God desiring to open his mind, in order that he might clearly see those things which he previously received by hearing (for sight is more trustworthy than ears)—the oracles sounded forth: «His name shall not be called Jacob, but Israel shall be your name, because you were strong with God and with men.» Jacob, then, is a name for learning and progress, of powers dependent upon hearing, but Israel a name for perfection. For the name signifies the vision of God. «The true Israel, the God-loved, the one who sees God. A man conquering power.» ^C Thamar sits at the crossroads, providing the appearance of a harlot to those walking on the way, in order that ^D those who are curious might uncover and manifest, and gaze upon the untouchable and undefiled and truly virginal beauty of modesty; who then is the inquisitive, and studious, and one who deems right to leave nothing unexamined and unsearched of the covered things, if not the commander-in-chief, and king, and one abiding in and rejoicing in the confessions towards God, named Judas? «Judah, which is interpreted "confession to the Lord." Judas is a symbol of the one confessing. Saving the confession towards God.» For Judea is interpreted "confession." «For Judas is interpreted "confession."» Powerful. «Wherefore he adds: And he afflicted her: equal to, he disciplined and chastised.»

^A And he admonished her. Well indeed it is said, «My son, do not despise the discipline of the Lord, nor faint when you are rebuked by him. For whom the Lord loves, he disciplines; and he scourges every son whom he receives» (Prov. iii, 11, 12; Heb. xii, 5, 6). And the aforementioned Scriptures, when we shall examine them in other places, will be found to represent other mysteries. Here, however, we say only this, that philosophy contains in itself the investigation of truth and the nature of things; and this is the truth, concerning which the Lord himself said, «I am the truth» (John xiv, 6). And furthermore, that the discipline which precedes that which is in Christ, exercises the mind and excites the intelligence, by generating an acumen of genius apt for inquiring after true philosophy, which those who are initiated, having found—or rather having received—from the Truth herself, possess. ^B

CHAPTER VI.

That for the most part, not by nature, but by institution, men become good, and that virtue contributes much to erudition.

Much, moreover, does that promptness contribute, which previous exercise procures, towards seeing the things which it behooves; but the exercise of the mind is that which can be perceived by the mind. The nature of these is threefold, being considered in continuous quantities, discrete quantities, and in things which are to be spoken. For the discourse which is formed from demonstrations makes a perfect faith in the soul of the one who follows, so that he does not even think that what has been demonstrated can be otherwise; nor does it allow him to succumb to those things which, through fraud, ^C run in upon us. In these disciplines, therefore, the soul is purged and excited away from the sensible, so that it may be able to discern the truth. For food and good erudition, if guarded, make good natures; and good natures, receiving such discipline, become better than they were before, as much in other things as in producing, just as in other animals. Whence it also says: «Go to the ant, O sluggard, and become wiser than she, who stores up much and all kinds of nourishment at the time of harvest against the threats of winter» (Prov. vi, 6, 8). Or, «Go to the bee, and learn how industrious she is: for she, grazing the whole meadow, produces one honeycomb.» But if you pray in the chamber, as the Lord taught «to worship in spirit» (John iv, 25), not only will your care be concerned with the house, ^D but also regarding the soul, what must be bestowed upon it, and how, and how much; and what must be stored up and treasured for it.

^A For it is not by nature, but by learning, that men become good and noble, just as is the case with physicians and pilots. We all see the vine and the horse in the same way; but the farmer will know whether the vine is good for fruit-bearing or bad, and the expert in horses will easily distinguish the sluggish from the swift. That some are naturally better suited for virtue than others is indeed shown by the particular studies of those who are naturally more apt; yet that perfection in virtue belongs to those of a better nature, it does not prove, since even those who are poorly suited for virtue by nature, once they have obtained the proper training, have for the most part attained goodness. And conversely, those who are naturally apt have become bad through negligence and sloth. Again, God created us naturally social and just, wherefore it must not be said that justice arises solely from institutional arrangement; but rather that the good that was present from creation must be fanned into flame by the precept, once the soul, instructed by learning, has willed to choose what is most excellent. ^B But just as we say that it is possible to be a believer even without letters, so we also confess that it is not possible to understand the things spoken in the faith without having learned them. For to accept what is said, and yet not to accept what is alien—this is not simple faith, but the faith that is combined with learning. And if ignorance, simultaneously with unlearning and lack of knowledge, brings about the science of divine and human things through instruction, still, just as it is possible to live righteously in poverty, so it is also possible in abundance; moreover, we acknowledge that one instructed in the liberal arts can pursue virtue more easily and more quickly, though it is not of such a kind that it cannot be grasped without them, but even then, it is better grasped by those who have learned and have their senses exercised. “For hatred,” says Solomon, “stirs up strife, but instruction guards the paths of life,” so that we may not be deceived, nor plundered by those who have practiced an evil art to the ruin of their hearers. ^C “But instruction,” he says, “goes astray” if it is “unrefuted”; and it is necessary to employ the refutative mode, in order to beat back the deceptive opinions of the sophists. Thus even Anaxarchus writes in his *On Kingship* in a *eudaimonic* way: “Much learning greatly benefits, yet greatly harms its possessor; it benefits the one who is worthy, but it harms the one who lightly utters every word, even in every public assembly.” But one must know the measures of the right moment. ^D

This is the end of wisdom. ^A For whoever sings before the doors, even if they have sung something wisely and skillfully, they are not reckoned as wise, but incur the reputation of folly. And Hesiod:

“Of the Muses, who render a man Divine, vocal, who knows many things.”

For in “words” he says “copious,” meaning the man who speaks many things; and “sharp” and “vehement” he calls “vocal”; and “divine” he calls him who is skilled, a philosopher, and knowledgeable in the truth. ^B

CHAPTER VII.

That philosophy opens the way to divine virtue, and that it is not of any particular sect, but eclectic.

It appears, therefore, that those preliminary liberal disciplines of the Greeks, together with philosophy itself, come to men from God, not primarily, but in the way that rains break forth upon the good earth, and upon the dung, and upon the houses. Similarly, both grass and wheat germinate; and it grows even upon monuments, the fig tree, and whatever tree is more shameless. And things that grow rashly come forth in appearance above those which are true, because they have partaken of the same power of the rain; but they do not possess the same grace as those which are born in rich soil, since they are accustomed to be dried up or pulled out immediately. ^C Moreover, the parable of the “sowing,” which the Lord interpreted, is useful for this place as well. For there is one husbandman of the earth which is in men, who from the foundation of the world sows the nourishing seeds, he who has rained down the Lord Word upon each at the proper time; but the times and the places that received them brought forth the difference. And besides, the husbandman does not sow wheat only (although even of this there are many differences; but he sows also other seeds, barley and beans, and peas, and vetches, and garden produce, and flowering seeds). To the same agriculture belongs also the planting of trees, and cultivating whatever pertains to the nurseries themselves, and to gardens, and to orchards, and, in a word, to producing and nurturing trees of every kind. Similarly, not only is the art of shepherding sheep, but also cattle-rearing, horse-breeding, and dog-rearing, and bee-keeping—all these are arts; and to speak briefly, herd-tending and animal-rearing differ from one another in greater or lesser degree, ^D but all are useful for life. By philosophy, however, I do not mean the Stoic, nor the Platonic, or the Epicurean and Aristotelian; but whatever has been spoken well by each of these sects, teaching justice with pious knowledge, this entire eclectic sum I call philosophy. But whatever things they have broken off from human reasonings and misinterpreted, these I would never call divine. And now, this also—

^A let us consider: whether those who do not know how to do good 57 live well; for some have fallen into well-doing, while others also attain the truth by discernment. ["Abraham," it is said, "was justified not by works, but by faith."] There is no profit to them, therefore, after the end of life, even if they act well now, if they do not possess faith. For this reason the Scriptures were interpreted in the tongue of the Greeks 58, so that they might never be able to put forward a pretext of ignorance, being able to hear even the things among us, if they only wish it. In one way a person speaks about truth, and in another way the truth interprets itself; the conjecture of truth is one thing, the truth itself another; likeness is one thing, the being itself another. And the one is acquired by learning and practice, the other by power and faith. For the instruction in godliness is a gift, but faith is grace. ^B For by doing 59 the will of God, we come to know the will. "Open therefore," the Scripture says, "the gates of righteousness; having entered through them, I will confess to the Lord." But the ways to righteousness, since God saves in many ways (for He is good), are many and varied, and lead to the sovereign way and gate. And if you seek the royal and authentic entrance, you will hear: ["This is the gate 40 of the Lord; the righteous shall enter through it."] There being, therefore, many gates opened in righteousness, this one 41 was in Christ; in whom are blessed all who have entered, and who direct their path in gnostic holiness. Straightway Clement in the *Epistle to the Corinthians*... ^C ...this eclectic sect, and so, loosened from the judgment of others, they said that they wished to embrace, as their own, truth alone, from whomever it might be produced. This, moreover, was the most recent of all the sects; for, as Laertius relates at the end of his prologue, not long ago an eclectic or elective sect was introduced by Potamo the Alexandrian, who selected those things that pleased him from each of the sects before Augustus and after him. And Suidas records that this Potamo lived, and after him, the "Eclectics." Furthermore, among those studying medicine, there are some in Galen who are called in Latin *Miscelliones*—"Miscellaneous." Whence Galen reports that he was warned by his father not to attach himself to any of the sects, but rather to learn from all and, passing judgment on all, to seek praise—a thing he boasts elsewhere that he did. Quintilian also, in book III, chapter 1, says: "For I have not attached myself to any sect, as if by some superstition." Furthermore, before the times of Potamo, Dio and a few like him instituted the same manner of philosophizing, even though they lacked the specific name of the sect. What Cicero professes about himself in *De Officiis*, book I, chapter 2: "Since we wish to be both Socratic and Platonic." And chapter 6: "We follow, therefore, at this time, and in this question, especially the Stoics, not as interpreters, but, as is our habit, we draw from their sources, according to our own judgment and choice, in whatever way it shall seem best." ^D

^A In his Epistle, he says, rendering the differences of those who are approved in the Church: "Let a man be faithful; let him be powerful in explaining knowledge; let him be wise in the discernment of words; let him be ready in works."

CHAPTER VIII.

That the sophistic art, and others that are concerned only with words, are not to be considered proportionately useful.

The sophistic art, which the Greeks have pursued as a renowned and important matter, is an imaginative power, producing false opinions through words as if they were true. For it provides the art of speaking for persuasion, but for contention, the art of disputing and struggling. Now these arts, if they are not joined with philosophy, would be destructive to everyone. For Plato plainly called the sophistic art a "bad art," and Aristotle, following him, pronounces it ^B a certain art of deceiving, as it plausibly steals away the whole office of wisdom and professes a wisdom in which it is not versed, nor has it applied any study to it. To say it briefly, just as the principle of the art of speaking is the probable, its work is the argument, and its end is persuasion; so too, for the art of disputation, the principle is that which appears, the work is contention, and the end is victory. For in the same way, the principle of the sophistic art is also that which appears; its work is twofold, one part from rhetoric, pursued in continuous speech, and the other from dialectic, by questioning; and the end of it is astonishment. The dialectic, moreover, which is bruited about in the schools, is shown to be a philosopher's exercise concerning the ^C opinionable, for the sake of the power of contradiction. Nowhere in these is there truth. Justly, therefore, the noble Apostle, disparaging these superfluous arts which consist in words, says: "If anyone does not accede to sound words, but is puffed up by some doctrine, knowing nothing, but laboring about questions and contentions of words, from which comes envy, strife, blasphemy, evil suspicions, disputations of men corrupted in mind and destitute of the truth." You see how he has inveighed against them, calling their logical art a "disease," on account of which they puff themselves up, those to whom this garrulous and wicked art is dear, whether they be Greek or barbarian sophists. Beautifully, therefore, the tragic poet Euripides says in the *Phænissæ*: ^D The unjust discourse, Being diseased in itself, has need of wise remedies.

^A For the saving Logos is called "sound," being himself truth; and that which is sound remains forever immortal. But separation from that which is sound and divine is impiety and a lethal malady. These are the ravenous wolves, hidden in sheep's clothing, slave-traders and eloquent seducers of souls, who steal secretly, but when exposed are convicted as thieves, struggling to carry off even us—the simple—by deceit and force, as being less capable than they in speaking.

A man often caught in a lack of eloquence, When he has spoken what is just, possesses less than the eloquent one. But now, with flowing mouths, they steal away the most true things, So that it may not seem what it is fitting should seem, says the tragedy. Such are these contentious ones, whether they follow sects or practice some I know not what dialectic arts. These are those who «draw the cords,» as Scripture says, «and weave nothing,» making a great deal of empty labor, which the Apostle himself called «the craftiness of men» and «apt for the snares of error.» For there are, he says, «many insubordinate, empty talkers, deceiving the mind.» ^B Therefore it is not said to all: «You are the salt of the earth.» For there are some, even among those who have heard the word, who are like sea-fish, which, although they are nourished in brine from their very birth, still have need of salt for seasoning. I, for my part, very gladly accept the tragedy which says:

O son, words well spoken could Be false; as the charms of language, they might defeat The truth; but this is not the most accurate thing, But nature and that which is right. But he who Practices eloquence, though he may be wise, yet I Consider things to be better than words, always.

Therefore, one must never seek to please the many. For those things which are pleasant to them, we do not practice; and the things which we know are far from their disposition. «Let us not become vainglorious,» says the Apostle, «provoking one another, envying one another.» Thus, therefore, the lover of truth Plato, as if divinely inspired. ^C

^A by God, says: «I, for my part, am such as to believe in nothing else but the reason which, upon reflection, appears to me to be the best.» He censures, therefore, those who believe in opinions without mind and knowledge; as it is not right, having abandoned right and sound reason, to believe in that which is a partaker of falsehood. For to have wandered from the truth is an evil; but to speak the truth, and to have opinions about things as they are, is a good. Men, however, are sometimes deprived of good things against their will; yet they are deprived of them either by being cheated, or beguiled, or compelled, and in such cases they have not believed. He who has believed of his own free will is already being spent; but he who is persuaded against his better judgment is cheated, forgetting that time takes away some things, while reason takes away others from the imprudent. Pain and anguish often compel, as does contention and anger ^B after an opinion has been embraced; and, above all, they are beguiled who are either called by pleasure or terrified by fear; but all these are voluntary veerings, and knowledge will never take any of them.

CHAPTER IX. That secular sciences are absolutely necessary for the correct understanding of the Scriptures.

Some men, however, who think themselves clever, wish neither to touch upon philosophy, nor dialectic, nor even to learn natural contemplation, but require faith alone and naked; just as if they expected to gather grapes from the vine right from the beginning without having bestowed any care upon it. But the Lord is allegorically called the «vine,» ^C from which, with care and the husbandry which is according to the Word, the fruit must be gathered. It is necessary to prune, to dig, to tie, and to do the rest. I think there is need of a pruning-hook, a mattock, and other agricultural implements for the care of the vine, so that it may produce for us edible fruit. And just as in agriculture, so also in medicine, he has learned profitably who has touched upon various disciplines, so that he may be able to cultivate and heal better. So too, here, I consider him well and profitably educated who refers everything to the truth, so that, picking out what is useful from geometry and music, and from grammar and philosophy itself, he may keep his faith safe from snares. Furthermore, the athlete, as has been said before, is held in contempt who has not previously ^D trained himself for the contest. Now, too, we praise the pilot who is instructed by experience in many things, who has seen the cities of many men.

^A and the physician who has become expert by the trial of many—which is what some also contrive for the empiric. But he who refers each thing to the upright life, bringing examples from both Greek and barbarian sources, is this highly skilled investigator of the truth and ^B truly a man of many counsels, who, like the touchstone (which is the Lydian), is believed to be able to distinguish the adulterated gold from the genuine; and he—our man of much knowledge, our Gnostic—is capable of separating sophistic philosophy from philosophy, ornamentation from gymnastics, cookery from medicine, and the art of speaking from dialectic, and, along with the other sects in barbarian philosophy, from the truth itself. For how is it not necessary for one who desires to become a partaker of the power of God to reason about intelligible things? And how is it not also useful to divide terms which are ambiguous, and those which are uttered homonymously according to the Scriptures? For by ^C ambiguity the Lord shrewdly eludes the devil at the time of temptation; and I, for my part, do not see here how the inventor—as some suppose—of philosophy and dialectic is led astray, being deceived by the trope of ambiguity. But if the prophets and apostles were not instructed in such arts, through which the exercises regarding philosophy are revealed, yet the mind of the prophetic and teaching Spirit, being uttered cryptically—because the ear that understands is not granted to all—requires technical instruction for clarity. For the prophets and the disciples of the Spirit ^D surely knew the mind of those things; for they perceived it by faith, as the Spirit has said, in a way that is not easily possible for those who have not learned to understand it in that manner. “But the commandments,” he says, “do thou record twice, in will and in knowledge, to answer words of truth to those who propose questions to you.” What then is the knowledge of answering, or what is that of asking questions? It would be dialectic. What then? Is not speaking also a work, and does not doing come from the Logos? For if we do not act by the Logos, we would be acting irrationally. But the rational work is accomplished according to God: “And nothing was made without Him,” he says, “the Logos of God.” Or did not the Lord

also

^A are those who are called orthodox approaching good works, not knowing what they do?

CAPUT X.

That one ought to take more care in doing good than in speaking well.

Therefore, the Savior, when He had taken the bread, first spoke and gave thanks; then, having broken the bread, He set it before us, that we might eat logically, and, by recognizing the Scriptures, order our life according to obedience. For just as those who use evil speech differ in no way from those who use evil deeds—for slander is the minister of the sword, and blasphemy causes grief, from which come the overturnings of life; these would be the works of an evil word—so too do those who use good speech draw near to those who perform good works. The Logos also recovers the soul, and exhorts it to nobility; and blessed is he who is ambidextrous. Therefore, neither is he who is capable of doing good to be blasphemed by him who is capable of speaking well, nor is he who is capable of speaking well to be reviled by him who is capable of doing good; but let each ^B exercise that for which he is fitted by nature. For what the one shows in deed, the other speaks in word, as if preparing the way for beneficence, and leading the hearers to well-doing. For there is a saving word, just as there is a saving work. Justice, at any rate, does not consist without the word. And just as the state of being treated well is taken away if we take away the doing of good, so too is obedience and faith taken away if neither the commandment, nor the one who is to explain the commandment, are taken together. But now, for the sake of one another, we abound in both words and deeds.

The contentious and sophistic art is to be entirely rejected, since the very expressions of the sophists not only dazzle the eyes of many and seduce them, but sometimes, by bringing force to bear, they ^C bring home a “Cadmean victory.” For that psalm is far more true: “The just man shall live to the end, because he will not see destruction when he sees the wise dying.” Whom, then, does he call wise? Hear from the Wisdom of Jesus: “There is no wisdom in the knowledge of wickedness.” He speaks of that which verbal and dialectical arts have devised. “Will you then seek wisdom among the wicked? And you shall not find it.” And if you ask again what this is, “The mouth of the just,” he will say to you, “shall distill wisdom”; but the sophistic art is called wisdom homonymously with the truth. As for me, I think it is incumbent upon me to live according to the Logos, and to understand the things signified; [to have] a fluent...

^A eloquence is not my concern, but rather to be content if I can signify what I understand in any way whatever. For what name is used to signify that which I wish to put forward is of no concern to me. For to be saved, and to lend a helping hand to those who desire to be saved, is what I consider to be best, not to compose flowery little speeches as though they were ornaments. "And if you will take heed," says the Pythagorean in Plato’s *Politicus*, "not to be overly concerned with names, you will appear richer in wisdom in your old age." And in the *Theaetetus* you might find it said again: "The fluency of names and words, and not examining them with accuracy, is for the most part not shameful and illiberal, but rather the contrary; yet sometimes it is even necessary." Scripture has expressed these things as briefly as possible, saying: "Do not be much in words." ^B For diction is like a garment upon the body, but the realities are the flesh and sinews. One ought not, therefore, to care more for the garment than for the salvation of the body. For not only a frugal way of life, but also a speech stripped of superfluous and curious ornament must be practiced by him who has chosen the true life, if indeed we reject luxury as deceitful and profligate—just as the ancient Lacedaemonians rightly judged and called ointment and purple deceitful garments and deceitful anointing; since neither is that preparation of food noble which has more seasoning than those things which nourish, nor is an elegant use of speech that which is able to delight the hearers ^C rather than to benefit them. Pythagoras advises us to consider the Muses more delightful than the Sirens; teaching us to practice wisdom not with pleasure, but refuting all other soul-seducing discourse as deceptive. And having sailed past the Sirens, one suffices; and by answering the Sphinx, another one suffices; but if... ^D For there is a twofold difference of pleasures: the one, which in the belly and in venereal matters indulges itself through luxury, he compared to the man-slaying songs of the Sirens; but the other, which consists in honorable and just things, to those things necessary for living, he said was in the same way delightful for the present, and without repentance for the future; this he said was like a certain harmony of the Muses.

^A Pythagoras warns us not to think the Muses more pleasant than the Sirens, teaching us not to practice wisdom for the sake of pleasure, and refuting that other deceptive delight of the soul. He who sails past the Sirens is enough to be one; and he who answers the Sphinx is another, or even, if you wish, not even one. We ought not, therefore, ever to broaden our phylacteries, emulating a vain desire for glory. It is sufficient for the Gnostic if even one auditor is found for him. ^B It is permitted, therefore, to hear the Boeotian Pindar also, who writes: "It is not permitted to reveal the ancient discourse to all, except by the most faithful paths of silence." A powerful discourse is a goad to battle. Very rightly, therefore, the blessed Apostle vehemently admonishes us "not to contend about words to no profit, to the subversion of the hearers; but to avoid profane, vain babblings: for they will progress to more ungodliness, and their word will eat as does a canker."

CHAPTER XI. What is the worldly wisdom and philosophy which the Apostle wishes us to avoid.

^B This "wisdom of the world is foolishness with God. And the Lord knows the thoughts of these wise men, that they are vain." Let no one, therefore, boast, excelling in human reasoning. For it is rightly written in Jeremiah: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, neither let the rich man glory in his riches; but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth that I am the Lord which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the Lord." — "That we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead," says the Apostle, "who delivered us from so great a death; that our faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. The spiritual man judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no one." ^C And I hear also this from him: "And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words, nor anyone creep in who might plunder you." And again: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ"; not every philosophy indeed, but the Epicurean, which Paul also mentions in the Acts of the Apostles, finding fault with it, because it takes away providence and refers all things

^A to be governed by the elements, and if there is any other that has honored the elements without understanding the efficient cause for them, nor has conceived of the Creator. But even the Stoics, [682b cf. pg 750b/marg] whom he also mentions, do not speak rightly when they say God is a body that has permeated the most base matter. ^B He calls logical subtlety "human tradition." Wherefore he also writes: "Flee youthful questions, for such contentions are childish." "But virtue is not held by the love of youths," says the philosopher Plato; and our contest, according to Gorgias of Leontini, requires two virtues: boldness and wisdom; boldness, that one may endure danger; wisdom, that one may discern the riddle. For indeed ^C the Word, like the proclamation at the Olympics, calls indeed him who wills, but crowns him who is able to remain invincible; since in truth the Word does not wish him who has believed to be idle. "For seek," he says, "and you shall find"; but he terminates the investigation with the discovery, driving out recent trifles, but approving the contemplation which confirms our faith. "This I say, that no one may deceive you in the probability ^D of speech," says the Apostle; clearly that you might have learned to discern the things said by them, and have been taught to confront the things that are brought against you. "As therefore you have received Jesus Christ the Lord, walk in him, rooted and built up in him, and confirmed in the faith." And persuasion is the confirmation of faith. "Beware that there be no one who leads you away from the faith in Christ through philosophy and empty deceit," which takes away Providence, "according to the tradition of men." For the philosophy that is according to the divine tradition establishes and confirms Providence; for if this is taken away, the economy concerning the Savior appears as a fable, when we are borne along "according to the elements of this world, and not according to Christ." For the doctrine that is consistent with Christ both glorifies the Creator, and carries ^B Providence even to individual things, and knows the nature of the elements to be mutable and created; and it teaches us to conduct our lives toward a power that assimilates us to God, and to make the economy, as being sovereign, the beginning of all instruction. But they worship the elements: Diogenes indeed the air, Tha-

Thales ^A water; Hippasus fire; and those who propose elements as the primary causes, assuming the name of philosophy, are certain godless creatures and lovers of pleasure. “For this reason I pray,” he says, “that your love may abound still more and more in knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent.” “For” when we were children, the same Apostle says, “we were enslaved under the elements of the world.” But the child, even if he is an heir, differs nothing from a slave until the time appointed by the father. Children, therefore, are even the philosophers, unless they be brought to manhood by Christ. For if the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman, at any rate he is indeed the seed of Abraham, which received its own gift not by promise. And the solid food ^B belongs to those who are perfect, who by reason of habit have their senses exercised for the discernment of good and evil. For everyone who partakes of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, being a child, and not yet knowing the word by which he has believed and acts, nor being able to render the cause in himself. “But test all things,” the Apostle says, “and hold fast what is good,” addressing those who are spiritual, who judge all things that are said according to truth, whether they seem to be true or actually are so. Discipline that is not subject to reproof goes astray; and stripes and reproofs give instruction of wisdom—that is to say, those reproofs which are with love. For “a right heart seeks knowledge,” because he who seeks God will find knowledge with righteousness; but those who have rightly sought it have found peace. “And I will know,” he says, “not the speech of those who are puffed up, but the power.” ^C When reprimanding those who are wise in their own opinion, and who think themselves to be wise, but are not, he writes: “For the kingdom of God is not in word,” not in that which is untrue, but in that which is persuasive by opinion, “but in power,” he said; for truth alone is powerful. And again: “If anyone thinks that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know.” For truth is never opinion. But “the opinion of knowledge puffs up, and fills with pride, but love edifies,” which is busied not about opinion, but about truth. Whence, “If anyone loves, this man is known,” he says. ^D

CHAPTER XII. Fidei mysteria non esse cuivis propalanda, ideo quod non sint veritatis idonei auditores.

^A Since it is not only tradition that is public to him who perceives the magnificence of the Word, the wisdom spoken in mystery, which the Son of God has taught, must be hidden. For even the prophet Isaiah is purified by fire as to his tongue, that he might be able to utter the vision; and it is fitting for us to cleanse not only our tongue, but also our ears, if we strive to be partakers of the truth. These things were an obstacle to my writing; and even now I am cautious, as it is said, “To cast pearls before swine, lest they trample them with their feet, and turning rend us.” For it is difficult to declare the discourses concerning the true light, which are truly pure and clear, to hearers who are swinish and uneducated; for there is nothing more ridiculous than these to the many, but again, to the gifted, they are more wonderful and breathings of God. ^B “The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him.” But the wise do not utter with the mouth what they think about in council. “But what you hear in the ear,” says the Lord, “proclaim upon the house-tops,” bidding us receive the secret traditions of the true knowledge, interpreted in a high and excellent manner, and just as we have heard in the ear, so also to deliver them to those to whom it is proper; but not to divulge them openly to all, commanding that those things said to them in parables be withheld. But the portrayal of these commentaries serves in truth those who have the truth sown here and there scattered about, that it might be hidden from those who, like jackdaws, scatter words here and there at random; but when they have met with a good husbandman, each of them will germinate, and will reveal the wheat. ^C

Chapter XIII. That each of the various philosophical sects has seized for itself a particle of truth.

Since therefore the truth is one (for falsehood has innumerable deviations), just as the Bacchantes tore apart and scattered the limbs of Pentheus, [so] the sects of philosophy, both barbarian and Greek, each having obtained a part, boasts that it possesses the whole truth.

But, as I think, it is the rising of the Light that illuminates all things. Therefore, let all Greeks and barbarians alike who have desired the truth, both those who have attained no small portion and those who have perhaps attained only a slight fragment of the Word of truth, come forward. For if the age of time represents at once the future, the present, and even the past in a single moment, surely the truth, in gathering together its own seeds, even though they may have been scattered in a foreign land, is far more powerful than the age. For we find that very many of the doctrines accepted by the heresies are not entirely absurd, nor have they severed the natural consequence—as though they were the women's quarters that rent asunder Christ, like the man—even although it is certain and beyond controversy that they are different in genus and in the whole truth. For they coincide into one, either as a member, or as a species, or as a genus. Just as the highest string, although it is contrary to the lowest, nonetheless both produce one harmony; and the even number, although it differs from the odd, yet in arithmetic ^B both agree; as in the design of a figure, the circle, and the triangle, and the square, and whatever other figures differ from one another; or even in the whole universe, all the parts, even if they differ among themselves, preserve the conjunction and consistency which they have with the whole: so therefore both barbarian and Greek philosophy have torn away a certain fragment of the eternal truth, not from the mythology of Bacchus, but from the theology of the eternal Word; but he who shall join together again the things that were divided, and make them one, know well that he will safely behold the perfect Word, the truth. It is written, therefore, in Ecclesiastes: "And I added wisdom above all that were before me in Jerusalem; and my heart saw..." ^C

Every man, by seeing from a part of the divine seminal Word that which is akin to it, has spoken well. Our own [teachings] appear more magnificent than any human instruction; for this reason, the whole [Being] that appeared for our sake, Christ, has become the rational [Word], both body, and word, and soul. For as many things as the philosophers have ever spoken and discovered well, or as the lawgivers have ordained for them; since they did not recognize all the things of the Word, which is Christ, they often spoke things contrary to themselves. ^D

^A I have known much; wisdom and knowledge, parables, and understanding. And this is a 32 choice of the spirit, because in the multitude of wisdom there is a multitude of knowledge. He who is experienced in manifold wisdom, this one would strictly be a gnostic. For it is written: “The abundance of the knowledge of wisdom shall give life to him that possesses it.” Again, this saying confirms the things said more clearly: “All things are plain to those who understand;” and all things are Greek and barbarian; but the others are not all things. And they are straight 33 to those who wish to draw away sense. “Choose discipline and not silver, and knowledge above tested gold; and choose also the sense of pure gold.” 35 For wisdom is better than precious stones; and all things desirable are not to be compared to it.

CHAPTER XIV.

The succession of the philosophers among the Greeks.

^B The Greeks say that, after Orpheus and Linus and the most ancient poets among them, the first to be admired for their wisdom were the seven 36, who were called the Wise Men; of whom four were from Asia: Thales the Milesian, and Bias of Priene, and Pittacus of Mytilene, and Cleobulus of Lindus. Two were from Europe: Solon the Athenian, and Chilo the Lacedaemonian. As for the ^C seventh, some say it was Periander the Corinthian, others Anacharsis the Scythian, and others Epimenides the Cretan, whom he recognizes as a Greek prophet, whom the apostle Paul mentions 37 in the Epistle to Titus, saying thus: “One of them, a prophet of their own, said, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies,’ and this testimony is true.” ^D See how he gives some of the truth to the prophets of the Greeks, and is not ashamed, while discussing for the edification of some and for the correction 39 of others, to make use of Greek poems! For to the Corinthians (and not only here), while discussing the resurrection of the dead, he has used a tragic iambic, saying: “What does it profit me if the dead do not rise? Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” Be not deceived; they corrupt good morals.

^A Others, however, have included Acusilaus the Argive in the number of the seven sages, and others Pherecydes the Syrian. Plato, 41 regarding Periander as unworthy of wisdom because he was a tyrant, substitutes Myson of Chenae in his place. That the wise men among the Greeks were born long after the time of Moses will be shown a little later; but the manner of their philosophy, being Hebrew and enigmatic, must now be considered. They favored pithy sententiousness, 42 which is admonitory and most useful. Plato himself says that this method was studiously and diligently followed of old, commonly by all Greeks, but especially by the Lacedaemonians and the Cretans, who used the best laws. ^B And as for the saying, “Know thyself,” 44 some have supposed it to be Chilon’s; but Chamaeleon 45 in his book *On the Gods* attributes it to Thales; while Aristotle attributes it to the Pythian. The knowledge it enjoins may be the pursuit of the divine, for it is not possible to know the parts without the essence of the whole universe; one must, therefore, 46 investigate the generation of the world, through which it will also be possible to discern human nature. Again, they refer to Chilon the Lacedaemonian the saying, “Nothing in excess.” 47 But Strato, in his work *On Inventions*, attributes this apophthegm to Stratodemes of Tegea; while Didymus attributes it to Solon, just as he does to Cleobulus the saying, “Measure is best.” 48 And the saying, “Give a pledge, and mischief is at hand,” 49 Cleomenes, in his book *On Hesiod*, says was previously spoken by Homer in these words:

^C “Wretched are the pledges of the wretched to give in pledge;”

but those around Aristotle think it belongs to Chilon; however, Didymus says this admonition belongs to Thales. Then next is the saying, “All men are evil,” or “Most men are evil” (for the same apophthegm is expressed in two ways), which those around Sotades 52 the Byzantine say belongs to Bias. And so too the saying, “Practice...”

On the character of the Greek sages

And they say that the gymnosophists and the Druids philosophized in an enigmatic manner: to worship the gods, to do nothing evil, and to practice courage. “All the Greeks suppose our city of Athens to be both eloquent and talkative; but Lacedaemon and Crete, [they consider] the one to be brief in speech, and the other to be studying wisdom more than verbosity.” Chamaleon.

ens to be both eloquent and talkative; but Lacedaemon and Crete, [they consider] the one to be brief in speech, and the other to be studying wisdom more than verbosity.” Chamaleon ^A continues to claim that the admonition, which says: “Know the occasion,” was Pittacus’. Now Solon gave laws to the Athenians, and Pittacus to the Mitylenaeans. At length, however, Pythagoras, the acquaintance of Pherecydes, was the first to call himself a philosopher. Therefore, after the men already mentioned, there have been three successions of philosophy, named after the places in which they spent their time: the Italic, which originated from Pythagoras; the Ionian, from Thales; and the Eleatic, from Xenophanes. Now Pythagoras, the son of Mnesarchus, was a Samian, as Hippobotus says; but as Aristoxenus says in the *Life of Pythagoras*, and Aristarchus, and Theopompus, he was a Tyrrhenian; but as Neanthes says, a Syrian or a Tyrian; so that, in the opinion of the many, Pythagoras was a barbarian by race. ^B Furthermore, Thales, as Leander and Herodotus record, was a Phoenician; but as some have supposed, a Milesian. He alone appears to have had contact with the prophets of the Egyptians; but no teacher of his is recorded, just as neither is one recorded for Pherecydes the Syrian, whose disciple Pythagoras was. But the philosophy of Pythagoras, which is called Italic, grew old in Metapontum, a city of Italy. Anaximander, the son of Praxiades, a Milesian, succeeds Thales; and him Anaximenes [...] ^C Aristarchus and Theopompus say he was a Tyrrhenian; whereas Neanthes calls him a Tyrian. Some call Thales a Milesian, but Leander and Herodotus named him a Phoenician. Yet the majority say he was a native Milesian and of noble family. No one was his teacher, except that when he went to Egypt he spent time with the priests. But he trained himself, having acquired the secret books of the Phoenicians. ^D [...] the Italic [succession was so named] from Pythagoras, because he spent most of his time in Italy. Anaximander, the son of Praxiades, a Milesian, succeeds Thales; and him Anaximenes

^A of Eurystratus, a Milesian, succeeds; after whom [comes] Anaxagoras, son of Hegesibulus, a Clazomenian. He transported his school from Ionia to Athens. Him Archelaus succeeds, whom Socrates heard.

*For from these a stone-cutter turned away, a chatterer of laws,* *A charmer of Greeks,*

says Timon in the *Silli*, because he turned away from the natural sciences to those things which pertain to morals. And when Socrates had heard him, Antisthenes introduced the Cynic sect, and Plato withdrew to the Academy. Aristotle, having philosophized with Plato, after he crossed over to the Lyceum, founded the Peripatetic sect. Him Theophrastus succeeds, then Strato, then Lycon, then Critolaus, then Diodorus. Speusippus succeeds Plato, and him ^B Xenocrates, and him Polemon. The listeners of Polemon were Crates and Crantor, in whom the Old Academy from Plato ended. Arcesilaus participated [in the school] of Crantor, from whom until Hegesilaus the Middle Academy flourished. Then Carneades succeeds Hegesilaus, and [others] in succession. A pupil of Crates becomes Zeno of Citium, who began the Stoic sect; him Cleanthes succeeds, then Chrysippus, and those after him. Of the Eleatic discipline, Xenophanes the Colophonian takes the lead, whom Timaeus says flourished in the time of Hiero, who held dominion in Sicily, and of Epicharmus the poet; but Apollodorus [says he flourished] at the time of the fortieth Olympiad.

Socrates concerned himself only with ethics, at least according to his other associates; if indeed even Xenophon in the *Memorabilia* explicitly says that he rejected the physical [sciences] as being above us, and spent his time on the ethical as being relevant to us. Timon knows such a man, in the verses where he says:

*For from these a stone-cutter turned away, a chatterer of laws,*

that is, from the physical sciences to ethical contemplation; ^C wherefore he added "chatterer of laws," inasmuch as the ethical part consists in discussing laws.

*Antisthenes heard Socrates, from whom [comes] Diogenes the Cynic, from whom Crates the Theban, from whom Zeno of Citium, from whom Cleanthes, from whom Chrysippus.*

^A reaching as far as the times of Darius and Cyrus. Parmenides, therefore, becomes a hearer of Xenophanes; after him Zeno, then Leucippus, then Democritus. Democritus' hearers were Protagoras the Abderite and Metrodorus of Chios, from whom [comes] Diogenes of Smyrna, from whom Anaxarchus; from him Pyrrho, from whom Nausiphanes; of him some also say Epicurus was a disciple. And this is the succession of the philosophers among the Greeks, in brief. But the times of those who were the authors of their philosophy must be mentioned in order, so that by comparison we may demonstrate that the philosophy of the Hebrews is many generations older. And concerning Xenophanes, who began the Eleatic philosophy, it has already been spoken. But Eudemus, in his *Astrological Histories*, says that Thales predicted the eclipse of the sun that took place, during the times when the Medes and Lydians joined battle with one another, when Cyaxares, the father of Astyages, was king of the Medes, and Alyattes, the father of Croesus, was king of the Lydians. Herodotus also agrees with him in his first book. And these times are about the fiftieth Olympiad. Pythagoras is found to have been in the time of the tyrant Polycrates, about the sixty-second Olympiad. Mnesiphilus is recorded as a follower of Solon, with whom Themistocles associated. Solon, therefore, flourished about the forty-sixth Olympiad. For Heraclitus ^B of ^C Bauson was the ^D

CHAPTER TITLES AND NOTES OMITTED

tyrant to lay down his authority. This man despised King Darius ^A when he exhorted him to come to the Persians.

CHAPTER XV.

That the philosophy of the Greeks was in great measure derived from the barbarians.

These are the times of those who were among the Greeks the most ancient of the wise men and philosophers. But that most of them were barbarians by race, and educated by barbarians, what is the need to say? Since it has been shown that Pythagoras was a Tuscan or a Tyrian. Antisthenes, however, was a Phrygian; and Orpheus, an Odrysian or Thracian. For most writers show that Homer was an Egyptian. Thales, being of Phoenician race, is said to have associated with the prophets of the Egyptians; just as ^B Pythagoras also did with those very ones, by whom he was even circumcised, in order that, entering into the inner sanctuaries, he might learn the mystic philosophy of the Egyptians; and he consorted with the most distinguished of the Chaldeans and Magi. And he signifies that which is now called the Church, by the "auditory"

(homacoion)

[Translator's note: Section ^D contains notes and apparatus regarding the text, largely summarizing the arguments above.]

^D As to those who were unable to restrain themselves through fear of the king, but thought that by the magnitude of their sufferings they would turn him from his purpose, they commanded him to submit to harsh orders alien to Greek training; but he, having performed these tasks readily, was so admired that he gained permission to sacrifice to the gods and to approach their rites, as is not found to be the case with any other foreigner. ^D They say that Pythagoras also submitted to circumcision, having learned this from the Egyptians. "Whence then, said Cebes, O Socrates, shall we obtain a good enchanter of such a kind, since you are leaving us? The whole of Greece is great, he said, O Cebes, in which there are everywhere good men, and many are the races of the barbarians, all of whom you must search through, seeking such an enchanter, sparing neither money nor labors."

^A And many are the races of the barbarians. Thus Plato also thinks there are certain barbarian philosophers. Epicurus, on the other hand, assumes that only Greeks can philosophize. In the *Symposium*, however, praising the barbarians as those who have excelled in the practice of philosophy, Plato says truly: "And in many other places, both among Greeks and among barbarians, by whom many temples have already been built on account of such sons." And it is clear that the barbarians, having honored their lawmakers and teachers in an exceptional manner, have called them gods. For they suppose that good souls, according to Plato, have left the supercelestial realm—having endured to come into this Tartarus and, having taken on a body, to partake of all the evils that spring from generation—and, being guardians of the human race, have laid down laws and proclaimed philosophy; ^B "than which no greater good has ever come or will come to the human race from the gods." And it seems to me that, having sensed the great benefits that are brought about through the wise, they have both honored these men and practiced philosophy publicly: the Brachmanes, the Odrysae, and the Getae. Even the Egyptian race has theology that is studied accurately—theirs, and that of the Chaldaeans and the Arabians, who are called the "Blessed," and all those who inhabit Palestine, and no small part of the Persian race, and countless other nations besides these. It is clear that Plato is always found magnifying the barbarians, remembering that he himself and Pythagoras learned most and the most noble of their doctrines among the barbarians. For this reason, he even spoke of "races of barbarians"—that is, "races of barbarian philosophers"—knowing in the *Phaedrus* the Egyptian king, and he shows him to you as wiser than Thoth, ^C who, having practiced laws, alone—but among you, Solon is valued because of the production of laws, and other men elsewhere in many places, both among Greeks and among barbarians, have demonstrated many fine deeds, having produced every kind of virtue; for whom many temples have already been built on account of such sons; but for human beings, nowhere. And from sources truly different, we have procured the race of philosophy; than which no greater good has ever been given to the human race by the gods, nor will it ever come. ^D

^A Thoyth knows Him, whom he recognizes as Hermes. But even in the *Charmides* he seems to know certain Thracians who are ^B said to make the soul immortal. Pythagoras is recorded to have been a disciple of Sonchis, the Egyptian archprophet; Plato of Sechnuphis of Heliopolis; Eudoxus of Cnidus of Conuphis, who was himself also an Egyptian. And in the ^C dialogue *On the Soul*, Plato again appears to recognize prophecy, introducing a prophet as announcing the speech of Lachesis and prophesying to the souls who are casting lots; and in the *Timaeus* he introduces the wisest Solon learning from the barbarian. The wording is as follows: “O Solon, Solon, you Greeks are always children; and there is no old man among the Greeks; for you have no doctrine hoary with age.” For Democritus, too, is said to have composed ^D the Babylonian ethical discourses; for he is said to have translated the works of Acharus.

On the Egyptian origin of the arts and the antiquity of barbarian philosophy

“I learned it there, while I was in the army, from one of the Thracian physicians of Zamolxis, who are said even to make men immortal.” So then, when they had arrived, they had to go immediately before Lachesis. A certain prophet, therefore, first arranged them in order; then, having taken from the knees of Lachesis lots and patterns of lives, he ascended a high pedestal and said: “The word of Necessity, of the daughter of Lachesis, the maiden.” And a certain one of the priests, who was very old, said: “Solon, Solon, you Greeks are always children, and there is no old Greek.” Having heard this, he said, “What do you mean by this?” He replied, “You are all young in your souls; for you have in them no old opinion derived from ancient tradition, nor any knowledge hoary with time.” And Democritus is said, even before this, to have composed the Babylonian ethical discourses. Concerning the sacred writings in Babylon, by way of eminence, concerning the sacred writings in Babylon, as once read in antiquity, the Ammouneis, the secret Ammonian writings, the dark fortress, concerning the sacred writings in Meroe. Sacred writings. [alt-version omitted]

^A arranged [them] so that they might be interpreted in his own writings. It is worth noting from him (98)—“Thus says Democritus,” the writer says—nay rather, also concerning him, where he boasts somewhere of his own polymathy: “I, ^A (99) indeed, of the men of my own time, have wandered over the most ground, investigating the most distant places; and I have seen the most regions, both of air and of earth (1); and I have listened to the most learned men, and none ^B has surpassed me in the composition of lines (3) (4) with demonstration (5), not even those called Arpedonaptae by the Egyptians (6); and along with all these, I spent eighty years in a foreign land.” For he came to Babylon, and to Persia, and to Egypt, becoming a disciple of the magi and the priests; and Pythagoras ^C pointed out Zoroaster the magus (8) the Persian (9). The secret books (10) of this man, as those who investigate them [say], Achiacharus—or among the Bosporanians, Achaicharus—«Babylonian discourses, a Chaldean discourse, a Phrygian discourse, concerning those in Meroe, from the stelae situated in the Seriadical land, characterized by the sacred dialect and hieroglyphic writings by Thouth, the first Hermes, ^D stelae of the world... (6) Arpedonaptae. Arpedonautae, harpēdonas [cords/lines], to stretch, to compose lines; [from] arsis, to touch the ground. For he also came to Babylon, and to Persia, and to Egypt, becoming a disciple to the Egyptians and to the priests. «To the Egyptian magi. Becoming a disciple of the priests, they record as students of [the magi]. He who boasts of the magus Ostanes.» ...Panphylian by race, Zoroaster the Persian...

^A showeth. Those who pursue the heresy of Prodicus boast that they possess the secret books of this man. But Alexander, in his book *On Pythagorean Symbols*, reports that Pythagoras was a disciple of Nazaratus the Assyrian (some think him to be Ezekiel, but this is not the case, as will be shown later), and furthermore he desires Pythagoras to have listened to the Gauls and the Brahmans. Clearchus the Peripatetic says that he knew a certain Jew who associated with Aristotle. For Heraclitus says that the Sibyl appeared not in a human manner, but rather by the divine. They say, therefore, that at Delphi ^B near the council-house, a certain rock is shown, upon which the first Sibyl is said to have sat, who had come from Helicon, having been reared by the Muses; but some say she arrived from the Malians, being the daughter of Lamia of Sidon. And Serapion, in his verses, says that the Sibyl did not cease from the art of divination even after she died; and that indeed which departed from her into the air after her death, this is what divines through rumors and omens; but that which changed into the earth, with a plant having sprung up, as is natural, any creature that fed upon it, ^C when it was in that place, he writes, signified to men an accurate knowledge of the future through the entrails. ^D Regarding the Sibyl, [Heraclitus] brings forward the book *On Pythagorean Oracles*: "The Sibyl, with frenzied mouth uttering things not to be laughed at, unadorned and unperfumed, reaches with her voice through a thousand years because of the god who speaks through her." From the same book is taken that which follows concerning the rock which is displayed at Delphi. But some things were omitted by Hervetus, for after that phrase, "reared by the Muses," there follows... [alt-version omitted] ...and Plutarch... [alt-version omitted] ...but the most learned French interpreter is to be followed by us, who compared the author with the manuscripts: "But some say she set out from Melea, and was the daughter of Lamia, [who was] the daughter of Neptune." Finally, those things which are brought forward from Serapion are also plucked from the same place.

^A And he thinks that her soul is the face which appears in the moon. Thus much concerning the Sibyl. Numa, however, the king of the Romans, was indeed a Pythagorean; but, being helped by those things which were handed down by Moses, he forbade the Romans to make an image of God in the likeness of a man or of a beast. Wherefore, in the first hundred and seventy years, while they were building temples, they made no statue, whether molded or painted. For Numa showed them, by way of mystery, that it is not possible to attain to the Supreme Being in any other way than by the mind alone. Philosophy, then, a thing of great utility, flourished in ancient times among the barbarians, shedding its light over the nations; and later it came also to the Greeks. Its leaders were the prophets of the Egyptians, the Chaldeans of the Assyrians, the Druids of the Gauls, the Samanaei of the Bactrians, the philosophers of the Celts, and the Magi of the Persians; ^B of whom the latter actually heralded the birth of the Saviour, arriving in the land of Judea, led by a star. There were also the Gymnosophists of the Indians, and other barbarian philosophers. There are two classes of these: some of them are called Sarmanae, and others are called Brachmanes. And of the Sarmanae, those who are called Allobii,

^A they do not inhabit cities, nor do they possess dwellings; they clothe themselves in the barks of trees, they eat the nuts of trees, and they drink water with their hands. They know nothing of marriage or the procreation of children, just like those who are currently called Encratites, that is, "the continent." There are also some among the Indians who follow the precepts of Butta, whom they have honored as a god on account of his extraordinary holiness. ^B There was also Anacharsis the Scythian; and he is recorded as having excelled many of the Greek philosophers. Hellanicus writes that the Hyperboreans lived beyond the Riphaean mountains, and states that they were taught justice, not eating meat but using the fruits of trees. These people lead those who are sixty years old outside the gates and make them disappear. There are also among the Germans ^C the women called sacred, who, by looking at the vortices of rivers and at the swirlings and sounds of the currents, conjecture and predict the future. These women did not permit them to join battle with Caesar before the new moon had shone. The Jewish race is by far more ancient than all these, and that which is commanded in their ^D writings—

[Index of supplementary notes omitted] [alt-version omitted]

Notes on this page: index of entries preserved

and that the philosophy which became written among them, was the predecessor of the philosophy among the Greeks, Philon the Pythagorean points out in many places. ^B But Aristobulus the Peripatetic also, and many others, lest by going through them by name I should delay, show this. But most clearly the writer Megasthenes, who lived with Seleucus Nicator, writes in the third book of his Indian History thus: "All that was said about nature by the ancients is said also by those who philosophize outside of Greece, some among the Indians by the Brahmans, and others in Syria by those who are called Jews."

Some, however, more mythically say that certain wise men, the so-called Idæan Dactyls, were the first: to whom is attributed both the discovery of the so-called Ephesian letters, and the discovery of rhythms in music. For which reason those among musicians called "dactyls" have received this name. And the Idæan Dactyls were Phrygians and barbarians. Herodorus relates that Hercules, being a prophet and a student of natural science, received the pillars of the world from the barbarian, the Phrygian Atlas; the myth hinting that he received the knowledge of celestial things by learning. ^C The Berytian Hermippus calls the centaur Chiron wise. Of whom he also says, the one who wrote the *Titanomachia*, that this man was the first to lead the whole race of mortals to justice, having indicated the forms of oaths, and propitious sacrifices, and the figures of Olympus.

The Titanomachia.

For they used to call banquets not from *ochē*—which is food—but from the fact that they were *eu* [well] with regard to these things, to which they used to gather to honor the divine, and to turn themselves toward joy and relaxation. And they called the drink *methy* [wine], and the god who gave this *Methymnæon*, and *Lyæum*, and *Euium*, and *Ieium*; just as they called him who was not gloomy and thoughtful "merry" [Greek: *hilaron*]. Hence, they asked the daemon to be propitious [Greek: *hileon*], shouting "ie, ie." Whence also they called the place where they did this "holy." That they called both the propitious and the merry by the same name, Ephippus shows...

^A At this place Achilles is educated, he who led the expedition against Troy. Hippon, the daughter of the centaur, having lived with Aeolus, taught him the physical theory, the ancestral science. Euripides also testifies concerning Hippon in this way: Divina quæ primum quidem præsagiit Oraculis, nec non per ortus siderum. At this Aeolus, Ulysses is entertained after the capture of Troy. Observe for me the periods of time for a comparison with the age of Moses, and the most ancient philosophy which existed in his time.

CHAPTER XVI.

That besides philosophy, the inventors of the other arts were also almost entirely barbarians.

Not only of philosophy, but of almost all the arts, the inventors were barbarians. And so the Egyptians first brought astrology to men. The Chaldaeans did the same. The Egyptians, in turn, also first taught how to kindle lamps, and divided the year into twelve months, and forbade commerce with women in the temples, and established by law that it was not permitted to enter the sacred places unwashed after being with a wife. And again, they were the inventors of geometry. there are some, however, who say that the Carians discovered that prescience which is gathered from the stars. The Phrygians were the first to observe the flight of birds. The Tuscans, neighbors of Italy, brought the art of soothsaying ^B or entrail-inspection to perfection. The Isaurians and Arabians studied auguries, as the Telmissians did the divination which is performed through dreams. The Etruscans invented the trumpet, and the Phrygians the flute; for Olympus and Marsyas were Phrygians. Cadmus ^{C D}

^A was a Phoenician, the inventor of letters for the Greeks, as Euphorus says; whence Herodotus also writes that letters were called Phoenician. Others say that the Phoenicians and Syrians were the first to devise letters. As for medicine, they say that Apis the Egyptian was indigenous, before Io arrived in Egypt; after these events, they say that Asclepius increased the art. Atlas the Libyan was the first to build a ship and sail the sea. And again, Celmis and Damnameneus ^B, the Idaean Dactyls, were the first to find iron in Cyprus; and another Idaean found the tempering of bronze; but as Hesiod says, a Scythian. And indeed [the following is observed regarding the ancients]:

Of the history of arts and letters

Those who have inquired into the depth of Greek affairs, perhaps as few as any before them, say: "The Greeks recount that the Phoenicians discovered letters, and that Cadmus was the first to bring them into Greece. They say that Apis the Egyptian was the beginner of medicine, and that Asclepius later increased the art. They say that a boat was first built in Libya." ^C And regarding the rest, it is clear from what has been said what one should maintain: namely, that the reading published in Athenaeus is meant to be corrected, just as the one in Clement is equally false. One must see to it that entities are not multiplied beyond necessity. Moreover, Clement calls him Euphorus on page 558, but Ephorus on pages 331, 337, and 551. ^D Regarding these matters, the Phoenicians who arrived with Cadmus, of whom the Gephyraeans were a part, after dwelling in this region, introduced many other teachings to the Greeks, and in particular letters, which did not exist among the Greeks before, as it seems to me... Using them, they declared, as justice required, that since the Phoenicians introduced them into Greece, they should be called Phoenician letters. From the ancient author of the Phoronis, it is established that the true names are Celmis, the great Damnameneus, and proud Acmon. Others count four, as Greg. Gyraldus says: Salaminus, Damnameneus, Hercules, and Acmon. Pliny, in book VII, chapter 56, says: "Hesiod says that they who are called the Idaean Dactyls found iron in Crete." Others, however, consider that the Telchines and Corybantes came from Crete to Cyprus, and were the first to work iron. Diodorus Siculus, in book V, chapter 15, in the place they call Berecynthus, reports that the Idaean Dactyls discovered the use of fire and the nature of copper and iron.

^A The Thracians first discovered what is called the *harpe* (a curved sword), and they were the first to use shields ^B on horseback. Similarly, the Illyrians also discovered the *pelta*. They say that the Tuscans also devised the art of modeling, and that Itanus (who was a Samnite) first made a shield. For Cadmus the Phoenician discovered stone-quarrying, and he devised the gold mines around Mount Pangaeum. Already, too, another nation, the Cappadocians, first discovered what is called the *nabla*, just as the Assyrians discovered the *dichordon*. For the Carthaginians first constructed a quadrireme, and Bosphorus acted as its architect upon short notice. Medea, the daughter of Aeetes, a Colchian, was the first to devise the dyeing of hair. Moreover, the Noropes (a Paeonian tribe, now called the Noricans) forged copper, and were the first to purify iron. Amycus, king of the Bebrycians, first invented the boxing thongs, that is, the *caestus*. As for music, Olympus the Mysian artistically devised the Lydian mode, and those called the Troglodytes discovered the *sambuca*, an instrument.

^A They say also that Satyrus the Phrygian discovered the oblique flute; and that Agnis, who was also a Phrygian, discovered the three-stringed instrument and the diatonic scale; and similarly that Olympus, also a Phrygian, discovered rhythmic beats; just as Marsyas, being of the same region as those before mentioned, discovered the Phrygian harmony, the mixo-Phrygian, and the mixo-Lydian; and that Thamyris the Thracian devised the Dorian mode. We have heard that the Persians were the first to construct a carriage, a bed, and a footstool; and that the Sidonians were the first to build a trireme. The Sicilians, who are near Italy, were the first to discover the *phorminx*, which does not differ much from the cithara; and they invented castanets. They record that under Semiramis, queen of the Assyrians ^B—for the Egyptians, you see, were not the only ones to rule—the weaving of linen garments was discovered; and Hellanicus says that Atossa, who was queen of the Persians, was the first to compose letters. Scamnon of Mytilene, therefore, and Theophrastus of Eresus, ^C and Cydippus of Mantinea, as well as Antiphanes, and Aristodemus, and Aristotle, and in addition to these Philostephanus, and also Strato the Peripatetic, have related these things in their books on discoveries. I have set forth a few of them to confirm the fact that the barbarians possess a nature capable of discovering things useful for life, ^D

from whom the Greeks have derived such practices. If, however, anyone should disparage the barbarian tongue, "To me," says ^A Anacharsis, "all Greeks talk Scythian." He was the very man held in admiration among the Greeks, who said: "To me, a cloak is my outer garment; a meal, milk and cheese." He describes a barbarian philosophy that professes deeds, not words. The Apostle speaks in this wise: "And you, [1 Cor. XIV, 9, 10, 11, 13] if by the tongue you do not give a clear utterance, how will what is said be known? For you will be speaking into the air. There are, it may be, as many kinds of languages in the world, and none is without voice. If, therefore, I do not know the power of the voice, I shall be a barbarian to the speaker, and the speaker a barbarian to me." And, "Let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret."

Yet, it was only late that the teaching and writing of discourse came to the Greeks. ^B Alcmaeon, for instance, son of Perithus, of Croton, was the first to compile a treatise on nature; though others say that Anaxagoras, son of Hegesibulus, of Clazomenae, was the first to issue a work in writing. Terpander of Antissa was the first to adapt melody to poetry and to set the laws of the Lacedaemonians to musical verse. Lassus of Hermione invented the dithyramb; Stesichorus of Himera, the hymn; Alcman the Lacedaemonian, the choral dance; Anacreon of Teos, erotic songs; and Pindarus of Thebes, the *hyporcheme*. Timotheus of Miletus was the first to perform both in chorus and on the cithara. ^C Then, too, Archilochus of Paros invented the iambic, and Hipponax of Ephesus the irregular iambic, while Thespis of Athens invented tragedy, and Sisarion of Icaria, comedy.

The grammarians teach us the dates of these men; but it would be tedious to set them forth with such exact precision, as it is shown promptly that Dionysus himself — that is, Bacchus, for whom the Dionysia and the spectacles are celebrated — is later than Moses. They also say that the development of discourse for formal discussion and the characteristics of rhetoric were discovered by them, and that the first judicial speech for publication was composed for pay ^D by Antiphon of Rhamnus, as Diodorus says. Apollodorus [alt-version omitted]

^A of Cyme first accepted the title of critic, and was called a grammarian. Some, however, say it was Eratosthenes of Cyrene, because he published two books which he entitled *Grammatica*. The first to be called a grammarian, as we use the term now, was Praxiphanes, son of Dionysophanes, a Mitylenean. Zaleucus the Locrian is recorded as the first to have established laws; others say Minos, the son of Zeus, in the time of Lynceus. He lived after Danaus, in the eleventh ^B generation from Inachus and Moses, as we shall show by entering into this a little further. Lycurgus, having been born many years after the capture of Troy, established laws for the Lacedaemonians one hundred and fifty years before the Olympiads; for we have already spoken of the [chronology of] Solon. Draco, who was also a legislator, is found to have lived around the thirty-ninth Olympiad. Antilochus, who specialized in the historians from the age of Pythagoras ^C to the death of Epicurus (which occurred on the tenth day of the month Gamelion), covers a total of three hundred and twelve years. They also say that the epic poet Phano, the wife of Ica...

FRAGMENTARY NOTES AND SCHOLIA

Antiphon, son of Sophilus, an Athenian, of the deme Rhamnus; no teacher of his is known; and yet he was the first to excel in judicial oratory after Gorgias. As for rhetoric, some say that Antiphon did not invent it, but that it was already in existence and he increased it; and that he was considered wise by some as self-taught, by others as instructed by his father; and they say his father was Sophilus.

ON THE LOCRIAN LAWS

"They are the first to be trusted with written laws." The so-called Epizephyrian Locrians lie nearby. And they say that these were the first to use written laws, which Zaleucus is thought to have suggested to them.

^DMinos, who was thought to excel in every kind of wisdom, as well as in intellect and legislation, lived in the time of Lynceus, who reigned after Danaus, in the eleventh generation after Inachus. Lycurgus, born long after the capture of Troy, established laws for the Lacedaemonians one hundred years before the Olympiads. Draco is found to have lived around the thirty-ninth Olympiad, Solon around the fortieth, Pythagoras around the sixty-second. Dieuchidas, in the fourth book of his *Megarica*, places the peak of Lycurgus at about the two hundred and ninety-first year after the capture of Troy; born long after the capture of Troy, he gave laws to the Lacedaemonians one hundred years before the Olympiads.

Furthermore, they say that Phanothea, the wife of Icarius, discovered the heroic hexameter; others, however, say Themis, one of the Titanides. ^A Didymus, moreover, in his book *On Pythagorean Philosophy*, reports that Theano the Crotoniate was the first woman to philosophize and write poems. Greek philosophy, therefore, as some say, by chance somehow and obscurely attains the truth, but does not attain it completely; as others wish, it derives its motion from the devil. Some, moreover, imagine that certain fallen powers breathed the whole of philosophy into men. But if Greek philosophy does not grasp the magnitude of the truth, and is still too weak to carry out the commands of the Lord, yet it prepares the way for the most royal teaching, in some way disciplining, and modeling the character, and preparing and predisposing toward the reception of the truth the one who recognizes Providence. ^B

CHAPTER XVII.

"Yes," they say, "it is written: 'All who came before the coming of the Lord are thieves and robbers.' All, therefore, who are in the Word (these are indeed those who were before the incarnation of the Word), are to be understood in a more general sense. But the prophets, inasmuch as they were sent and inspired by the Lord, were not thieves, but ministers. So the Scripture says: 'Wisdom sent her servants, calling ^C with a loud proclamation to the mixing bowl of wine.'" Philosophy, however, was not sent by the Lord, but came, he says, stolen, or given by a thief; that is to say, some power, or angel, having learned something of the truth, and not ^D continuing in it, breathed these things out, and having stolen them, taught them, not because the Lord did not know...

[index: entries preserved]

who even before the foundation of each thing knew the ends of things that were to be—was ignorant, but because He did not prevent it. For the theft coming among men had at that time some utility; not that the one who stole was aiming at what was beneficial, but because Providence was directing the outcome of the bold act toward what was beneficial. ^A I know that many are continually pressing upon us, and saying that what does not prevent is the cause; for they say that the cause of a theft is the one who did not guard [against it], or the one who did not prevent it; just as of an arson, the one who did not extinguish the beginning of the evil; and of a shipwreck, the pilot who did not strike the sail. Immediately, those who are the causes of these things are punished by the law; for to whom there was the power [(10)] to prevent, to him is imputed the cause of what has happened. We say to them, however, that the cause is to be understood in the doing, the working, and the acting; but that what does not prevent is, in this respect, inactive. ^B Furthermore, the cause is conjoined with the operation; just as the shipbuilder is related to the making of the vessel, and the builder to the being-built [(11)] of the house; but what does not prevent is separate from the thing being done; for precisely for this reason the thing is accomplished, because that which had the power to prevent does not act, nor does it prevent; for what does that which does not prevent actually do?

And now the argument even proceeds to a refutation for them: if they are going to blame, because of a wound, not the arrow, but the shield that did not prevent the arrow from passing through; for they will not blame the thief, but the one who did not prevent the theft. Therefore, let them not say that Hector [(12)] burned the ships of the Greeks, but Achilles; because, being able to prevent Hector, he did not prevent him. ^C But he, on account of anger (and it was in his power [(15)] to be angry or not to be angry), did not prevent the fire, and perhaps was a contributing cause; but the devil, being possessed of free will, was able to repent [(14)] and steal; and he himself is the cause of the theft, not the Lord who did not prevent it. But neither was the gift harmful, so that a prevention should intervene. But if it is necessary to speak precisely toward them, let them know that the non-preventive—which we say occurred in the case of the theft—is in no way a cause; but the preventive is implicated in the charge of being the cause. For the one who shields is the cause to the one being shielded of not being wounded, by preventing him from being wounded. And to Socrates, the demonic sign was a cause, and not the one who did not prevent... ^D For he taught the mysteries and revealed to the aeon the things in heaven; and the sons of men, practicing his practices, dare to know the mysteries. [alt-version omitted]

^A For it is not the act of discouraging, but of encouraging—even if he did not encourage. Therefore, neither praises, nor reproaches, nor honors, nor punishments are just, if the soul does not have the power of impulse and initiative, but wickedness is involuntary. Whence he who hinders is the cause; but he who does not hinder judges the choice of the soul justly, so that God may be, as much as possible, ^B blameless for us regarding wickedness. But since choice and impulse initiate the sins, and a misguided opinion sometimes prevails—due to which ignorance and lack of knowledge we neglect to depart—punishments are awarded reasonably. For even being feverish is involuntary; but when someone is feverish through his own fault and through intemperance, we blame him. As also vice is involuntary; for no one chooses evil as evil, but led away by the pleasure that is in it, and supposing it to be good, he considers it desirable to be taken. Since these things are so, to be delivered from ignorance, from the base and delightful choice, and before all things, not to assent to those deceptive phantasies and visions, lies within our power. ^C The devil is called a "robber and a thief," having mixed false prophets in with the prophets, just as tares with the wheat. "All, therefore, who came before the Lord are thieves and robbers"—not absolutely all men, but all the false prophets, and all who were not truly sent by him. And the false prophets also had the theft of being called prophets, being prophets, but of the liar. For the Lord says: "You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he has not stood in the truth, because there is no truth in him. ^D Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own; for he is a liar and the father of it." But in their falsehoods, the false prophets also said some true things. And in truth, these were prophesying in an "ecstasy," as ministers of the apostate. And the Shepherd also says, the angel of repentance, to Hermas concerning the false prophet: "For he speaks some true words; for the devil fills him with his own spirit, if he might be able to break one of the righteous." All things, therefore, are administered from above for good, so that the manifold wisdom of God may be known through the Church, according to the foreknowledge of the ages, which he made in Christ.

^A Nothing, however, is opposed to God, nor is anything contrary to Him, since He is Lord and Almighty. Indeed, even the counsels and actions of those who have revolted, being partial, arise from an evil disposition, just as do bodily diseases; yet they are governed by the universal providence toward a healthy end, even if the cause itself is disease-producing. It is, therefore, the greatest work of divine providence not to allow the evil that has sprung from voluntary defection to remain useless and unprofitable, nor to let it become altogether harmful. For it is the work of divine wisdom, virtue, and power, not only to do good (for this is, so to speak, the very nature of God, just as it is for fire to warm and for light to illuminate), but also, and most especially, to produce from the evils devised by some people a good and useful end, and to make beneficial use of those things that seem evil, just as it does with the testimony that proceeds from temptation. ^B There is, therefore, even in philosophy, which was stolen—as if from Prometheus—a little fire, being usefully fanned into a light suitable for illumination, some trace of wisdom and an impulse from God. Such, then, are the thieves and robbers among the Greek philosophers, who, before the coming of the Lord, took portions of the truth from the Hebrew prophets, not by an act of knowledge, but by appropriating them as their own dogmas. Some they adulterated, others they foolishly sophisticated through excessive curiosity, and others they even discovered themselves; for perhaps they also possessed the ^C "spirit of intelligence." Aristotle also agrees with Scripture, having called the sophistic art a thief of wisdom, as we have previously indicated. The Apostle says: "Which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit." For as regards the prophets, he says: "All we have received from his fullness," clearly meaning the fullness of Christ. Therefore, the prophets are not thieves. And the Lord says: "My teaching is not mine, but His who sent me, the Father." But concerning thieves, He says: "He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory." Such are the Greeks, "lovers of self and arrogant." ^D Yet, when Scripture calls them wise, it does not reproach those who are truly wise, but those who seem wise to themselves.

CHAPTER XVIII.

Illustrating that saying of the Apostle: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise."

Concerning these men, he says: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and I will set aside the prudence of the prudent." ^A The Apostle therefore infers: "Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the inquisitor of this age?" By this he distinguishes those from the scribes—the inquisitors of this age—namely, the philosophers from among the nations. "Did not God make foolish the wisdom of the world?" This is to be taken in the negative sense, as if to say, "Did not God make foolish the wisdom of the world?"—that is, "Did He *not* make it foolish, and show it to be untrue," contrary to what they themselves supposed? Or, if you ask the cause why they seemed wise to themselves, he replies: "Because of the blindness ^B of their heart; for in the wisdom of God"—that is, in that which was announced through the prophets—"the world did not know God through wisdom," which speaks through the prophets. "But it pleased God through the foolishness of the proclamation"—for that it is which seems foolishness to the Greeks—"to save those who believe." For the Jews, he says, seek signs for belief, "but the Greeks seek wisdom," namely, those discourses which are called compelling, and other such syllogisms. "But we preach Jesus ^C Christ crucified; to the Jews indeed a stumbling block," because, though they know the prophecy, they do not believe the outcome; "but to the Greeks foolishness," for those who seem wise to themselves think it a fable that the Son of God should speak through a man, that God should have a Son, and that He should have suffered. Whence it comes about that, preoccupied by an excessive conceit of themselves, they are unwilling to believe. For the coming of the Savior did not make men foolish, hard-hearted, and infidel, but prudent, apt to be persuaded, and furthermore faithful. But those who were unwilling to obey, by distancing themselves from the voluntary adherence of those who did obey, were shown to be imprudent, unfaithful, and foolish. ^D "But to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God."

Must we not then (which is even better) deem that saying, "Did not God make the wisdom of the world foolish," to be negative—as if to say, "He did not make it foolish"—lest the cause of the hardening of heart appear to have originated from God, from Him who made the wisdom foolish? For in all, although they were wise, they became subject to greater blame because they did not believe the proclamation; for the choice and election of truth is voluntary. Furthermore, that saying, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise," signifies that He has caused it to shine forth by the contrast of that barbarian philosophy which is contemned and despised; just as a lamp, when illuminated by the sun, is said to have perished, in that it does not exert an equal effect. Since all men, therefore, have been called, those who willed to obey were named "the called."

^A For there is no injustice with God. Verily, of both races those who have believed, these are "a peculiar people." In the Acts of the Apostles you will find it word for word: "They, therefore, who gladly received his word were baptized; but they who were not willing to obey withdrew themselves." To these the prophecy speaks: "And if you be willing, and hear me, you shall eat the good things of the earth"; ^B proving that it is in our power both to choose and to decline. The Apostle has called the instruction according to the Lord "God's wisdom," in order to show that true philosophy is delivered through the Son. Furthermore, he who seems to himself to be wise has certain admonitions, which command him according to the Apostle "to put on the new man, who is created according to God in righteousness and holiness of truth. Wherefore, ^C putting away lying, speak truth. Give not place to the devil. Let him that stole steal no more; but rather let him labor, working that which is good" (and to work is to labor in seeking the truth; for it is joined to that which is done in word, to beneficence) "that you may have to give to him that has need," both of secular wealth and of divine wisdom. For he wishes the word to be taught, and the money to be cast upon the tables, having been accurately tested, so that it may be put out to usury. Whence the Word infers: "Let no corrupt word proceed out of your mouth." ^D This word is corrupt, which proceeds from conceit; "but if there be any good for the edification of need, that it may give grace to them that hear." But of the good God, the word must necessarily be good. And how is that which saves not good?

CHAPTER XIX.

That, therefore, it is proved by testimony that the Greeks have also some true dogmas, one may consider from this also. Paul is written in the Acts of the Apostles as saying to the Areopagites: "I perceive that you are too superstitious; for passing by and observing your objects of worship, I found an altar on which was inscribed, To the Unknown God. Whom, therefore, ignorant you worship, him I announce to you. God, who made the world and all things in it; he, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made by hands, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all life and breath, and all things; and has made of one every race of men, to dwell upon all the face of the earth, defining

^A the appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, to seek the Divine, if perhaps they might feel after him or find him; although he is not far from each one of us: for in him we live, and move, and are, as also some of your own poets have said: *For we are indeed his offspring.*

From which it is clear that, using even poetic examples from Aratus' *Phaenomena*, he approves what has been well said among the Greeks; and through the "unknown God," he hinted at the Creator God, honored indeed by the Greeks through a circumlocution, but who must be accepted and learned through knowledge by the Son. "I have therefore sent you to the nations," he says, "to open ^B their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God; that they themselves may receive remission of sins, and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in me." These, therefore, are the eyes of the blind being opened: the knowledge of the Father through the Son is the comprehension of the Greek circumlocution; and to "turn from the power of Satan" is to be changed from the sin through which servitude was introduced. Yet we do not accept every philosophy absolutely, but that about which Socrates also speaks in Plato: "There are, as they say, those who are engaged in the mysteries, thyrsus-bearers indeed many, but few are the Bacchi," implying that "many are called, but few ^C are chosen." He clearly adds: "These, however, to my way of thinking, are none other than those who have philosophized rightly; in whose number, that I might be, I have omitted nothing in my life, so far as in me lay, but have striven in every way. But whether I have striven rightly, and whether I have accomplished anything, when we have arrived thither, we shall know clearly, if God wills, a little later." Does it not seem to you that he declares from the Hebrew Scriptures the hope of the righteous after death through faith? And in *Demodocus*, if the treatise is indeed Plato's: "Do not suppose," ^D

^A he says, "that I am saying one should live bent over the arts, or that one should be a man of much learning, but rather something else; for I, for my part, used to consider it a reproach. For he knew, I think, that one who has much knowledge of things already possesses a mind that teaches," which is the sentiment of Heraclitus. And in the fifth book of the *Republic*: ^B "Shall we then," he says, "count all these, and others given to such studies of various arts, as philosophers?" "By no means," he said, "but rather as similar to philosophers. Whom, then, do you call true philosophers?" "Those," said I, "who are lovers of the vision of truth." For philosophy does not consist in geometry, which has its postulates and hypotheses, nor in music, which is merely conjectural, nor in astronomy, ^C which is stuffed with natural, shifting, and merely probable arguments; but it is the work of the knowledge of the Good itself and of truth. Although there are other paths to the Good, just as there are paths to the Good. Hence, he himself does not grant that the "encyclical" education is sufficient for the Good, but only that it contributes to awakening and training the soul for those things that are perceived by the intellect. ^D Whether, therefore, they say that the Greeks uttered something of divine philosophy by chance, this chance must be referred to divine dispensation; for no one would attribute chance to the gods on account of the contention which exists among us. Or if by fortune, that fortune is not devoid of providence. Or if, again, one should say that certain natural notions were inborn in the Greeks, we recognize one Creator of nature: for that reason we have also called justice natural. Or if they had a common mind, let us consider who is its father, and what justice is in the distribution of this mind. For if anyone speaks of a "foretelling" and denounces a "co-telling," he is speaking of kinds of prophecy. Indeed, they also wish some things to have been said by the philosophers by way of an intimation of truth. ^A For the blessed Apostle writes concerning us: "For we see now as through a mirror," as we come to know ourselves by reflection in Him, and, as far as is possible, contemplate the creative cause from the divine element within us.

^A "For if you have seen your brother," he says, "you have seen your God." I believe it is the Savior—God—who is called God for us at this time. But after the laying aside of the flesh, "face to face," then it will be definitive and apprehensible, when "the heart" shall have become "pure." And indeed, those who have philosophized accurately among the Greeks see God through an impression and a transparency; for such are the true images fashioned according to our inability, as one sees an image in water, and we see things through transparent and clear bodies. Salomon is therefore right: "He who sows," he says, "righteousness, works truth," but there are those who sow their own, ^B or "do more." And again: "Take care of the green things in the field, and you shall shear the grass, and gather the ripe hay, that you may have sheep for clothing." Do you see how there must also be a concern for external covering and protection? "Know well the souls of your flock." For "when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves," the uncircumcision keeping the righteousness of the law, according to the Apostle, both before the law and before the advent. The Word, as if making a comparison of those from philosophy with those who are called heretics, very clearly says: ^C "A friend who is near is better than a brother who dwells far off. He who relies on falsehoods, this man pastures the winds, and chases winged birds." I do not think the Word is rejecting philosophy here, even if it often makes use of probable arguments apt for producing faith, but it is patching up the heresies. He adds, therefore: "For he has abandoned the ways of his own vineyard, and has wandered away from the tracks of his own farm." These are they who have abandoned the Church from the beginning. Straightway, he who has fallen into heresy "passes through a waterless wilderness," having left behind the truly existing God—deserted by God, seeking waterless water, ^D "traversing the uninhabited and thirsty land, gathering barrenness with his hands." And to those who are lacking in understanding, I exhort, says the Scripture...

is that which follows heresies. He therefore infers: "For she has left the paths of her vineyard, and has wandered in the paths of her own husbandry." These are those who forsake the primitive Church. But he who has fallen into heresy has "passed ^A through a desert without water," having forsaken Him who is truly God, and being deserted by God, seeking water where there is no water, traversing a land uninhabitable and thirsty, gathering with his hands the sterility of fruits. "And to those who lack prudence," says Wisdom, speaking of those who are involved in heresies, "I command you: touch freely of stolen breads and of the sweet water of theft." Where, by "bread" and "water," the Scripture clearly denotes those heresies which, in the oblation, use bread and water otherwise than as the canons of the Church enjoin. There are, indeed, those who use only water in the Eucharist. But do you retreat, so that you do not delay long in her place: by "place," he calls the Synagogue, not the Church, equivocally. Then he exclaims: "For thus you shall pass over the water of the alien," not esteeming the heretical baptism to be appropriate and genuine water. "And you shall pass over an alien river," which carries one away and drags him down into the sea, into which he who has swerved from the stability of the truth is cast, falling back again into ^B the gentile and disordered waves of life.

But just as many men, who draw a ship, cannot be called many causes, but one cause consisting of many: for it is not each one who is the cause of the ship being drawn, but [they act] together with the others; so also philosophy contributes to the comprehension of the truth, since it is an inquiry into truth, not being the cause of the comprehension, but a cause together with others, and a fellow-worker; and perhaps even a co-cause. And as, while happiness is one, its causes happen to be many virtues; and as, for one to be warmed, both the sun, and fire, and the bath, and clothing are effective; so, while truth is one, there are many things that contribute to the inquiry into it; but the finding is through the Son. If, indeed, we consider it, virtue is in power one; ^C but it happens that, in these things...

CHAPTER XX.

By what means philosophy contributes to the comprehension of divine truth.

For it happens that, in these things, one thing is the cause of another, and just as we say that these contribute to finding the truth, so also we maintain that philosophy acts as a preparatory training for the truth. For he who makes use of it to the extent of its power, and is not carried away into the unstable waves of life, will be able to grasp it. Therefore, since there is one truth, there are many things that contribute to the search ^D for it; but the finding is through the Son. If, then, we examine it, virtue is in potentiality one; but it has happened that to these things...

^A a quality is inherent, and it is called prudence, in others temperance, and in others fortitude or justice. By the same reasoning, then, since there is also one truth, in geometry there is the truth of geometry, in music the truth of music; and in right philosophy there would be Greek truth. But this alone is the sovereign, unassailable truth, which we are taught by the Son of God. We say that this is the manner in which one and the same drachma, if given to a sailor, is called fare; if to a tax collector, tax; and rent to a landlord; wages to a teacher; and a deposit to one who sells. Each of them, whether it be virtue or truth, although ^B they are called by a common name, has only its own proper and unique effect; from the union of all of these, the blessed life is born. For we are not made blessed by names alone, when we call the correct life blessedness, and him blessed whose soul is adorned virtuously. And if philosophy also brings help from afar to the discovery of truth, extending itself through various notions toward our knowledge, which touches most nearly upon the truth, yet it brings help in this way to the one who, by the help of the Word, endeavors to grasp knowledge. Therefore, Greek truth, even if it has been allotted the same name, is yet sufficiently distinguished from our truth by the magnitude of its knowledge, by the clarity of its demonstrations, by divine power, and by similar things. ^C For we are God-taught, having learned the truly sacred writings from the Son of God; whence they do not stir souls in the same way as we do, but by a completely different method and discipline. But if, for the sake of those who seek opportunities to slander us, we must make distinctions, calling philosophy, insofar as it is engaged in the investigation of truth, a joint-cause and fellow-worker for the apprehension of truth—as it is a searching for truth—we shall acknowledge it to be a preparatory discipline for the Gnostic, not setting it up as the cause, which is merely a joint-cause; nor yet as the cohesive factor, nor as if the truth could not exist without philosophy. For almost all of us, without the circle of disciplines ^D which they call 'encyclic,' and without Greek philosophy, and some even without letters, have received the Word concerning God by faith, moved by the divine and barbarian philosophy, educated by wisdom that works by itself. But that which works with another, being imperfect in itself to perform its work, we call a fellow-worker and a joint-cause, from a joint-cause becoming a cause, and from having come together with another, being called a cause; yet it is not able in itself to provide the effect that is in accordance with truth. And yet philosophy also once claimed for itself the

justify the Greeks, though not with that universal and perfect justice for the attainment of which it cooperates, even as the first and second step to one ascending into an upper chamber, and the grammarian to one who is about to philosophize—not as if, with this taken away, anything is lacking to the universal Word, or the truth is destroyed; for vision, hearing, and speech also contribute to the truth, though it is the mind that naturally recognizes it. But among those things that cooperate, some afford greater power, while others afford lesser. Clarity, at any rate, cooperates for the transmission of the truth; and dialectic provides help so that we may not fall before the inroads of the heresies. The teaching concerning ^B the Savior is, then, self-sufficient and in need of nothing, as it is "the power of God and the wisdom of God"; but the Greek philosophy that approaches it does not make the truth more powerful, but by rendering impotent the sophistical attempts made against it and by driving off the deceitful traps set against the truth, it has been appropriately called the "fence" and "hedge" of the vineyard. And truth, which is grasped by faith, is like bread necessary for living; but the preparatory discipline is like a relish and a dessert, "as the meal is ending, a sweet dainty," according to the Theban Pindar. But the Scripture speaks outright: ^C "The guileless shall become more shrewd by understanding; but the wise man shall receive knowledge." And just as the Lord says: "He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but he who seeks the glory of Him who sent him is true, and there is no injustice in him." Consequently, he acts unjustly in turn who has usurped the things of the barbarians, and, boasting of them as his own, while magnifying his own glory and falsifying the truth; this man is called a thief by the Scripture. It says, therefore: "My son, do not be a liar; for lying leads to theft." And as for the thief, what he has stolen he truly possesses, even if it be gold, even if it be silver, even if it be discourse, ^D even if it be doctrine. Since, therefore, they have stolen something, they know the truth indeed, but they know it conjecturally and through the necessities of logic; having been instructed, however, they will attain a comprehensive knowledge of it.

CHAPTER XXI.

By comparing the age of Moses and the other prophets at length with the times of the Greeks, it is shown that the institutions and laws of the Jews are much older than Greek philosophy.

That the dogmas of the philosophers were stolen from the Hebrews, we shall discuss a little later. In the meantime, however, as method requires, we must now speak of the times of Moses; from which it will be evident beyond any controversy that the philosophy of the Hebrews is far older than any other philosophy. And concerning these matters, it has indeed been accurately stated by Tatian in his ^A Address to the Greeks. It has also been stated by Cassianus in the first book of the Exegetica; nevertheless, the commentary requires that we, too, should run through what has been said on this point. Apion, therefore, the grammarian, who is surnamed Plistonices, in the fourth book of his Histories of Egypt, although he was ill-disposed toward the Hebrews, being an Egyptian by race—to such an extent that he even wrote a book against the Jews—making mention of Amosis, the king of Egypt, and of the events of his reign, brings forward Ptolemy of Mendes as a witness. And his words are as follows: “Amosis destroyed Athyria, who was in the time of Inachus the Argive,” as he wrote in his ^B Chronology.

91 The Greeks used to object to the Christians that their religion and dogmas were recently invented, and were therefore false; whence the writers of apologies often show that the matters of the Jews, from whom the Christians derived their origin, were far older than all the philosophy and histories of the Greeks. Justin Martyr asserts that the writings of the Hebrew prophets are older than all the writers who have ever existed, Apol. 1, p. 46, Oxford ed. The same argument is pursued more broadly by him in his Address to the Greeks, p. 62 ff. Theophilus in the beginning of book III of his Ad Autolycum: “You think, perhaps, that the discourse of truth is nonsense, imagining that our writings are fresh and recent. Therefore, I will not hesitate, God assisting, to trace back the antiquity of our writings from their first origin.” [See ibid., p. 127, Paris ed.] “But now I set out, God assisting, to demonstrate more exactly the computation of the times, so that you may know that our history is not recent, nor fabulous, but is older and truer than all poets and historians.” Then on p. 137, at the end of the same book, he adds: “From the computation of the times, and from the rest which we have mentioned, I judge it to be clearly evident that our doctrine and religion are not recent; indeed, the things which we have provided above clearly show the antiquity of the prophetic writings and the divinity of our religion: and that the things which we deliver are not fabulous and false, but surpass the records of profane writers in antiquity and truth.” I have brought these things forward so that it might be evident why Clement and other ancient writers of apologies labored so much on this argument. Cf. Lactantius, lib. iv, cap. 5.

92 These words Eusebius translated in his Praeparatio evangelica, lib. x, c. 12, p. 496 ff., Oxford ed. Furthermore, it exists in the Eusebian codex manuscript preserved in the college of St. John the Baptist.

93 Tatian’s words are in Tatian, p. 125, Oxford ed.

94 Address to the Greeks. Regarding the article: Eusebius, where he is with a doubled sigma, as among the Latins. SYLBURG.

95 Apion. Tertullian cites Apion in //Apologeticus adversus gentes//, c. 49, to which passage Pamelius, when writing, notes that Pliny, lib. XXXVII, c. 5, mentions him. “Apion,” he says, “surnamed Plistonices, left behind him a writing not long ago, that is still in the Labyrinth of Egypt, the colossus of Serapis.” Justin in his //Adhortatio ad gentes// calls him the son of Posidonius, and Africanus in Eusebius, //Praep.//, lib. x, cap. 3, calls him a most diligent investigator of history. Tatian, Justin, and Africanus in Eusebius praise Ptolemy of Mendes and the priest of Mendes as witnesses. COLLECT. Cf. also Tatian on Apion, cap. 59; A. Gellius, lib. v, cap. 14, and lib. vi, cap. 8; the Recognitions of Clement, lib. x, c. 52, and what Cotelerius noted there.

96 Fourth. “There are five books [of Apion],” says Tatian. But he was the one against whom Josephus defends the Jewish nation.

97 Amosis. The king whom Justin, Theophilus, and others call Amasis. The codex of John follows Tatian, who calls him Amosis.

98 Ptolemy. Cf. again Justin in the //Paraeneses//, Tatian, etc.

99 Athyria. The current Tatian, p. 130, has it thus; but Eusebius, reciting his words, [original-script column: see facsimile] which name...

^A a Mendesius Ptolemaeus; for this Ptolemaeus was a priest, and having set forth the acts of the Egyptian kings in three whole books, says that in the time of Amosis, king of Egypt, under the leadership of Moses, the departure of the Jews from Egypt took place. From which it is understood that Moses flourished in the time of Inachus. Older than the Greek records are the Argolic, those I mean which trace their origin from Inachus, as Dionysius of Halicarnassus teaches in his *Chronicles*. ^B Forty generations later than these are the Attic records, which trace their origin from Cecrops, the double-natured and indigenous, as Tatian says word for word; and nine generations later are the Arcadian [records], starting from Pelasgus; for this man also is said to be indigenous. And later than these by another fifty-two [generations] are the Phthiotic [records], those which start from Deucalion. Up to the time of the Trojan [War], from Inachus, twenty or more generations are counted; and in years, as I may say, four hundred and more. Now ^C the Egyptian records are precise regarding the years, and the interpreter of the events concerning them is Ptolemaeus, not the king, but the priest of Mendes. He, in setting forth the acts of the kings, says that in the time of Amosis, king of Egypt, the departure of the Jews from Egypt took place, to the regions to which they came, with Moses leading them. And he speaks thus: “But Amosis lived in the time of King Inachus.” By some Greek writers [it is said that he lived] at the time of Inachus, son of Phoroneus; [they say] “Moses, of the Hebrew race, the first of all prophets, ^D who delivered to the people oracles and holy scriptures regarding the Savior, I mean Christ, and regarding the knowledge of God for the nations through him, flourished in the times of Inachus,” as men well known in learning have said: Clement, Africanus, Tatian, of our own school; and of those from the Circumcision, Josephus and Justus, each separately offering the proof from ancient history. They have set Inachus to precede the Trojan times by seven hundred years. And the time from Inachus until the capture of Ilium completes twenty generations. Therefore, if Moses was born in the time of Inachus, he is older than the Trojan [events] by four hundred years.

^A Indeed, the affairs of the Assyrians will also appear more ancient than Greek affairs by many years, according to what Ctesias says. It will appear that in the forty-second year of the Assyrian rule, and the thirty-second of the eighth dynasty of Belochus, [was the time] of Moses; and the movement from Egypt was in the time of Amosis the Egyptian and Inachus the Argive. ^B There was in Greece, in the time of Phoroneus who succeeded Inachus, the inundation which took place in the time of Ogyges, as well as the Sicyonian kingdom, first of Aegialeus, then of Europs, then of Telchines; and the kingdom of Cres in Crete. For Acusilaus says that Phoroneus was the first man; whence also the poet of the *Phoronis* said he was "the father of mortal men." Hence Plato, in the *Timaeus*, following Acusilaus, writes: "And when at some time he wished to bring them into a discourse concerning the ancient affairs of this city, he attempted to speak of the most ancient things, concerning Phoroneus, who was called the first, and Niobe, and of those things which were after the flood." ^C For in the time of Inachus, the first king of the Argives, under whom all—both those from the circumcision and those from grace—the historians Josephus and Justus, and Clemens the holy *Stromateus*, and Tatian and Africanus, agree that Moses was born, and that he flourished in the time of Phoroneus, the son of Inachus and Niobe. For an inundation is recorded among the Athenians in the time of Ogyges, in the Acte, which is now called Attica, which is the most ancient according to those things which the Greeks relate. And this, moreover, some refer to the times of Phoroneus, others to the times of Apis. Similarly, the departure from Egypt is recorded differently by historians at the same times, [coinciding] with the flood in the time of Ogyges. ^D And in this matter, Josephus and Justus, the Jewish historians, and Clemens, the author of the *Stromata*, agree, and Africanus. For [Plato] says: "And when he wished to lead them into a discourse concerning the ancients, he attempted to speak of the most ancient things, concerning Phoroneus who was called the first, and Niobe, and after the flood, again concerning Deucalion and Pyrrha, how they lived through it, to recount their genealogy."

^A And after Phorbas ^B was Actæus, from whom comes Actæa, which is Attica. In the time of Triopas, were Prometheus, and Atlas, and Epimetheus, and the double-natured Cecrops, and Ino. In the time of Crotopus, the burning at the time of Phaethon, and the deluge at the time of Deucalion. In the time of Sthenelus, the kingdom of Amphictyon, and the arrival of Danaus in the Peloponnese, and the founding of Dardania by Dardanus, "Whom first, says Homer, Did Zeus ^C the cloud-gatherer beget," and the carrying off from Crete to Phoenicia. In the time of Lynceus, the rape of the Maiden, and the founding of the precinct in Eleusis, and the agriculture of Triptolemus, and the arrival of Cadmus in Thebes, and the kingdom of Minos. In the time of Proetus, the war of Eumolpus against the Athenians; and in the time of Acrisius, the crossing of Pelops from Phrygia, and the arrival of Ion in Athens, and the second ^D arrival in Athens...

^A of Cecrops, and the deeds of Perseus and Dionysus, and Orpheus and Musaeus. ^B In the eighteenth year of the reign of Agamemnon, Ilium was taken, in the first year of Demophon, son of Theseus, on the twelfth day of the month Thargelion, as Dionysus the Argive says. Aegias and Dercylus say on the third day of the month Panemus, on the eighth day waning; for Hellanicus says on the twelfth of the month Thargelion; and some of those who have written ^C on Attica say on the eighth day waning, in the last year of the reign of Menestheus, during a full moon. "The night was in its middle," says the author of the *Little Iliad*, "And the bright moon was rising." Others say on the same day of Scirophorion. Now Theseus, being an emulator of Heracles, is one generation older than the Trojan events. Homer, at any rate, mentions Tlepolemus, who was the son of Heracles, as having fought at Ilium. It is shown, therefore, that Moses ^D preceded the apotheosis of Dionysus by six hundred and four years; if indeed the reign of Perseus

^A in the thirty-second year is deified, as Apollodorus says in his Chronicles. From Dionysus to Heracles and those heroes who sailed in the Argo with Jason, sixty-three years are reckoned; and Asclepius and the Dioscuri sailed with them, as Apollonius of Rhodes testifies in his Argonautica. From the reign of Heracles, which was at Argos, up to the deification of Heracles himself and Asclepius, there are reckoned thirty-eight years, according to the chronographer Apollodorus; and from thence to the deification of Castor and Pollux, there are fifty-three years; at which time, approximately, the capture of Troy also took place. But if we must also believe the poet Hesiod, let us hear him:

1.

The Theogony of Hesiod

Cadmus, the father of Semele, came to Thebes in the time of Lynceus, and became the inventor of the Greek letters. Triopas was contemporary with Isis, in the seventh generation from Inachus. They say that Isis was the same as Io, because she wandered over the whole earth. Ister, however, in his book *On the Colony of the Egyptians*, says that she was the daughter of Prometheus. Prometheus was in the time of Triopas, in the seventh generation after Moses; so that Moses appears to have flourished even before the generation of man according to the Greeks ^B.

^{C D}

^A Leo, who wrote on the gods of Egypt, says that Isis is called Demeter by the Greeks, and that she lived in the time of Lynceus, the eleventh generation after Moses. ^B Apis, the king of the Argives, builds Memphis, as Aristippus says in the first book of his *Arcadica*. Aristeas the Argive says that he was named Sarapis, and that he is the one whom the Egyptians worship. Nymphodorus of Amphipolis, in the third book of his *Customs of Asia*, says that when the bull Apis died and was embalmed, it was placed in a "coffin"—which is called *soros* in Greek—in the temple of the deity who was worshiped; and hence it was called Soroapis, and later, by a certain custom of the locals, Sarapis. Now, Apis is the third from Inachus. Furthermore, Latona lived in the time of Tityus:

For Tityus dragged Latona, the glorious wife of Jove.

Tityus, moreover, was a contemporary of Tantalus. It is, therefore, with good reason that Pindar the Boeotian writes: "In time, Apollo was born." And it is no wonder, since it is found that even he served Admetus for hire for a great year, along with Hercules. Zethus and Amphion, the inventors of music, lived around the age of Cadmus. And if ^C anyone should tell us that Phemonoe was the first to utter oracles, we must understand that the human account of these matters is subsequent to the era of Moses. Since we have demonstrated the sequence of times, we must hasten to the rest of the discourse, keeping in view the truth of Scripture. For as we have already shown, the time of the wise men of the Greeks is far later than the exodus of Moses, and even later than the kingdom of David and the other subsequent kings.

^D Thus, the account of the Greeks, being late, seems to be a gathering of some rumors—some taken from the barbarians, and some invented by a vain imagination. For even the oldest of the Greek philosophers, as well as the poets, acknowledge that they gained the most important things from the barbarians. And what is most surprising, they even admit that they were pupils of the prophets of the barbarians. But suffice it, then, to have set these things down at present, in order to clearly demonstrate to those willing to learn that the path of the truth is straight and manifest from the beginning, having been revealed from the first generation, while the wisdom of the Greeks is of recent origin and, as it were, late-born.

^A Let it be granted, however, that twenty-seven years after Phemonoe came Orpheus, Musaeus, and Linus, the teacher of Hercules. Homer and Hesiod were much later than the Trojan era, and long after them came the lawgivers of the Greeks, Lycurgus, Solon, the seven sages, and those around Pherecydes the Syrian, as well as Pythagoras the Great, who all lived much later, around the Olympiads, as we have already shown. Thus, it has been demonstrated to us that Moses is more ancient ^B than most of the gods who are worshipped among the Greeks, and not only than the so-called sages and poets. Nor is he alone in this, for the Sibyl is also said to be older than Orpheus. Regarding her name and the oracles attributed to her, many accounts are given—that she was Phrygian and called Artemis, ^D and that, having come to Delphi, she sang:

O Delphi, servants of Phoebus who strikes from afar, I have come to you to expound the mind of Zeus the aegis-bearer, Being angered at my own brother, Apollo.

There is also another, the Erythraean, who is called Herophile. Heraclides Ponticus mentions them in his book *On Oracles*. I pass over the Egyptian and the Italian, she who lived in Rome ^C as Carmenta, whose son was Evander, who built the temple of Pan in Rome, which is called the Lupercal.

It is worth our while, now that we have arrived at this point, to examine the times of the other prophets who lived among the Hebrews after Moses. After Moses departed this life, Jesus succeeded him as leader of the people, fighting for sixty-five years, and resting in the good land for twenty-five years, as the book of Jesus...

^A This book contains that the aforementioned man succeeded Moses for twenty-seven years (68). Then, the Hebrews having sinned, they were delivered to Chusachar (69), king of Mesopotamia, for eight years, as the book of Judges records. But having later turned back to God, they received as a leader Gothoniel, the younger brother of Chaleb, of the tribe of Judah, who, having killed the king of Mesopotamia, ruled the people for fifty years thereafter (70). And again, having sinned, they were delivered to Eglom, king of the Moabites, for eighteen years. But when they had returned, Aod again led them for eighty years; he was a man who used both hands as the right (71), of the tribe of Ephraim; he is the one who did away with Eglom. After Aod had died, when they had sinned again, they were delivered to Jabim, king of Chanaan, for twenty years; in his time, Debbora, wife of Labidoth, of the tribe of Ephraim, prophesied; and and the high priest was Ozius, son of Rhiesu (72). Through her, Barac, son of Benner, of the tribe of Nephthalim, having led the army and drawn up in battle array against Sisara, the commander of Jabim’s army, was victorious; and from then on, Debbora, judging the people, ruled for forty years. But when she had died, the people having sinned again, were delivered to the Madianites for seven years. After these events, Gedeon, of the tribe of Manasse, son of Joas, having led three hundred into battle and destroyed one hundred and twenty thousand of them, ruled for forty years; after whom his son Achimelech (73) ruled for three years. Boleas (74), son of Bedan, son of Charran, of the tribe of Ephraim, succeeded him, holding the magistracy for twenty-three years. After whom, when the people had sinned again, they were delivered to the Ammanites for eighteen years; but when they had been led to repentance, Jepthe the Galaadite, of the tribe of Manasse, led them; and he ruled for six years. After whom ^C Abatthan (76) of Bethlehem, of the tribe of Judah, ruled. After whom Abiezer, being his son, having taken the honor, left it to his son, named Bochei, and he himself left it to him; from whom Ozis, being his son, received it, after whom Elis held the priesthood. Phinees begat Abisou, Abisou begat Bokki, and Bokki begat Ozi. And Debbora sent and called Barac, son of Abineem, from Cades of Nephthalim. Thalas, son of Phoua, son of his paternal uncle, a man of Issachar, arose after Abimelech to save Israel. And he lived in Samir in the mountain of Ephraim and judged Israel for twenty-three years, and died, and was buried in Samir.

^A Then Ebron the Zebulonite, for eight years. Then Eglom from Ephraim, for eight years. Some, however, add the forty years of Ebron to the seven years of Abatthan. And after him, the people having sinned again, they were subjected to the Philistine aliens for forty years. But upon their return to God, Samson from the tribe of Dan, having conquered the aliens in war, took the lead. He ruled for twenty years. And after him, there being an interregnum, the priest Eli judged the people for forty years. Samuel the prophet succeeded him; under whom Saul reigned, having held the kingdom for twenty-seven years. He anointed David as well. Now Samuel died two years before Saul, during the high priesthood of Abimelech. He ^B anointed Saul to be king, who first reigned over Israel after the judges; the total number of whom, up to Samuel, comes to four hundred sixty-three years and seven months. Then, through the first book of Kings, Saul is said to have reigned for twenty years after his renewal. But after the death of Saul, David, the son of Jesse, from the tribe of Judah, reigned for the second time in Hebron for forty years, as the second book of Kings contains. And the high priest was Abiathar, the son of Abimelech, of the kin of Eli. Gad and Nathan prophesied in his time. Thus, there are from Joshua, son of Nun, until David received the kingdom, according to some, four hundred fifty years; but as the proposed chronology shows, there are gathered five hundred twenty-three years and seven months, until the death of David. And after this, Solomon, the son of David, reigned for forty years. In his time Nathan continued to prophesy, who also exhorted him regarding the building of the ^C temple; likewise, Achias from Shiloh also prophesied. Both kings, David and Solomon, were also prophets. And Sadoc, the high priest, was the first to serve in the temple which Solomon built, being the eighth from Aaron, the first high priest. There are therefore from Moses until the age of Solomon, as some say, five hundred ^D

ninety-five years; but as others, five hundred seventy-six. If, however, anyone should add to those years which are from Jesus to David, four hundred and fifty years, the forty years during which Moses was leader, and the other eighty years which Moses had lived before the exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt had occurred, and were to add to these the forty years of the reign of David, he will collect ^A in all six hundred and ten years. But ^B our chronology proceeds more accurately and perfectly if, to the five hundred and twenty-three years and seven months until the death of David, one should add the one hundred and twenty years of Moses and the forty of Solomon. For he will collect in all, until the death of Solomon, six hundred and eighty-three years and seven months. Hiram ^B gives his own daughter to Solomon, at the time when, after the taking of Troy, Menelaus came to Phoenicia, as says Menander ^A the Pergamenian, and Laetus in the *Phoenician History*. After Solomon, Roboam, his son, reigns seventeen years; and the high priest was Abimelech, the son of Sadoc. In his time, the kingdom being divided, Jeroboam, of the tribe of Ephraim, a slave of Solomon, reigns in Samaria; and Ahijah the Shilonite ^B still prophesies, as does Samaeas, the son of Amame, and he who went forth from Judah to Roboam and prophesied ^B at the altar. After this man reigns...

ANNOTATIONS TO CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA

(84) Ninety-five, or as others, five hundred and seventy-six. [From] the departure of the Jews from Egypt to the temple built by Solomon, the years are numbered as five hundred and sixty-six from the Tyrian commentaries by Theophilus to Autolycus, book II, p. 111, Paris edition.

(85) Hiram. He is called Hieramus, Cheiramus, Eiramus, Theiramus among the LXX interpreters in III Kings 4:1. Josephus calls him Eiramus, Theophilus calls him Cheiramus, and in other places he is also called Eiramus; in the *Chronicon Alexandrinum*, p. 91, where Du Fresne notes that only Clement of Alexandria mentions that he gave his own daughter to Solomon in marriage. But truly Clement took the things which he relates here from Tatian, or at least both took them from the same authors. The words of Tatian are these, *Orat. ad Graecos*, p. 128: "There were among the Phoenicians three men: Theodotus, Hypsicrates, and Mochus; their books were translated into the Greek tongue by Chaetus, who also accurately wrote the biographies of the philosophers. Furthermore, in their histories it is indicated that under a certain king the carrying off of Europe occurred, and that Menelaus arrived in Phoenicia; and mention is made of King Chiramus, who gave his daughter in marriage to Solomon, king of the Jews, and donated all kinds of wood for the construction of the temple." Menander the Pergamenian also testifies to these same things in his writings. Eusebius in the *Chronicle*: "Solomon married the daughter of Iramus, king of the Tyrians, as Tatian reports." The same again in the *Epitome of Times*: "Iramus was king of the Tyrians, whose daughter Solomon married, as Tatian reports": see the notes added to Tatian regarding the things just said.

(87) Laetus is he whom Tatian erroneously calls Xaitos, and Eusebius, reciting his words, calls Aitos. Conf. besides the notes to Tatian, Bochart, *Chanaan*, lib. II, cap. 17, and Reinesius, *De lingua Punica*, cap. 12.

(88) Abimelech. Eusebius in the *Chronicle*, describing the times, says: "The Hebrew priest Abimelech flourished at this time. Ahijah, Samaeas, and he who prophesied against the altar in Samaria, were prophets." Those things which pertain to the prophets are repeated in the Chronological Canon: in both places, however, he mistakenly attributes the Bethelitic altar to Samaria.

(89) Samaeas son of Amame, and "he who from Judah," so that they are distinct men: Samaeus, and he who went out from Judah and prophesied against the Bethelitic altar. Eusebius distinguishes them in the places already mentioned. Hervetus translates thus: "Samæas son of Amanæ, who also went out from Judah, etc.," as if Samæas were he who had gone out from Judah to Jeroboam, as if the text were "ho kai [which also]," just as it is written in Tatian in the words recently mentioned, for which some assign to this prophet the name Samæas, Sameas, Semeias, or Senieias. Tertullian, *De jejuniis*, cap. 6: "Samaeas, the man of God, having prophesied the outcome of the idolatry introduced by King Jeroboam, after the hand of that king was withered and immediately restored, etc." There are others, indeed, who call him Adonias, Jadon, Addo, Oded, etc., and distinguish him from Samæas. Regarding which opinions, compare what Cotelerius has noted to the *Apostolic Constitutions*, lib. IV. Cotelerius, in the place already cited, says: "The interpreter of Clement of Alexandria has slipped significantly when he translates those words thus: 'Who also went out from Judah to Ro...'"

'" ^A Abias, his son, twenty-three years; and likewise his son Asaman. He suffered from gout in his old age. In his time, Jehu, son of Ananias, prophesied. After him, Josaphat, his son, reigned five years. In his time, Elias the Thesbite, and Michaeas, son of Iebla, and Abdias, son of Ananias, prophesied. In the time of Michaeas, there was also a false prophet, Sedecias, son of Chanaan. Following these is the reign of Joram, son of Josaphat, for eight years; in whose time Elias prophesied, and after Elias, Eliseus, son of Saphat. In his time, those in Samaria ate the dung of a dove, and their own children. The period of Josaphat extends from the last part of the third book of Kings to the fourth. In the time of Joram, Elias was taken up; and Eliseus, son of Saphat, began to prophesy, for six years—of which years he was forty years old. Then Ochozias reigned for one year; in his time, Eliseus was still prophesying, and with him Abdadonaeus. After him, the mother of Ozias, Gotholia, reigned for eight years, having killed the children of her brother; for she was of the race of Achab. But the sister of Ozias, ^B Jesabaea, stole away the son of Ozias, Joas, and later conferred the kingdom upon him. In the time of this Gotholia, Eliseus was still prophesying; after whom reigned, as I said before, Joas, who was saved by Jesabaea, the wife of Jodaes the high priest; and he lived for a full forty years. Consequently, from Solomon to the death of the prophet Eliseus, the years amount to, as some say, one hundred and five; but as others, one hundred and two; as the preceding passage reveals... ^C

(91) Abias: Theophilus, Abias three years. Eusebius, Praeparat. evangel. Which he also said twice in the Chronicle; and the authority of Holy Scripture confirms it. He whom Clement calls Asaman is called Asa by others, and it is reported that he reigned forty-one years. Whence it happens that Clement’s times closely approximate those which have been numbered by the others. For the sacred codices and Eusebius grant three years to Abias and forty-one to Asa, forty-four for both. Theophilus grants seven to Abias, forty-one to Asa, forty-eight for both. Clement, however, grants twenty-three years to Abias, and the same to Asa; and thus forty-six for both.

(92) Five years: Lowth correctly noted, writing that it is twenty-five years. For all agree that the reign of Josaphat lasted twenty-five years.

(94) Abdadonaeus: To be read "Abdadonaeus," that is, Azarias, or as some read, II Paralip. xv, 1. Lowth. A certain learned man warned that this is Obadias, and that the name is composed of "Obdi" and "Adonai," which is "servant of God," not noticing that Clement, a little further below, distinguishes Abdias, or Obadias, from Abdadonaeus. Scaliger, in *Hist. Synag.* published with Eusebius’s Chronicle, page 517: These things, of course, like many others, are borrowed by Clement... ^D Obadias is also mentioned by Epiphanius, or whoever the author of the *Catalogue of the Prophets* was, which Cotelerius published from a Royal manuscript in his notes to the *Apostolic Constitutions*, book IV, cap. 6: in which place Abdadon is far removed from Eliseus, with whom Clement joined him. For his mother was Athalia. Theophilus, who substituted "man" for "woman," is to be corrected. Athalia, Joas is said to have succeeded her, II Paral. xxii, 1, and the following; IV Reg. xi, and following, says Eusebius both in the *Chronicle* and in *Praeparat. evangel.*, Theophilus. Among the LXX interpreters, in the aforementioned place of Kings, it is said that Athalia reigned six years, and that Joas succeeded her in the seventh year; and II Paralip. xxii, 12, Joas is said to have been hidden for six years, and Gotholia on earth. But he seems to have led Clement into error, because II Paral. xxiii, 1, Joas is said to have been restored to the kingdom by the priest Joda within the "eighth year."

(97) Children of the brother: But Athalia is not recorded to have killed any from the stock of Achab, the Israelite king, from whom she was descended. It should therefore have been written "the children of her son." For she killed all the children of her son, Ahazia, one by one, except Joas, who reigned after her. Conf. IV Reg. xi, 1; II Paralip. xxii, 10.

^A Some say one hundred and five; but others, one hundred and two; but as the proposed chronology shows, from the reign of Solomon there are one hundred and eighty-one years. And from the Trojan times 99 until the birth of Homer, according to Philochorus, there are one hundred and eighty years, after the Ionian colony. 1 Aristarchus, however, in his *Commentaries on Archilochus*, says that he is to be taken as living at the time of the Ionian migration, which happened one hundred and forty years after the Trojan times. 2 Apollodorus, however, [places him] one hundred years after the Ionian migration, when Agesilaus, son of Doryssus, was king of the Lacedaemonians; so that Lycurgus, the lawgiver, might coincide with him, while he was still a youth. Euthymenes, in his *Chronicles*, says he flourished with Hesiod during the time of Acastus in Chios, occurring about the two-hundredth year after the capture of Troy; and this belongs to ^B the glory [of those times], and Archemachus in his third book of the *Euboica* [states] that both he himself and Hesiod and the prophet Elisha 4 were younger. And if one wishes to follow the grammarian Crates 5 and speak concerning

The Return of the Heracleidae

99 *From the Trojan times.* Tatian likewise in his *Oration against the Greeks*: "Homer flourished after the Ionian migration, in the archonship of Archippus at Athens, one hundred and eighty years after the Trojan events." [...] "After the Ionian migration forty years, in the archonship of Arxippus at Athens... one hundred and eighty years after the Ionian migration." Let Moses and Homer be set as our boundaries, in that each of them is more ancient: the one being senior to all poets and historians, the other the progenitor of all barbarian wisdom.

1 *Aristarchus.* The same discrepancy is found. For Tatian and Clement say that Aristarchus established the Ionian migration at the one hundred and fortieth year after the Trojan destruction, but Eusebius in his *Chronicle* says the one hundredth only. The same is read in the manuscripts.

2 *Apollodorus.* Tatian, or those around Apollodorus, [say] two hundred and fifty years after the Trojan events, but in the Basle edition there is added in the margin another reading, which agrees with Clement: "two hundred and forty years after the capture of Ilium." In Eusebius, *Praeparatio* x, ^C the same things are more correctly cited. Nor does it depart from the *Chronicle* when writing: "Apollodorus the Athenian, two hundred and forty years after the sack of Ilium." Furthermore, "when Agesilaus, son of Doryssus," was — in the Greek text, Eusebius in his *Chronicle* around the times of Rehoboam, son of Solomon, counts the fifth king of the Lacedaemonians as Doristhus, and then the sixth as Agesilaus. More correctly in Pausanias, in his *Laconica*: "Now those who succeeded to the throne from this family are Doryssus, son of Labotas, and Agesilaus, son of Doryssus." Thus, therefore, it must be written in the *Chronicle* and in Clement, unless you wish to retain that as a patronymic.

^D 3 *Lycurgus.* Plutarch in the beginning of his *Life of Lycurgus* reports that Lycurgus was not far from the times of Homer; and some even record a meeting with him. Strabo, *Geography* x, p. 482, says the same, [stating] that he met with Homer, as some suppose, when he was dwelling in Chios. Cicero, *Tusculan Disputations* v, cap. 3: "It is handed down that Homer lived in the times of Lycurgus."

4 *Elisha.* ...in *Histor. Synag.*

5 *Crates.* Concerning the return of the Heracleidae, cited here, "the return," elsewhere more correctly Hervetus [reads] "the descent." Eusebius in the *Chronicle*: "Some, among whom is Crates, place him before the descent of the Heracleidae."

to say that Homer lived eighty years after the fall of Troy, he will again be found to have lived later than Solomon, in whose time occurred the arrival of Menelaus in Phoenicia, as has been said before. Eratosthenes, however, assigns the age of Homer to the hundredth year after the fall of Troy. ^A Indeed, Theopompus, in the forty-third book of his *Philippics*, recounts that Homer lived five hundred years after those who campaigned at Ilium. Euphorion, in his work *On the Aliades*, places him in the time of Gyges, who began to reign from the eighteenth Olympiad; he also says that he was the first to be called a tyrant. Sosibius the Laconian, in his *Chronographical Register*, places Homer in the eighth year of the reign of Charillus, son of Polydectes. Now Charillus reigned for sixty-four years, after whom his son Nicander reigned for thirty-nine years; and he says that the first ^B Olympiad was established in the thirty-fourth year of his reign, so that Homer lived about ninety years before the institution of the Olympic games. After Joas, the kingdom was succeeded by his son Amasias, for thirty-nine years. Ozias, his son, likewise followed him for fifty-two years; and he died a leper. During his time, Amos and Isaiah prophesied.

^C Regarding these, those who follow Crates say that he flourished before the return of the Heraclidae, within eighty years after the Trojan War. Those who follow Eratosthenes say one hundred years after the fall of Troy. Others have brought down the times still further, saying that Homer lived at the same time as Archilochus; but Archilochus flourished around the twenty-third Olympiad, in the time of Gyges the Lydian, five hundred years after the Iliac events. Some have said that he lived before the Olympiads. ^D

^A His son also, and Hosea the son of Beeri, and Jonas the son of Amathi, who was from Geth Chober, who preached to the Ninevites, who came forth from the belly of the whale. Then Jonathan, the son of Ozias, reigns for sixteen years. In his time, Isaiah and Hosea and Micah the Morasthite, and Joel the son of Bathuel were still prophesying. Him his son Achaz succeeds for sixteen years. In his time, in the fifteenth year, Israel was led away into Babylon; and Shalmanasar, the king of the Assyrians, resettled those who dwelt in Samaria among the Medes and Babylonians. Achaz is again succeeded by Osee for eight years. Then Ezechias for twenty-nine years. To him, on account of his holiness, when he had reached the end of his life, God granted through Isaiah to live another fifteen years, by the reversion of the sun. ^B Up to this point the prophets Isaiah, and Hosea, and Micah extended their ministry. But these are said to have lived after the age of Lycurgus, the legislator of the Lacedaemonians; for Dieuchidas, in the fourth book of his *Megarica*, places the peak of Lycurgus around the two hundred and ninetieth year after the capture of Troy. Isaiah, however, is seen to have been prophesying from the reign of Solomon—in whose time it was shown that Menelaus came into Phoenicia—up to the two hundredth year, and with him Micah, and Hosea, and Joel the son of Bathuel. After Ezechias, his son Manasses reigns for fifty-five years; then his son Amos for two years; after whom reigned his son Josias, the most observant of the law and of justice, for thirty-one years. ^C He placed "the limbs of men upon the limbs of idols," just as it is written in Leviticus. In his time, in the eighteenth year, the Passover was celebrated, such as had not been kept from the time of Samuel to that day.

^A Then also Chelcias the priest, the father of the prophet Jeremiah, having chanced upon the book of the Law laid up in the temple, read it and departed this life. In his time Huldah, and Zephaniah, and Jeremiah prophesied. In the time of Jeremiah, Ananias the son of Josias becomes a false prophet. He, having disobeyed Jeremiah the prophet, was slain by Nechao, king of Egypt, by the river Euphrates, when he encountered him as he was marching against the Assyrians ^B. Josias is succeeded by Jechonias, and Joachas his son, for three months and ten days. Him Nechao, king of Egypt, having bound, led away into Egypt, having appointed in his stead as king his brother Joakim, at a tribute of the land, for eleven years. After him, his namesake Joakim reigns for three months. Then Sedecias, for eleven years; and until him the prophecy of Jeremiah continues; but Buzi also, and Urias the son of Samaeas, and Habakkuk with him, prophesy; and the period of the Hebrew kings comes to an end. There are therefore from the birth of Moses until this migration, as some say, nine hundred and seventy-two years; but according to the accurate chronography, one thousand and eighty-five years, six months, ten days; and from the reign of David until the captivity, which was brought about by the Chaldeans, four hundred and fifty-two years, six months; but as the accuracy of the times according to us ^C gathers, four hundred and eighty-two years, six months, and ten days. And in the twelfth year of ^D

^A the reign of Sedecias, Nabuchodonosor, seventy years before the principality of the Persians, made war against the Phoenicians and the Jews, as Berosus says in his Chaldean Histories. Joabas, writing ^B concerning the Assyrians, confesses that he received the history from Berosus, testifying to the truth of the man. Therefore, Nabuchodonosor, having blinded Sedecias, carries him off to Babylon and moves the entire nation into foreign lands (and the captivity lasts for seventy years), except for a few who fled into Egypt. Jeremiah and Habacuc also continued to prophesy in the time of Sedecias. In the fifth year of his reign in Babylon, Ezechiel prophesied, and after him the prophet Nahum, then Daniel. Again, after this, Haggai and Zacharias prophesied in the time of Darius the First, for two years, after whom came the messenger among the twelve. After Haggai and Zacharias, Nehemias, the chief cupbearer of Artaxerxes, a son of Acheli the Israelite, builds the city of Jerusalem and repairs the temple. In this captivity, Esther and Mardochæus appear, whose book is preserved, as is also that of the Maccabees. During this same captivity, Misael, Ananias, and Azarias, not wishing to worship the image, were cast into a furnace of fire and were saved through the appearance of an angel. Then, because of the dragon, Daniel, having been thrown into a den of lions, was fed by the providence of God through Habacuc and was saved after seven days. ^C Here also Berosus, a Babylonian man and priest of Bel among them, who lived in the time of Alexander, having arranged the history of the Chaldeans in three books for Antiochus, who was third after Alexander, and having set forth the accounts of the kings, tells the name of one of them, Nabuchodonosor, who made war upon the Phoenicians and the Jews; these events ^D we know were heralded by our prophets, having happened long after the age of Moses, seventy years before the hegemony of the Persians. Now Berosus is a most capable witness, and a proof of this is that Juba, writing about the Assyrians, says that he learned the history from Berosus.

^A And he was nourished by divine Providence, and was saved on the seventh ^B day. Here also occurred the sign of Jonah, and Tobias, through the agency of Raphael the angel, takes Sarah as his wife, after the demon had destroyed the first seven suitors; and after the marriage of Tobias, his father Tobit recovers his sight. Here Zorobabel, having overcome his adversaries by wisdom, happens to have bought from Darius the renovation of Jerusalem, and returns with Esdras to his ancestral land, through whom the redemption of the people occurs, and the recognition of the divinely inspired oracles, and the restoration of the scriptures, and the saving Passover is celebrated, and the dissolution of the foreign intermarriage takes place. ^C Cyrus had also previously proclaimed the restoration of the Hebrews. The promise having been fulfilled in the time of Darius, the feast of the Dedication is celebrated, just as also in the case of the Tabernacles. And all the years, together with those of the captivity until the restoration of the people, from the birth of Moses, come to one thousand one hundred and fifty-five years, six months, and ten days; and from the kingdom of David, to three hundred and fifty-two years, as some say; but as more accurately calculated, five hundred and seventy-two years, six months, and ten days. ^D Therefore, there have been fulfilled from the captivity which befell them in Babylon in the time of Jeremiah the prophet, the things spoken by Daniel the prophet which are as follows: "Seventy weeks have been cut short upon thy people, and upon the holy city, in order that sin may be finished, and that sins may be sealed, and that iniquities may be wiped out, and that he may make expiation, and that he may bring in everlasting righteousness, and seal the vision and the prophet, and anoint the Most Holy; and thou shalt know and understand from the going forth of the command to answer, and to build Jerusalem, until Christ the leader, seven weeks, and weeks...

and it shall turn, and it shall be built, a plaza and wall; and the times shall be emptied; and after the sixty-two weeks, the chrisma shall be destroyed, and there shall be no judgment in it; and he shall destroy the city and the sanctuary with the leader that is coming. And they shall be cut off in a flood, and unto the end of the war, ^A shortened by devastations. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the middle of the week, my sacrifice and libation shall be taken away; and upon the temple, the abomination of desolations, and until the consummation of time, a consummation shall be given upon the desolation. And in the middle of the week, he shall cause to cease the incense of sacrifice, and [of] the wing of devastation until the consummation and the order of devastation. That the temple was built in seven weeks is clear; for it is written in Ezra. And thus Christ became king of the Jews and leader, as the seven weeks were completed, in Jerusalem; and throughout the sixty-two weeks all Judea was at peace, and it was without wars; and our Lord Christ, ^B the «Holy of holies,» having come and fulfilled the vision and the prophet, was anointed in the flesh by the Spirit of his Father; in these sixty-two weeks, as the prophet said.

^A For Nero reigning held the half of that hebdomad, and in the holy city of Jerusalem he set up the abomination; and in the half of the hebdomad he himself was also taken off, as were Otho, Galba, and Vitellius. But Vespasian gained power, and he took Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place. And that these things are so, is clear to him who is able to understand, as the prophet also has said.

When the eleventh year, therefore, was being completed, at the beginning of the following one, while Joachim was reigning, the captivity into Babylon takes place under king Nebuchadnezzar, in the seventh year of his reign over the Assyrians, and in the second year of Vaphres reigning over the Egyptians, and while Philippus was archon at Athens, in the first year of the forty-eighth Olympiad. And the captivity remained... ^{B C} The seventy hebdomads, however, which are in Daniel, until Christ the leader, if anyone should count from that time, he would find them to be four hundred and ninety years, ending at Nero, the Roman emperor, under whom the city began to be besieged; and after Nero, in the second year, it undergoes its final capture by Vespasian. ^D Galba, and Otho, Behold I give Pharaoh Vaphres, king of Egypt, into the hands of his enemy. Vaphres reigning.

^A the captivity for seventy years, ending in the second year of Darius 64 the son of Hystaspes, who was king of the Persians, Assyrians, and Egyptians; in whose time, as I said before, Haggai and Zechariah, and the Angel who was one of the twelve, prophesied; and the high priest was Jesus, the son of Josedec. And in the second year of the reign of Darius, whom Herodotus 65 says terminated the rule of the Magi, Zerubbabel the son of Salathiel is sent to raise up and adorn the temple which was in Jerusalem. Therefore the times of the Persians are also collected thus: Cyrus, thirty years 66; Cambyses, nineteen 67; Darius, forty-six 68; Xerxes, twenty-six; Artaxerxes, forty-one; Darius, eight 69; Artaxerxes, forty-two; Ochus or Arses, ^B three 70. There are gathered together for the total of Persian years two hundred and thirty-five 71. And when Alexander the Macedonian had struck down this Darius according to the aforementioned years, he begins his reign; likewise, therefore, the times of the Macedonian kings are also calculated thus: Alexander, eighteen years 72; Ptolemy 73 the son of Lagus 74, forty years; Ptolemy Philadelphus, twenty-seven years 75; then the son always from the father, Philopator, of Agathoclea, the second Evergetes, ^C if he is also called Physcon. Ochus, or, misled by the similarity of names or by a lapse of memory, [Clement] omitted [him]; as he also omitted Darius, the son of Arses, the last of the kings of Persia, who, when he had reigned for six years, was conquered by Alexander, as follows immediately.

71 Two hundred and thirty-five. Sixteen rather, as the numbers now stand. 72 Eighteen. Twelve, Eusebius and others. 73 Ptolemy the son of Lagus. Because the cognomens of the Ptolemies of the Lagid line were various, it has happened that historians do not agree in enumerating them. Most agree from the son of Lagus up to Philometor, such as Tertullian, Eusebius, Epiphanius (except that the latter calls him Philopator), and Strabo, who says that those kings succeeded in turn (διαδεχόμενοι), up to Philometor. Third, Evergetes, is also called Epiphanes in the prologues of Trogus published with Justin; for so I read that word. Fourth, Strabo's, of whom Justin book xxx. Fifth, his son Epiphanes, to whom M. Lepidus was given as tutor by the Romans, the husband of Cleopatra, the sister of Antiochus Epiphanes. Sixth, Philometor, whom Popilius protected against Antiochus. Strabo: "His brother succeeded him." He killed his brother's son. Justin book xxxvi. Therefore Evergetes and Physcon and Soter are the same [person], the brother of Philometor, not two, as learned men with Eusebius wish. Seventh, ^D his son Lathyrus, surnamed by Strabo, Latyros in the prologue of Trogus xxxix, Lathyrus by others, whom his mother cast out. Eighth, Alexander, the ninth according to Eusebius, of whom I read thus in a manuscript: "Physcon Ptolemy having been expelled from the kingdom by his mother Cleopatra, and withdrawing to Cyprus, Ptolemy, who is also Alexander, succeeds." Ninth, Lathyrus again, of whom Eusebius is to be read thus: "Ptolemy, who had been cast out by his mother, having returned from flight, obtained the kingdom, because the citizens had driven out Alexander, who had been before him, on account of the killing of his mother." Tenth, his son, whom Strabo calls Auletes, Eusebius Dionysius. Others consider Dionysius to be the brother of Cleopatra; but because he did not reign for long, he is omitted by others together with Nothus and Alexander II. Collect.

Collectively, then, the times of the Macedonian kings amount to three hundred and twelve years and eighteen days. ^A It is evident, therefore, that those who prophesied in the second year of the reign of Darius, the son of Hystaspes—namely, Haggai and Zechariah, and the Angel among the twelve prophets—having prophesied in the first year of the forty-eighth Olympiad, were older than Pythagoras, who is assigned to the sixty-second Olympiad; and than Thales, who was the most ancient of the Greek sages, living around the fiftieth Olympiad. Now, the sages listed with Thales were his contemporaries, as Andron states in his *Tripod*. For Heraclitus, being later than Pythagoras, mentions him in his writings. Hence, it is beyond controversy that the first Olympiad is older than the age of the prophets mentioned above, and of those called the Seven Sages, and that it is shown to be four hundred and seven years later than the Trojan wars. ^B It is easy, therefore, to perceive that Solomon, who lived at the time of Menelaus (who was of the Trojan era), was many years older than the Greek sages. Moreover, by how many years Moses precedes him has been shown by us in what was said previously. Alexander, surnamed Polyhistor, in his work concerning the Jews, transcribed some letters of Solomon to Vaphres, the king of Egypt, and to the king of the Phoenician Tyrians, and theirs to Solomon, in which it is shown that Vaphres sent him eighty thousand Egyptian men for the building of the temple, and the other ^C sent as many, with a Tyrian architect by a Jewish mother, from the tribe of David, as is written there, whose name was Hyperon. Furthermore, Onomacritus the Athenian, whose poems are said to be those inscribed to Orpheus, flourished ^D during the sovereignty…

^A of the Pisistratidae, around the fiftieth Olympiad. Orpheus was the disciple of Musaeus, who sailed with Hercules. But Amphion precedes the events of the Trojan war by two generations. Demodocus and Phemius lived at the time of the Trojan war; for the one spent his time among the suitors, and the other among the Phaeacians, and they were held in great esteem because of their skill in playing the cithara.

Now, concerning the responses that are said to be Musaeus’, they say they are those of Onomacritus; the Crater of Orpheus, they say, is by Zopyrus of Heraclea; and the Descent into the Underworld is by Prodicus of Chios. Ion of Chios, in his *Trigrammi*, reports that Pythagoras also attributed certain things to Orpheus. Epigenes, in the works he wrote concerning the poetry attributed to Orpheus, says that the Descent into the Underworld and the Sacred Oration are the work of Cercops the Pythagorean, while the Peplum and the Physica are by Brontinus. Moreover, some also reckon Terpander among the ancients; Hellanicus, at any rate, places him during the time of the Pisistratidae, around the fiftieth Olympiad. ^B Orpheus, who sailed with Hercules, was the disciple of Musaeus. And regarding Amphion, it was not necessary to say more than that it is agreed he flourished two generations before the Trojan war. Furthermore, Demodocus and Phemius were famous during the war itself: for the latter spent his time among the suitors, and the former among the Phaeacians. ^C And as for those writings attributed to Musaeus, they say they are by Onomacritus; the *Cratera* of Orpheus, they say, is by Zopyrus; and the *Descent into the Underworld* is by Prodicus of Perinthus.

Moreover, Ion of Chios in his *Trigrammi* records that Pythagoras, having composed a certain poem, attributed it to Orpheus. Epigenes, in his treatise on the poetry of Orpheus, says that the *Descent into the Underworld* and the *Sacred Oration* are by Cercops the Pythagorean; as for the *Peplum* and the *Physica*, they are by Brontinus. ^D

*Odyssey*, book I, verse 153: The herald placed the beautiful cithara in the hands of Phemius, who sang among the suitors by compulsion.

*Odyssey*, book VIII, verse 43: Summon the divine singer, Demodocus: for to him truly has God given the song, sweet and excellent, to delight us in whatever way the spirit moves him to sing.

^A Likewise, some also treat Terpander as an ancient; Hellanicus, at any rate, records that he lived in the time of Midas. Phanias, however, putting Lesches the Lesbian before Terpander, considers Terpander to be younger than Archilochus, and says that Lesches competed with Arctinus and won. Xanthus the Lydian [places them] around the eighteenth Olympiad; but as Dionysius says, Thasos was founded about the fifteenth Olympiad, so that it is evident that Archilochus was known after the twentieth Olympiad. He mentions, at any rate, the destruction of the Magnetes, as having happened recently. Simonides, then, is considered to be of the time of Archilochus; but Callinus is not much earlier, for Archilochus mentions the Magnetes as having perished, while [Callinus] mentions them as prospering. Eumelus of Corinth, being older, is said to have met Archias, who founded Syracuse. We have been led to say these things, because [people] generally place the poets of the Cycle ^B among the very ancients. Furthermore, there are current among the Greeks many reported to have been oracles, such as the Bacides and Dictys—and these are assigned to Zopyrus of Heraclea, or, as others say, to Brotinus. ^C That Thasos is also called Aeria is clear from the oracle given to the father of Archilochus: "Tell the Parians, Telesicles, as I command you, to build an illustrious city in the island of Aeria." From there was Archilochus the poet; and Thasos was founded by the Parians. ^D The Epic Cycle also treats of the so-called Epic Cycle; how it begins from the mythical union of Heaven and Earth, from which are born three hundred-handed children, and two others are brought forth, the Cyclopes. It proceeds concerning the gods, and other things mythologized by the Greeks, and if anywhere anything touching upon history is clarified. And the Epic Cycle is completed, being collected from various poets, up to the arrival of Odysseus in Ithaca. He says that the poems of the Epic Cycle are preserved and studied by the many, not so much for their excellence as for the sequence of the events in them. He also gives the names and the homelands of those who composed the Epic Cycle. There were three Bacides: one was an Attic one, who was a seer, another was a Locrian, and the third was a Boeotian. Similarly there are three Bacides: one from Heleon in Boeotia, one an Athenian, and one an Arcadian.

^A The one, indeed, is Boeotian, the other Arcadian, and many have foretold many things to many people. By the counsel of the Athenian Amphilytus, Pisistratus also strengthened his tyranny, when he had pointed out to him the time for the attack. Let there be silence regarding Cometes the Cretan, Cinyras the Cyprian, Admetus the Thessalian, Aristaeus the Cyrenaean, Amphiaraus the Athenian, Timozeus the Corcyraean, Demaenetus the Phocian, Epigenes the Thespian, Nicias the Carystian, Aristo the Thessalian, Dionysius the Carthaginian, Cleophon the Corinthian, and Hippo, daughter of Chiron, and Boeo, and Manto, and the multitude of the Sibyls—the Samian, the Colophonian, the Cumaean, the Erythraean, the Phyto, the Taraxandra, the Macetian, the Thessalian, the Thesprotian; and again Calchas and Mopsus, who lived in the times of the Trojan War; but Mopsus was older, as one who had sailed with the Argonauts. They say that Battus the Cyrenaean composed the work called the *Divination* of Mopsus; and Dorotheus in his first *Pandect* relates that Mopsus heard the alcyone and the crow. ^B Pythagoras the Great also always paid attention to prescience, as did Abaris the Hyperborean, and Aristaeus the Proconnesian, and Epimenides the Cretan, who came to Sparta, and Zoroaster the Mede, and Empedocles the Agrigentine, and Phormio the Lacon; and indeed Polyaratus the Thasian, and Empedotimus the Syracusan, and after these, especially Socrates the Athenian. "For I have," he says in the *Theages*, "by divine lot, a certain demonic sign that has accompanied me from childhood. This is a voice, which, whenever it occurs, holds me back from what I am about to do, but it never urges me on." And Execestus, the tyrant of the Phocians, wearing two enchanted rings, understood the timing of his actions by the sound they made against each other. Yet he died murdered, even though the sound had given him prior warning, as Aristotle says in the *Constitutions of the Phocians*. ^C But even among the men of old in Egypt, in the opinion of men,

^A there were gods: Hermes the Theban and Asclepius the Memphite. And again Tiresias and Manto in Thebes, as Euripides says. Now Helenus and Laocoon, and Oenone and Brenus in Ilium. For Crenus, one of the Heraclidae, is reported to have been a famous seer; and another, Iamus, in Elis, from whom the Iamidae; and Polyidus in Argos and Megara, of whom tragedy makes mention. What need is there for me to recount Telemus, who, being a prophet of the Cyclopes, foretold to Polyphemus the things that would come to pass during the wandering of Odysseus? Or Onomacritus of Athens? Or Amphiaraus, who, with the seven who marched against Thebes, is reported to have lived one generation before the capture of Troy? Or Theoclymenus in Cephallenia? Or Telmessus in Caria, or Galeus in Sicily? In addition to these there may have been others: Idmon, who was with the Argonauts; Phemonoe the Delphic; Mopsus, son of Apollo and Manto, in Pamphylia; and Amphilochus, son of Amphiaraus, in Cilicia; Alcmeon among the Acarnanians; Anias in Delos; and Aristander of Telmessus, who was with Alexander. Furthermore, Philochorus in the first book of his *On Divination* records that Orpheus was a seer. ^B Theopompus, and Ephorus, and Timaeus write of a certain prophet named Orthagoras, just as Pythocles the Samian does in the fourth book of his *Italica*, regarding Gaius Julius Nepos. But as for those others, they are "all thieves and robbers," as the Scripture says, having foretold most things by observation and by probabilities, just as do the physiognomists, physicians, and seers; others, however, are stirred by demons, or are deranged by waters, ^C and incenses, and by the quality of the air. But among the Hebrews, the prophets [spoke] by the power and inspiration of God. For example, Adam, before the Law, foretold both what concerned the woman and the naming of the animals; and Noah, who preached repentance; and Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, who clearly foretold no small number of future things. ^D

^A In the time of the Law, Moses and Aaron; after whom prophesied Jesus the son of Nave, Samuel, Gad, Nathan, Achias, Samæas, Jehu, Elias, Michæas, Abdiu, Elisæus, Abdadonai, Amos, Isaias, Osee, Jonas, Joel, Jeremias, Sophonias the son of Buzi, Ezechiel, Urias, Ambacum, Nahum, Daniel, Misael who was over the accounts, Aggeus, Zacharias, and Angelus, who was one of the twelve. All the prophets, then, are thirty-five. And of the women (for they also prophesied), Sara, and Rebecca, and Maria, Debbora, and Olda. Then, about the same times, John prophesied until the saving baptism; and after the birth of Christ, Anna and Simeon. For Zacharias, the father of John, is said in the Gospels to have prophesied even before the child.

From Moses, then, let us gather the chronology according to the Greeks. From the birth of Moses to the exodus of the Jews from Egypt, it is eighty years; and until his death, another forty. The exodus occurred in the time of Inachus, before the Sothiac revolution; for Moses went out from Egypt four hundred and forty-five years earlier. ^B From the leadership of Moses and Inachus to the flood of Deucalion—I mean the second deluge—and the conflagration of Phaethon, which happened in the time of Crotopus, forty generations are counted; yet three generations are reckoned to the count of a hundred years. From the flood to the burning of Ida, the invention of iron, and the Idæan Dactyls, it is seventy-three years, as Thrasyllus says; and from the burning of Ida to the abduction of Ganymedes, sixty-five years. From thence to the expedition of Perseus, when Glaucus also established the Isthmian games for Melicertes, fifteen years; and from the expedition of Perseus to the founding of Troy, thirty-four years. ^C Thence to the voyage of the ship which is called Argo, sixty-four years. From that time to Theseus and the Minotaur, thirty-two years; then to the seven who attacked Thebes, ten years. To the Olympic contest, which Hercules established for Pelops, three years; and to the expedition of the Amazons against Athens, and

to the abduction of Helen by Theseus, nine years. From then until the apotheosis of Hercules, eleven years; then to the abduction of Helen [(21)] by Alexander, four years. From the capture of Troy [(22)] to the descent of Aeneas and the founding of Lavinium, ten years; and to the reign of Ascanius, eight years; and to the return of the Heraclidae, sixty-one years; and to the Olympiad of Iphitus, three hundred and thirty-eight years [(25)]. Eratosthenes describes the times thus: “From the capture of Troy to the return of the Heraclidae, eighty years [(24)]. From then to the founding of Ionia, sixty years. As to what follows these, to the guardianship of Lycurgus, one hundred and fifty-nine years; and to the year preceding the first Olympic games, one hundred and eight years.” From this Olympiad to the crossing of Xerxes, two hundred and ninety-seven years; from which ^B to the beginning of the Peloponnesian War, forty-eight years; and to the collapse and defeat of the Athenians, twenty-seven years; and to the battle at Leuctra, thirty-four years; after which to the death of Philip, thirty-five years. After these, to the passing of Alexander [(25)], twelve years.

Again, from the first [(26)] Olympiad, some say that to the founding of Rome [(27)] twenty-four years are totaled. From then to the destruction of Babylon [(28)]...

Note on Page 874

[(21)] "Then to the abduction of Helen." These things agree with the Chronicles of Eusebius, if they are corrected in this way according to the authority of the best Pithoean manuscript, so that these words are written at the ninth year of Menestheus: "Hercules fell into a pestilential disease, and for the remedy of his pain he threw himself into the flames, and thus in the fifty-second year of his age he was finished by death. Some write that he perished before his thirtieth year." Then these things are to be referred to the fourteenth year of Menestheus, which I read thus in the royal manuscript: "Alexander abducted Helen, and the ten-year Trojan War arose: the cause of the evil was that there was a contest of three women concerning beauty, one of them promising Helen to the shepherd judge. The destruction of Troy happened in the time of Elon, ^C judge of the Hebrews, whom Abdon succeeded, and soon Samson, that we may refer profane matters to sacred things." But the name of that first judge ought to be restored in Eusebius, and it should be read: "After Esebon, in the book of the Hebrews, it is related that the judge Elon ruled the people for ten years," which is not found among the LXX interpreters. In the Pithoean codex it is called Alaon, in Victorius Alon, in the Books of Kings Elaon, in the Vulgate Abialon. Indeed, it is strange that the LXX omits this judge, since we read thus in Judges xii, 11: "And after him judged Israel Elon the Zebulonite." And here is our note before page 873: "Then Ebron the Zabulonite for eight years. Then Aglon from Ephraim for eight years. Some, however, join the four years of Ebron with the seven years of Abatthan." In the Greek it was: "Plane Ebron is Elon, but Eglon is Abdon the Ephraimite, Abatthan finally Esebon, whose years they perhaps joined with the years of Elon." [(22)] "From the capture of Troy." The period from the abduction of Helen to the capture of Troy; whence Scaliger in ^D *Historica Syntagma* inserts before these words, "from here to the capture of Troy, ten years." Which perhaps a negligent copyist omitted because of the repetition in the next sentence. [(23)] "Thirty-four." Twenty-eight, Scaliger in *Historica Syntagma*. [(24)] "Eighty." Compare Tatian, p. 107, 408 Oxford edition. [(25)] "To the Alexander." Fl. ed., "after the Alexander," but it should be read "to the Alexander," the sense itself argues, and the Chronicle of Eusebius confirms it. [(26)] "Again from the first." Jos. Scaliger, *lib v De emend. temp.*, feels that the city was founded in the seventh Olympiad, which opinion has many assertors: Dionysius, Eusebius, others, and especially the ancient chronologer in Clement: "For the fewer the complete 24 are, the more days are lacking, as many as there are from the Palilia to the following summer days, on which the Olympic game was celebrated." Nor does Solinus think otherwise, who says that Rome was founded at the Palilia at the beginning of the Olympiad, that is, around the beginning of the seventh Olympiad. [(27)] "To the founding of Rome," etc. Theophilus, p. 137, Paris edition. "Rome founded by Romulus, who is reported to have been the son of Mars and Ilia, in the seventh Olympiad." [(28)] "From then to the destruction of Babylon." The same in the same book, p. 221, acting on the consulate of Junius and Brutus, reads this place thus. But the ancient chronologer, in Clement: "From here to the time when kings were removed and consuls were created, 253 years." In the Florentine edition of Clement it was read: "Her... ancient one, converting these, added 'from Darius'." Certainly, if you consult other chronologers, the number of years which Clement brings forward agrees better with the space of time from the founding of Rome to the expulsion of kings than to the destruction of Babylon. And here, having omitted the Greeks, he seems to pursue the Roman epochs: wherefore, assenting to this emendation, we shall read what followed thus: "and from the expulsion of kings to the death of Alexander, 186 years." You will find the same in the Chronicle of Eusebius from Olympiad 66 to 114, where the expulsion of kings and the death of Alexander are noted. Theophilus, p. 137, wishes that from the founding of Rome to Tarquin the Proud were 220 years, and that he reigned 25 years. Thus...

^A Twenty-four years are counted until the founding of the city, and from then to the destruction of Babylon consuls were created for about 243 years. From the destruction of Babylon ^B to the death of Alexander, there are 186 years. From then to the victory of Augustus, when Antony took his own life in Alexandria, there are 294 years; Augustus was consul for the fourth time. From that time to the contest which Domitian established in Rome, there are 114 years; and from the first contest to the death of Commodus, there are 111 years. There are some who, from Cecrops down to Alexander the Macedonian, total 1828 years; from Demophon, 1250 years; and from the destruction of Troy down to the return of the Heraclidae, 120 or 180 years. From that point down to the archonship of Evaenetus, during which they say Alexander crossed into Asia, it is according to Phanias, 715 years; according to Ephorus, 735 years; according to Timaeus and Clitarchus, 820 years; according to Eratosthenes, 774 years; and according to Duris, from the destruction of Troy to the arrival of Alexander in Asia, 1000 years. From then until Evaenetus the archon in Athens, during whose term Alexander dies, 11 years. From then until the reign of Germanicus Claudius Caesar, 365 years; from which time the years down to the death of Commodus also become clear, as far as they can be totaled. After the Greek history, one must also provide the greatest intervals from the barbarian chronologies. From Adam ^C to the flood, there are totaled 2148 years and 4 days; from Shem to Abraham, 1250 years. From Isaac to the inheritance, 616 years. Then from the Judges to Samuel, 463 years and 7 months. And after the judges, the years of the kings ^D

three, seven months. And after the Judges, five hundred seventy-two years, six months, and ten days of kingdoms. After which times, two hundred thirty-five years of the Persian empire. Then, from the Macedonian era until the death of Antonius, three hundred twelve years, eighteen days. After which time, the Roman empire until the death of Commodus lasted two hundred twenty-two years. ^A Again, from the seventy-year captivity and the restoration of the people to their native land until the captivity that was in the time of Vespasian, four hundred ten years are gathered. Lastly, from Vespasian until the death of Commodus, one hundred twenty-one years, six months, and twenty-four days are found.

Demetrius, however, says in his *On the Kings in Judea*, that the tribe of Judah, and Benjamin, and Levi were not taken captive by Sennacherib, but that there were one hundred twenty-eight years and six months from this captivity until the final one which Nebuchadnezzar carried out from Jerusalem. From the time the ten tribes were taken captive from Samaria until Ptolemy IV, five hundred seventy-three years and nine months; and from the time of those from Jerusalem, three hundred thirty-eight years and three months. Philo, too, has recorded the kings of the Jews ^B differently from Demetrius.

Moreover, Eupolemus in the same work says that the total years from Adam until the fifth year of Demetrius Ptolemy, who reigned as the twelfth in Egypt, amounts to five thousand one hundred forty-nine years. And from the time Moses led the Jews out of Egypt until the aforementioned term, there are gathered two thousand five hundred eighty years. From this time until the consuls in Rome, Gaius Domitian and Casianus, one hundred twenty years are gathered.

Euphorus and many other historians, and nations, say that there are seventy-five ^C tongues, having misheard the voice of Moses saying: “And all the souls, those from Jacob who descended into Egypt, were seventy-five.” But according to the true interpretation, the general dialects appear to be seventy-two, as our traditions ^D provide.

^A And the others, which are many, come about through a community of two, or three, or even more languages. A dialect is an utterance manifesting the particular character of a place, or an utterance manifesting the specific or common character of a nation. The Greeks say that there are five dialects among them: Attic, Ionic, Doric, Aeolic, and the fifth, the Common; but the voices of barbarians are countless, and they are not called dialects, but languages. ^B Plato also assigns a certain dialect to the gods, inferring this primarily from dreams and oracles, and in other ways also from those possessed by demons, who speak neither with their own voice nor in their own dialect, but in that of the demons who enter into them. He also thinks that unreasonable animals have dialects, which those of the same kind heed. For instance, when an elephant has fallen into the mire and has cried out, another one nearby, having observed what happened, returns a little while later, brings with him a herd of elephants, and rescues the one that had fallen. They say, moreover, that in Libya a scorpion, if it does not succeed in stinging a human, returns with many others, and hanging on to one another like a chain, it thus plots its ambush; animals using not an obscure sign, nor signaling to one another by appearance, but, as I think, by their own proper dialect. ^C And some others say that if a fish is pulled up, and the line breaks and it escapes, no other fish of the same species will be found in that same place for the rest of that day. But the primary and general dialects are indeed barbarian in nature, ^D as those who portray the inhabited world paint a cynocephalus in order to show that they say there are seventy-two ancient countries of the inhabited world.

“Whom the gods call Briareus, but all men Aegean.” “Which indeed men call Batieia, But the immortals have named the tomb of dancing Myrina.” “Which the gods call Chalcis, but men Cymindis.” “Which the gods call Xanthus, but men Scamander.”

The ancient scholiast on the Iliad annotated this verse thus: Homer refers the first of the double names to the gods, and the second to men. And wise men say of humans that they also have conversations, obviously more sacred than ours, and that they themselves perceive what is happening, and show by their deeds that they perceive it, when, having predicted what the birds said—that they would go somewhere, and would do this or that—they show that they went there and did what they had indeed predicted. And there seems to be nothing more observant of oaths or more faithful toward the gods than elephants.

^A Some others also say that if a fish, having broken the net, has escaped, it will no longer be found on that day—the fish of its kind. But the primary and originary dialects are indeed barbarian, whereas the names possess a nature. For even humans acknowledge that prayers are more powerful when they are recited in a barbarian tongue. Moreover, Plato in the *Cratylus*, when he wishes to interpret *pūr* (fire), says that the name is barbarian. He testifies, therefore, that the Phrygians call it so, deviating but slightly. I think, however, that it would be no worse to set down here also the times of the Roman emperors, for the sake of demonstrating the birth of the Savior. Augustus, 43 years; Tiberius, 22 years; Gaius, 4 years; Claudius, 14 years; Nero, 14 years; Galba, 1 year; Vespasian, 10 years; Titus, 3 years; Domitian, 15 years; Nerva, 1 year; Trajan, 19 years; Hadrian, 21 years; Antoninus, 21 years; likewise again, Antoninus and Commodus, 32 years. Everything from Augustus to Commodus totals 222 years, and from Adam to the death of Commodus, 5,784 years, two months, and twelve days. Some, however, record the times of the Roman emperors thus: Gaius Julius Caesar, 3 years, 4 months, 5 days; after whom Augustus reigned for 46 years, 4 months, one day. Then Tiberius, 26 years, 6 months, 19 days; whom Gaius Caesar succeeds for 3 years, 10 months, 8 days; this one, Claudius, for 13 years, 8 months, 21 days. ^{B C} Concerning the truth of the original names, that we have received them from certain barbarians; and that the barbarians are more ancient than we. «See, therefore, also this name *pūr* (fire): lest it be barbarian; for this is neither easy to attach to the Greek tongue, and it is manifest that the Phrygians call it so, deviating slightly; and likewise *hudōr* (water), and *kunas* (dogs), and many other things.» ^D Just as some Stoics would have it, not that they were imposed by convention, but that they contain a certain hidden theology which conforms to the Maker of the universe; wherefore these names are effective if they are pronounced in a manner and order consistent with them. Other names of demons, uttered in the Egyptian language, have a certain power of their own, and in turn, others in the Persian language; and thus among individual nations, others are assumed for certain uses. The same [author] in Book V, page 261: "But since Celsus, etc." And because Celsus thinks it makes no difference whether one says Jupiter or Diespiter, Adonai or Sabaoth, or Ammun as the Egyptians do, or Pappaeus as the Scythians do, let us discuss these things for a little while. The reader should just keep in mind what we said above regarding this same question, given the occasion offered to us by Celsus: and now we repeat the same, that the nature of names is not according to human pleasure, as it seemed to Aristotle—for languages did not take their beginning from humans, as is clear to those observing the properties of incantations in various languages and the various accents of names according to different regions. We discussed this briefly above, saying that words, having a genuine power in one language, do not retain the same power if they are transferred into another. The same is found in humans: for if a person, from birth called by this or that Greek name, were to be charmed—having changed the name into Roman, or Egyptian, or that of any other nation—the incantation will not be effective, though it would have been had it been called by the name long ago imposed upon it. The same will happen with a Roman name, if one attempts the incantation having changed it into Greek: it will not avail, though it was to have availed had the original name of the person not been changed. Where see what Guil. Spencerus has annotated to these passages.

^A Nero, 13 years, 8 months, 28 days; Galba, 7 months, 6 days; Otho, 5 months, 1 day; Vitellius, 7 months, 1 day; Vespasian, 11 years, 11 months, 26 days; Titus, 2 years, 2 months; Domitian, 15 years, 5 months, 5 days; Nerva, 1 year, 4 months; Trajan, 19 years, 7 months, 16 days; Hadrian, 20 years, 10 months, 28 days; Antoninus, 21 years, 3 months, 7 days; Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, 19 years, 11 days; Commodus, 12 years, 9 months, 14 days. From Julius Caesar, therefore, until the death of Commodus, there are 236 years, 6 months. There are gathered, then, all the years from Romulus, who built Rome, until the death of Commodus, 953 years, 6 months. Our Lord ^B was born in the twenty-eighth year, when first they ordered the census to take place, under Augustus. That this is true is written thus in the Gospel according to Luke: "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, the word of the Lord came unto John, the son of Zacharias." And again in the same: "And Jesus was coming for baptism, being about thirty years of age." And that [He lived] only one year [in his ministry], this too the Scripture shows: "He hath sent me to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord."

^C For in the 4th year of the reign of Augustus, on the 25th of December, on the sixth day, at the seventh hour of the day, our Lord Jesus Christ was born according to the flesh of the holy Virgin Mary, in the year according to the Antiochenes from the creation of the world until the birth and crucifixion of Christ, six thousand [years]; for there are gathered from Adam until Phalec, son of Heber, 3,000 years, and from Phalec until the 45th year of the reign of Augustus, 2,011 years, and the Savior remained with men for 33 years; so that there are from Adam until the birth and crucifixion of Christ, 5,044 years complete; for Phalec, according to the prophecy of Moses, is said to be the middle of the time of Christ’s manifestation. For just as God fashioned man on the sixth day, and he immediately fell into sin, so also on the sixth day of the thousandth year He came upon the earth and saved him. For the divine Scripture signifies this, saying, "A day with the Lord is as a thousand years," which also Clement and Theophilus and Timothy, the most God-beloved chronographers, have set forth.

^A And that it was necessary for Him to preach but for one year, this too is written thus: "To preach the acceptable year of the Lord, He sent me." This the prophet also said, and the Gospel. In the fifteenth year, therefore, of Tiberius, and the fifteenth of Augustus—in this way are the thirty years completed, until He suffered. From the time He suffered until the destruction of Jerusalem, there are forty-two years, and three months; and from the destruction of Jerusalem until the death of Commodus, there are one hundred and twenty-eight years, ten months, and three days. There are, therefore, from the time our Lord was born until the death of Commodus, in all, one hundred and ninety-four years, one month, and thirteen days. There are also those who, searching more curiously into the birth of our Savior, not only add the year but even the day, which they say was in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, on the twenty-fifth of Pachon. ^B

STROMATA, BOOK I

...as if about thirty years old. That He ought to preach only for one year is written thus: "To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, He sent me." This the prophet said, and the Gospel. In the fifteenth year, therefore, of Tiberius, and the fifteenth of Augustus, are the thirty years completed up to the time He suffered. Now, from the time He suffered, until the time of one who founded Rome, until the death of Commodus, are nine hundred and fifty-three years and six months. The Lord our God was born in the twenty-eighth year, when first they ordered a census and description to be made in the time of Augustus. And that this is true is written thus in the Gospel according to Luke: "In the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, the word of the Lord came upon John, the son of Zacharias." And again in the same: "Jesus was coming to his baptism, being about thirty years old." That it was necessary for Him to preach for that one year alone, this too is written thus: "He sent me to preach the acceptable year of the Lord." This both the prophet and the Gospel said. In the fifteenth year, therefore, of Tiberius, and the fifteenth of Augustus, the thirty years are thus completed up to the time He suffered. From the time He suffered, until...

^B the destruction of Jerusalem, there are forty-two years and three months. And from the destruction of Jerusalem until the death of Commodus, there are one hundred and twenty-eight years, ten months, and three days. In total, from the birth of the Lord until the death of Commodus, there are one hundred and ninety-four years, one month, and thirteen days. There are some, however, who more curiously add not only the year, but also the day, which they say was the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, on the twenty-fifth of Pachon. But the followers of Basilides ^A also celebrate the day of His baptism, spending the whole preceding night in readings. They say, however, that this was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, on the fifteenth of the month of Tubi; some, however, say it was the eleventh of the same month. And discussing His passion more subtly, some claim the Lord suffered in the sixteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, on the twenty-fifth of Phamenoth; others say the twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi; others, the nineteenth of Pharmuthi. Indeed, some of them even claim He was born on the twenty-fourth or twenty-fifth of Pharmuthi. Furthermore, those things also must be referred to the chronology, I mean the days which Daniel signifies from the desolation of Jerusalem: seven years, seven months of Vespasian. For the two years are taken into account with the months of Otho, Galba, and Vitellius, which are seventeen, and days, eight; and thus it becomes three years and six months, which is ^D "half of the week," just as the prophet Daniel said. He said that one thousand two hundred and ninety days would pass from the time the abomination stood ^C by Nero in the holy city until its destruction. For so the passage provided shows: "Until when shall the vision stand?

The Birth, Baptism, and Passion of the Lord

^A the sacrifice that has been taken away, the sin will be made desolate, and the power and the Holy One will be trodden down? And He said to him: "Until evening and morning, two thousand three hundred days; and the Holy One will be taken away." These two thousand three hundred days equal three years and six months, of which Nero held the half while he was king, which was half a week; and the other half was during the time of Vespasian with Otho, Galba, and Vitellius. And for this reason Daniel says: "Blessed is he who arrives at the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days." For until these days the war continued, but after this it ceased. This number is also shown from the appointed chapter, which says thus: "And from the time of the change of the continual sacrifice, and for the giving of the abomination of desolation, one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and arrives at the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days." ^B Flavius Josephus, the Jew, who composed the Jewish histories, having traced back the times, says that from Moses to David there are five hundred and eighty-five years; and from David to the second year of Vespasian, one thousand one hundred and seventy-nine; then from that time to the tenth year of Antoninus, seventy-seven years; so that from Moses to the tenth year of Antoninus there are in all two thousand eight hundred and thirty-one years. Others, having counted from Inachus and Moses to the death of Commodus, said there were two thousand four hundred and forty-two years; others, two thousand four hundred and twenty-one. In the Gospel according to Matthew, the genealogy is traced from Abraham to Mary the mother of the Lord. "For there are," he says, "from Abraham to David fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to Christ likewise other fourteen generations; three mystical intervals, completed in six weeks."

And as for the things concerning the times, which have been related variously by many and have been set forth by us, let them be thus. ^C But that the Scriptures, both those of the Law and the prophetic ones, be interpreted,

CHAPTER XXII.

On the Greek interpretation of the Old Testament.

^A say [they were translated] in the time of King Ptolemy, son of Lagus 70, or, as some say, in the time of him surnamed Philadelphus, Demetrius of Phalerum having brought the greatest zeal to this matter, and having accurately managed the affairs concerning the translation 71. ^B For 72 while the Macedonians were still holding Asia, the king, being ambitious to adorn the library in Alexandria, which had been formed by him 73, with all writings, requested the inhabitants of Jerusalem to translate into the Greek dialect the prophecies that were among them. But they 74, inasmuch as they were still obeying the Macedonians, chose seventy elders, the most approved among them, experienced in the Scriptures and learned in the Greek dialect, and sent them to him along with the divine books. And as each of them interpreted each one separately... [alt-version omitted]

70 *Of the Word.* Thus Irenaeus, whom Clement follows. Almost all the rest relate that the perfect interpretation of the Bibles was instituted under Philadelphus. Concerning this matter, Vossius says in *De Hist. Graec., lib. 1, c. 12*: "Demetrius of Phalerum was the advocate for Ptolemy Lagus, known as Soter, that he should designate as successors to his kingdom the children he had by Eurydice, and not the son of Berenice, who was later called Philadelphus. But Soter, while still surviving, made Philadelphus a partner in the kingdom. Henceforth, Demetrius was always hateful to Philadelphus, who, soon after his father's death, stripped him of every honor and cast him into prison, where he died by the bite of an asp." These things clearly show the time of Demetrius: but they do not seem sufficiently to agree with those who have handed down that he presided over the Alexandrian library under Philadelphus, and that at his instigation ^C the Bibles were translated from the Hebrew fountain into the Greek tongue. And yet that matter has even great men among ancient authors as [its] witnesses. Indeed, I do not think it easy to say how these things are to be reconciled. But I will bring forward into the middle what is most probable. I judge that that translation was instituted at the time when Philadelphus was reigning with his parent. Indeed, if we say this, even Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria will be able to be reconciled with others of the ancients. For those two hand down that the sacred codex was translated into Greek in the time of Ptolemy Lagus. But Aristaeus, Aristobulus the Jew, Philo, Josephus, Tertullianus, Eusebius, Epiphanius, and many others, refer this to the time of Philadelphus, to such an extent that it would be long to list them. Nor is the cause obscure why almost all say it was done rather in the times of Philadelphus. For he was always most humane toward the Jews, so that it is probable ^D that he was the whole beginning and end of this counsel regarding the translation of the Bibles. And perhaps, while the parent was alive, that labor was only begun: but, when Philadelphus reigned alone, it was finally completed. Indeed, I would prefer to say something like this than, with Scaliger in *Animadversiones Eusebianae*, to cast off the faith of all those—and Jews and Christians and ancients—for the sake of one Hermippus (whether he was the Smyrnean who seems to have lived under Ptolemy Euergetes, or the Berytian who finally lived in the time of Hadrian Caesar), who handed down with supreme consensus that Demetrius of Phalerum presided over the library of Philadelphus. And when I had written these things, it seemed better to weigh more accurately those things which I remembered reading in Eusebius, *Hist. ecclesiast., lib. 7, cap. 26*, or where we have in Greek these things of Anatolius concerning Aristobulus: "Who [was] one of the seventy interpreters, who translated the sacred and divine Scriptures of the Hebrews for Ptolemy Philadelphus and his father, and who dedicated a commentary on the Mosaic law to the same kings." Where we clearly see that both kings are joined, father and son. These things, indeed, remove every scruple and fully confirm our conjecture. Clement seems to have inserted this passage from the book of Aristobulus, dedicated to Ptolemy Philometor, with a few things changed according to his custom. The words of Aristobulus are as they are found in Eusebius, *Praeparatio evang., lib. 13, cap. 12*: Where, for what was mentioned above, it can be written: "For before the Romans possessed their kingdom, while the Macedonians were still possessing Asia, Ptolemy, son of Lagus, desiring to adorn that library which had been fashioned by him in Alexandria with the books worth the effort of all men, requested of the inhabitants of Jerusalem to have their Scriptures translated into the Greek tongue."

^A And when all the translations had been compared, they were found to agree both in their thoughts and in their words; for it was the will of God, having been pondered for Greek ears. Nor indeed was it foreign to the inspiration of God, who had given the prophecy, that the translation should also be effected as if it were a Greek prophecy; since even in the captivity under Nebuchadnezzar, when the Scriptures had been destroyed, during the times of Artaxerxes, king of the Persians, Ezra the Levite, the priest, having become inspired, reconstructed all the ancient Scriptures once again and prophesied. Aristobulus, in his first book to Philometor, writes word for word: “Plato also followed our legislation, and it is manifest that he had studied everything said in it in detail. For translation had been made before Demetrius, by another, before the sovereignty of Alexander and the Persians, of the events concerning the exodus of the Hebrews, our fellow-citizens, from Egypt, ^B and the manifestation of all that had occurred to them, and the conquest of the land, and the exposition of the entire legislation; so that it is evident that the aforementioned philosopher had taken many things therefrom—for he was a man of great learning—just as Pythagoras also transferred many things from our traditions into his own dogmatic system.” And Numenius, the Pythagorean philosopher, writes directly: “For what is Plato, but Moses speaking in Attic Greek?” ^C This Moses is a theologian and prophet, and since... for the Scriptures were translated according to the inspiration of God. “And it is nothing wonderful that God should have brought this to pass, who also in the captivity of the people under Nebuchadnezzar, while the Scriptures were destroyed and after the Jews had returned to their own land ^D seventy years later, then, in the times of Artaxerxes, king of the Persians, inspired Ezra the priest of the tribe of Levi, to recount all the words of the preceding prophets and to restore to the people the legislation which was given through Moses.”

^A Pythagoras openly writes: “For what is Plato, but Moses speaking Attic?” ^B This Moses was a theologian and a prophet, and according to some, an interpreter of the sacred laws. The Scriptures themselves, which are worthy of belief, proclaim his lineage, his deeds, and his life; yet it must be spoken of by us as well, in as much as we are able.

CHAPTER XXIII.

Moses, being a Chaldean by his original lineage, was born in Egypt, as his ancestors had migrated from Babylon to Egypt on account of a long-drawn-out famine. Born in the seventh generation, and educated in a royal manner, he experienced such fortune as this. When the Hebrews in Egypt had grown into a great multitude, the king of the region, fearing lest the multitude should prepare ambushes for him, ordered them to raise the females (for a woman is a creature feeble for war), but to destroy the males, suspecting the vigorous youth. But since the child was of noble birth, ^C his parents nourished him for three successive months by hiding him, their natural love prevailing over the tyrannical cruelty.

^D This is he who is the seventh generation from the first (ancestor), who, himself a stranger, became the leader of the entire Jewish nation. And he was deemed worthy of a royal upbringing for the following reason: The king of that land, observing the nation ever increasing in population, fearing that the settlers, having become more numerous, might contend with the natives for the supreme rule with a stronger hand, devised unholy schemes to destroy their strength; and he ordered that of those being born, the females should be raised, since a woman is, by her nature's weakness, sluggish for war, but the males should be destroyed, since a courageous force is an untakable and difficult-to-suppress fortification. Born, therefore, the boy at once manifested an appearance more comely than that of an ordinary person, so that, as far as was possible, the parents disregarded the tyrant's decrees. They say, at least, that for three successive months he was nourished with milk at home, escaping the notice of the many. “By faith Moses, when he was born, was hidden three months by his parents, because they saw that the child was comely, and they were not afraid of the king's commandment.” Fearing later, lest while providing for one they themselves might perish with him, being many themselves, they exposed the child by the banks of the river, weeping. And the sister of the exposed infant, still a virgin, having been moved by familial passion, watched from a little distance.

^A Thereupon the daughter of the king, not having conceived for a long time, but desiring a child, arrived at the river on that day, intending to use the baths and sprinklings. Having heard the child crying, she commanded him to be brought to her; and, having felt pity, she sought a nurse. Then the sister of the child, running up, said she had a Hebrew woman who had given birth not long before, and that she would bring her as a nurse if she wished. When she had consented and requested it, she brought the mother of the child to be his nurse, as if she were someone else, for an agreed-upon wage. Then the queen gives the child the name Moses, etymologically, because he was taken out from the "water"; for the Egyptians call water "mou." ^B Into which he was exposed to perish. For, indeed, they call Moses the one who "breathed again in the water." It is clear, therefore, that in the time before, when the child was circumcised, his parents gave him some name; and he was called Joachim. He also had a third name in heaven after his assumption, as the initiates say. ^C

The outcome

^A When he had reached a mature age, he received instruction in arithmetic, geometry, rhythmic, harmonic, and metric theory, as well as the entirety of music, through the use of instruments and the discussions of those who were distinguished among the Egyptian scholars. Furthermore, he was taught the philosophy transmitted through symbols, which they demonstrate in what are called hieroglyphic writings, and through the handling of animals, which they also venerate with divine honors. The rest of the encyclical education was taught to him by Greeks. The inhabitants of the surrounding regions taught him the Assyrian characters and the Chaldean science of the heavens; this he also received from the Egyptians, who are among those most dedicated to mathematics.

He was also taught geometry, rhythmic, harmonic, medical, and musical arts by the preeminent Egyptians, and in addition, the philosophy transmitted through symbols, which they show in hieroglyphic writings. The rest of the encyclical education the Greeks taught him in Egypt, as one would a royal child, as Philo says in his *Life of Moses*. He also further learned Egyptian letters and the science of the heavens from both the Chaldeans and the Egyptians—whence it is said in the Acts, "he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians."

Eupolemus, in his work *On the Kings of Judea*, says that Moses was the first wise man and the first to transmit grammar to the Jews; that the Phoenicians received it from the Jews, and the Greeks from the Phoenicians. ^B Having been brought to their true nature, he increased his wisdom; yet he so cherished the discipline and customs of his own kindred and ancestors that he struck down and slew the Egyptian who had unjustly attacked the Hebrew.

The mystics say that he slew the Egyptian by a word alone, just as Peter, in the Acts, is reported to have slain by a word those who had defrauded [the Church] of the price of the piece of land and had lied. Artapanus, at any rate, in his work *On the Jews*, relates that Moses was cast into prison by Nechephres ^C, the king of the Egyptians, and that he is called the angel of death by the Hebrews, by whose command they say the bodies of the dead are dissolved into dust. They thought this custody of Moses' body was indicated in the Epistle of Jude (ver. 9). Our Clement, in *Adumbrations on Jude* (9), says: "When Michael the archangel, disputing with the devil, contended about the body of Moses." This confirms the Assumption of Moses. Furthermore, they gathered that he had been received into heaven from the Gospels, by the account that he appeared with Elijah (Matt. XVII, 3; Mark IX; Luke IX). ^D

^A Since Moses requested that the people be allowed to leave Egypt, and the prison was opened by night through the will of God, he went out, proceeded to the palace, stood over the sleeping king, and awakened him. The king, being struck by what had happened, ordered Moses to state the name of the God who had sent him. Moses, having bent down to the king's ear, spoke it. Having heard this, the king immediately fell down speechless, but upon being held up by Moses, he came back to life.

Regarding the upbringing of Moses, Ezechielus, the writer of Jewish tragedies, who wrote in the drama entitled *The Exagoge*, agrees with us, writing as follows from the person of Moses:

Seeing ^B our race increasing in abundance, Against us deep deceit did Pharaoh weave, The king, with heavy works of brick and lime Afflicting mortals, and with structures vast, To build for them the towers of the wretched. Then he proclaims to the entire Hebrew race To cast their male offspring into the deep-flowing river. There, my mother who bore me hid me for Three months, as she said; but not staying hidden, She set me forth, having clothed me with finery, Beside the river’s edge, in a deep marsh, And Miriam, my sister, watched from nearby. Then the daughter of the king, together with her maids, Came down to cleanse her fresh skin by the baths. Seeing me, she straightway took me up. She knew I was a Hebrew; and she spoke thus: Miriam, my sister, running to the princess, "Do you wish that I find for you quickly a nurse From among the Hebrews for this child?" The maiden nodded. She went and told my mother; and she quickly arrived. The mother herself had come, and took me in her arms. The daughter of the king said: "Woman, Raise this one, and I will pay your wages." She named me Moses, because, in truth, She lifted me from the wet riverbank. ^C But when the time of infancy had passed for me,

CONCERNING THE AFOREMENTIONED

COLLECT. Corrected, as it seems, by Clement: Corrected again by Clement. John exhibits this verse thus: Not badly. Ezechiel followed. Eusebius, By which we have followed Eusebius.

^A My mother led me

To the royal house,

Then having recounted the struggle between the Hebrew and the Egyptian, and the burial of the Egyptian in the sand, concerning the other struggle he says:....

.... Why do you strike one weaker than yourself? But he said: Who appointed you as a judge over us, Or a master here? Do you kill me too, Just as you killed the man yesterday? And I, fearing, Said: How did this become known?

^B He flees, then, from there, and pastures sheep, being pre-instructed for pastoral leadership. For to one who is to preside over the most gentle flock of men, the pastoral art is a certain preliminary exercise, just as hunting is to those who are by nature warlike. From there, however, God leads him, that he might be the leader of the Hebrew army. Then the Egyptians, who have often been senseless, are cautioned: but the Hebrews became spectators of the evils which others were suffering, learning the power of God without any danger. But since the Egyptians, not accepting by hearing the results of divine power, through their own folly—the ignorant ^C disbelieving—then, as it has been said, the ignorant learned through experience. And afterward, the Hebrews departing, having carried off great spoils of the Egyptians, withdrew: not because of avarice, as the accusers say (for God did not persuade them to covet the property of others); but first, receiving the necessary wages for the works and services which they had provided to the Egyptians for the whole time.

^D Philo: "Those who are foolish are cautioned by a swarm of blows, whom reason did not instruct." A little later: "But in the manner of infant children, not yet wise through age, they were taught by their own harm." For having obtained much spoil, they loaded it partly on their own shoulders, partly on their beasts of burden: not out of avarice, as detractors might say, or the coveting of others' wealth (for what could there be?); but first, that they might receive the necessary compensation for their prolonged labor; then, that for the injuries received during the time they served, they might exact some loss, if not in proportion to their merit, at least something.

^A Since they rendered tit for tat, they in a way defended themselves, retaliating for the greed of the Egyptians by the carrying off of the spoil, just as they had formerly been troubled by the Egyptians through their reduction into slavery. Whether, therefore, one would say that this happened as in a state of war, they judged it worthy to carry off the possessions of their enemies by the law of the victors, as the stronger over the weaker (and the cause of the war ^B was just. The Hebrews came as suppliants to the Egyptians due to famine; but the latter, having enslaved the strangers, forced them to serve in the manner of prisoners, nor did they give them their wages); or whether, as in peace, they received the spoil as wages from those unwilling to pay for a long time, but rather depriving them of it.

CHAPTER XXIV.

How Moses fulfilled the role of leader and led others by his example to carry out that duty.

Est itaque noster Moyses propheticus, legum ferendarum peritus, ordinandæ et instruendæ aciei gnarus, exercitus ducendi artem tenens, politicus, et philosophus. Ac quomodo quidem fuerit propheticus, post haec dicetur, quando de prophetia tractabimus. Ordinandae autem aciei peritia fuerit pars artis imperatoriae, seu ducendi exercitus. Ars autem ducendi exercitus est pars regnandi scientiae. ^C Et rursus legum ferendarum peritia regnandi scientiae pars fuerit, sicut etiam judicandi facultas. Regii autem officii una quidem species est divina, ut quae sit secundum Deum et sanctum ejus Filium, a quibus cum quae ex terra bona sunt, et quae externa, tum etiam perfecta felicitas suppeditatur. «Petite» enim, inquit, «magna, et parva vobis adjicientur.» Secunda est autem regni species, post eam administrationem, quae rationalis pure est ac divina, ea, quae irascibili animae parte solum in regnando utitur: qua Hercules quidem Argivis, Alexander autem Macedonum, ^D ἐβασίλευσε. Tértio autem, τὸ ἑνὸς ἐφιέμενον, τοῦ νικῆσαι μόνον καὶ καταστρέψασθαι· τὸ δὲ πρὸς κακὸν ἢ ἀγαθὸν τὴν νίκην ποιεῖσθαι, τῷ τοιούτῳ οὐ πρόσεστιν· ᾧ Πέρσαι ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα στρα...

στρα^Aτεύσαντες συνεχρήσαντο. Τοῦ γὰρ θυμοῦ τὸ μὲν φιλονεικον μόνον ἐστὶν, αὐτοῦ τοῦ κρατεῖν ἕνεκα τὴν δυναστείαν πεποιημένον· τὸ δὲ φιλόκαλον, εἰς καλὴν καταχρωμένης τῆς ψυχῆς τῷ θυμῷ. Τετάρτη δὲ, ἡ πασῶν κακίστη, ἡ κατὰ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας ταττομένη βασιλεία· ὡς ἡ Σαρδαναπάλου, καὶ τῶν τὸ τέλος ποιουμένων, ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις ὡς πλεῖστα χαρίζεσθαι. Τοῦ δὲ βασιλικοῦ, τοῦ τε κατ᾽ ἀρετὴν νικῶντος καὶ τοῦ κατὰ βίαν, ὄργανον τὸ τακτικόν. Ἄλλο δὲ κατ᾽ ἄλλην φύσιν τε καὶ ὕλην· ἐν μέν γε ὅπλοις, καὶ τοῖς μαχίμοις ζῴοις, δι᾽ ἐμψύχων τε καὶ ἀψύχων, ψυχὴ τὸ τάττον ἐστὶ καὶ νοῦς· ἐν δὲ τοῖς τῆς ψυχῆς πάθεσιν, ὧν ἐπικρατοῦμεν τῇ ἀρετῇ, λογισμός ἐστι τὸ τακτικὸν, ἐπισφραγιζόμενος ἐγκράτειαν καὶ σωφροσύνην μεθ᾽ ὁσιότητος, καὶ γνῶσιν ἀγαθὴν μετ᾽ ἀληθείας, τὸ τέλος εἰς εὐσέβειαν ἀναφέρων Θεοῦ· οὕτω γὰρ τῇ ἀρετῇ χρωμένοις φρόνησίς ἡ τάττουσά ἐστι· τὰ δὲ θεῖα ἡ σοφία· τὰ ἀνθρώπεια δὲ ἡ πολιτική· σύμπαντα δὲ ἡ βασιλική. Βασιλεὺς τοίνυν ἐστὶν ὁ ἄρχων κατὰ νόμους, ὁ τὴν τοῦ ἄρχειν ἑκόντων ἐπιστήμην ἔχων· οἷός ἐστιν ὁ Κύριος, τοὺς εἰς αὐτὸν καὶ δι᾽ αὐτοῦ πιστεύοντας προϊέμενος. Πάντα γὰρ παρέδωκεν ὁ Θεὸς, καὶ πάντα ὑπέταξε Χριστῷ, τῷ βασιλεῖ ἡμῶν· ἵνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶν γόνυ κάμψῃ, ἐπουρανίων, καὶ ἐπιγείων, καὶ καταχθονίων· καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσηται, ὅτι Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ Πατρός. ^B Ἰδέαις δὲ ἐνέχεται τὸ στρατήγημα τρισὶν, ἀσφαλεῖ, παραβόλῳ, καὶ τῷ ἐκ τούτων μικτῷ· συντίθεται δὲ τούτων ἕκαστον ἐκ τριῶν, ἢ διὰ λόγου, ἢ δι᾽ ἔργων, ἢ καὶ δι᾽ ἀμφοτέρων ἅμα τούτων. Ταῦτα δὲ ὑπάρξει πάντα ἐπιτελεῖν, ἢ πείθοντας, ἢ βιαζομένους, ἢ ἀδικοῦντας, ἐν τῷ ἀμύνασθαι, οἷς ἐμπεριέχεται· ἢ τὰ δίκαια ποιοῦντας, ἢ ψευδομένους, ἢ ἀληθεύοντας, ἢ καὶ τούτων ἅμα τισὶ χρωμένους κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν καιρόν. Ταῦτα δὲ σύμπαντα, καὶ τὸ πῶς δεῖ χρῆσθαι τούτων ἑκάστῳ, παρὰ Μωϋσέως λαβόντες Ἕλληνες, ὠφέληνται. Τύπου δὲ ἕνεκεν, ἑνὸς ἢ καὶ δευτέρου ἐπιμνησθήσομαι παραδείγματος στρατηγικοῦ. Μωϋσῆς, τὸν λαὸν ἐξαγαγὼν, ὑποπτεύσας ἐπιδιώξειν τοὺς Αἰγυπτίους, τὴν ὀλίγην καὶ σύντομον ἀπολιπὼν ὁδὸν, ἐπὶ τὴν ἔρημον ἐτρέπετο· καὶ νύκτωρ τὰ πολλὰ τῇ πορείᾳ ἐκέχρητο. Ἑτέρα γὰρ ἦν οἰκονομία, καθ᾽ ἣν ἐπαιδεύοντο Ἑβραῖοι, δι᾽ ἐρημίας πολλῆς καὶ χρόνου μακροῦ, εἰς μόνον τὸ πιστεύειν τὸν Θεὸν εἶναι, δι᾽ ὑπομονῆς ἐθιζόμενοι σώφρονος. Τὸ γοῦν στρατήγημα ^C τοῦ Μωϋσέως διδάσκει πρὸ τῶν κινδύνων δεῖν τὰ χρήσιμα συνιδεῖν, καὶ οὕτως ἐπιβαλεῖν. Ἀμέλει γέγονεν ὅπερ καὶ ὑπώπτευσεν· ἐπεδίωξαν γὰρ οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι ἐφ᾽ ἵππων καὶ ὀχημάτων· ἀλλ᾽ ἀπώλοντο θᾶττον, ῥαγείσης τῆς θαλάσσης, καὶ σὺν ἵπποις καὶ ἅρμασιν αὐτοὺς κατακλυσάσης, ὡς μηδὲ λείψανον αὐτῶν ἀπολειφθῆναι. Μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα στύλος πυρὸς ἑπόμενος ^D

[STROMATUM LIB. I.]

becoming accustomed, it was part of a different dispensation. Moses therefore teaches a stratagem, that dangers are to be attacked only when those things that are useful for repelling them have been provided. And truly, that which he suspected came to pass. For the Egyptians pursued them on horses and chariots; but they perished quickly, when the sea was divided, and engulfed them with their horses and chariots, so that no relics of them remained. After these things, however, the following and accompanying column of fire (for it led them) guided the Hebrews by night through an inaccessible region, ^A training and introducing them by toils and journeys to strength and fortitude: so that after they had experienced the danger of what appeared grievous, it might be manifest how good was the region to which he was transmitting them from the trackless path. Moreover, he also defeated the enemies who were previously occupying that region, and slew them, having attacked them from the desert and rugged road (for such is the art of the strategist). For it was a work of experience and strategic science to have occupied the region of the enemies. Miltiades, the Athenian general who conquered the Persians in the battle of Marathon, having observed this, imitated his manner: he led the Athenians by night, marching through a trackless path, and deceiving the barbarians who were watching him; for Hippias, who had defected from the Athenians, had brought the barbarians into Attica, and, having occupied the opportune spots, was guarding them, because he had the experience of the region. It was therefore a difficult task to elude Hippias; whence Miltiades, having rightly used a trackless path and attacked ^B by night the Persians, whom Datis commanded, succeeded in the struggle with those whom he himself led. And also to Thrasybulus, when he was bringing back the exiles from Phyle and wished to remain hidden, a column became a guide while he was traveling through paths untrodden; for Thrasybulus, at night, when it was moonless and the weather was wintry, a fire was seen going before them, which led them safely and left them near Munychia; where now is the altar of the Light-bringer. Let our doctrines then become credible to the Greeks even from this; that it is possible for the Almighty God to cause a column of fire to go before the Hebrews by night, which also was the guide of their journey. Moreover, it is said in a certain oracle: ^C "A column for the Thebans is Bacchus, full of joy," from the history of the Hebrews. Furthermore, Euripides also says in *Antiopa*: ".... The cowherd here in the chambers Blooming with ivy, a column of the god Evius."

The column signifies the non-representational nature of God. But the illuminated column, besides signifying the non-representational, indicates the standing and permanent being of God, and His immutable and formless light. Before, therefore, the art of carving various forms of statues was perfected, the ancients, setting up columns, worshipped them as images of God. Thus the author of the *Phoronis* writes: "Callithoe, key-bearer of the Olympian queen, Argive Hera, whom with wreaths and garlands ^D [adorns]."

* [For note 39: *τὰ Φυλῆς* being the name of the place. Those who were besieged at Phyle when the Lacedaemonians and the Thirty attacked those who had occupied Phyle. See also Stephanus of Byzantium.] * [For note 40: Cf. Eusebius, *Praeparatio Evangelica* book 1, cap. 9, and our *Archaeologia Graeca* book 11, cap. 2.]

^A An Argive maiden was the first to adorn a column. Furthermore, he who composed the *Europia* signifies that the image of Apollo in Delphi is a column, by means of these verses: That we might dedicate to the god the tenth and the first fruits, From the holy stalls and the high column.

Apollo, indeed, who is mystically so called from the "privation" of the many, is one God. Furthermore, that fire which was like a pillar, and the fire which journeyed through pathless places, is a symbol of the holy light, which passes from the earth and runs back into heaven through the wood, by which also the power to see intellectually has been given to us.

CHAPTER XXV. How Plato in his Laws imitated Moses.

^B Plato the philosopher, having been aided by the writings of Moses in the framing of his laws, did indeed rebuke the mode of administering a republic of Minos and Lycurgus, as that which looked only toward strength; but he commended, as more honorable and more venerable, that which speaks of one thing and is always directed toward one decree. For he says that it behooves us to philosophize with strength, honesty, and prudence, if, looking toward the dignity of heaven, we remain immutably, and without any repentance, of the same opinion and occupy ourselves with the same things. Wherefore, he interprets those things which are said in the Law, enjoining us to look toward one God and to do what is just. He says that there are two species of the "political": one the legal, the other indeed, the name being preserved, the political. And by the political, he properly signifies the Creator of all things, as he hints in the book of the same name; moreover, he calls those who look toward Him, and choose an active and just life, and are also free for contemplation, "political." And that political, which ^C is likewise called legal, he divides into a cosmic magnificence and a private order, which he called propriety, harmony, and temperance, when the rulers are fitting for those who are ruled, and the ruled are obedient to the rulers; which is what is according to Moses in its effect.

^A Furthermore, Plato, having been helped by the fact that the legal pertains to generation and the political to friendship and harmony, joined the philosopher in the *Epinomis*—the one who knows the passage of all generation that occurs through the wandering stars—to the *Laws*; but he conjoins the other philosopher, Timaeus, who is skilled in astronomy and in the theory of their motion, and of the sympathy and communion they have with one another, to the *Republic*. For the end, I suppose, both of the political man and of him who lives according to law, is contemplation; for it is necessary to administer the state rightly, but it is best to philosophize. For he who has understanding, having drawn all his own things into knowledge, will live, having directed his life with good works, and having dishonored the opposites, and pursuing the studies that contribute to truth. ^B Law is not the things that are believed (for neither is what is seen necessarily sight), nor is it every opinion (for not even that which is evil), but law is a good opinion, and a good opinion is the true one, and the true one is that which finds "the Being" and attains it: "He who is has sent me," says Moses. Or others, in accordance—evidently—with this good opinion, have declared law to be right reason, prescriptive indeed regarding what must be done, and proscriptive regarding what must not be done.

*Epinomis, or The Philosopher*

^A Hence the law is rightly said to have been given through Moses, being a canon of things just and unjust; and we may properly call this a "decree" (θεσμὸν) which was handed down by God through Moses. It has, therefore, a leading toward the divine. Paul also says: "The law was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made" (Galat. III, 19). Then, as if explaining the thought, he adds: "But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up,"—that is, by fear of sins—"unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith" (Galat. III, 23, 24). The legislative art is that which assigns to each part of the soul, and to their actions, what is appropriate. Moses, to sum it up, was an animate law, governed by the good Word. He thus administered a good system of public life; and that is the good education of men in society. Furthermore, he handled the judicial faculty, which is the science of correcting sinners so that they may learn justice. Of the same order with it is the punitive faculty, which holds to the measure in punishing. For punishment, as it exists, is a correction of the soul. The whole institution of Moses, so to speak, is concerned with teaching those who are able to become good and noble men, and with hunting out those who are similar to them—which would be the art of ruling. And that which is concerned with the right use of those things which have been captured by the Word is the wisdom of legislation. For its own property, as it is most kingly, is both to possess and to use. ^B Philosophers, therefore, proclaim only the wise man to be king, lawgiver, commander, just, ^C holy, and beloved of God. If we find these marks in Moses, as the Scriptures themselves show, we shall rightly be convinced in calling Moses truly wise. Just as we say that the pastoral art takes care of sheep—whence it is said that "the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep" (Joan. X, 11)—so we shall also say that the art of legislation, as it takes care of the flock of men, establishes their virtue and stirs up what is good in them. But if the allegory of the flock signifies a flock of men, the Lord himself will be both the good shepherd and the lawgiver. ^D As to the statement that the king’s office is to command what ought to be done and forbid that from which it is fitting to abstain, and that the command of things to be done and the interdiction of things to be avoided belong properly to the law—it thus follows that the king is an animate law, and the law a most just king. The same author says in *De migratione Abrahami*: "For law is nothing else than the divine utterance, commanding what should be done and forbidding what should not be done." Clement looks to this same definition of law in *Stromata*, book III.

^A of the one flock, "of those sheep that hear his voice," there is one caretaker, namely, he who "seeks what is lost" and finds it, by law and by word; since the law is spiritual and leads to that blessedness. For that which is made by the Holy Spirit is spiritual. He, then, is the true lawgiver who not only professes what is good and honorable, but also knows it. And the law is the salutary command of him who possesses knowledge, or rather, the law is the command of ^B knowledge. "For the Word of God is power and wisdom." And this same one is the interpreter of laws, through whom the law was given; the first interpreter of the divine commandments, he who "lays open the bosom of the Father," the only-begotten Son. Next, as for those who obey the law, because they have some knowledge of it, they are unable either to disbelieve or to be ignorant of the truth; but those who disbelieve, and are least willing to be established in its works, if any others are, ^C these also stand convicted of being ignorant of the truth. What, then, is this unbelief of the Greeks? Do you not wish to be persuaded by the truth, which asserts that the law was given from God through Moses, when you yourselves, moved by the authority of your own people, honor Moses? And they record that Minos, coming to the cave of Zeus, received laws from Zeus over a period of nine years; and Plato, Aristotle, and Ephorus write that Lycurgus, in his constant travel to Delphi to Apollo, learned the legislative art; ^D and Chamaeleon the Heracleote in his work *On Drunkenness*, and Aristotle in his *Republic of the Locrians*, record that Zaleucus the Locrian received laws from Athena. But those among the Greeks who, in order that the legislation might seem worthy of greater faith—as far as they are able—raise it up to the divine, acting in imitation of the prophecy according to Moses, are ungrateful, because they do not acknowledge the truth and the archetypal model of the things that are reported among them.

CHAPTER XXVII.

That the law looks to the advantages of men, even while it corrects and punishes.

Let no one, then, rail against the law because of its punishments, as if it were not good and honorable. For if he who removes a disease of the body is thought to be a benefactor, would he who attempts to free the soul from injustice not be even more so a caretaker, inasmuch as the soul is more precious than the body? But for the sake of the health of the body, we undergo cutting, and burning, and the drinking of medicines; and he who brings these is called both savior and physician, not from any envy, nor from ill-will toward the sufferer, but as the reason of the art might dictate, parts

^A are cut away so that the healthy portions should not perish with them. And one would not charge the physician’s art with wickedness; shall we not then take the same view regarding the soul, whether it be a matter of fleeing from or paying penalties, or of bonds, if one is ever to attain righteousness out of injustice? For the law, taking thought for its subjects, instructs them toward piety toward God, and dictates what must be done, and restrains each from sins, imposing penalties upon their lesser instances. But when it perceives someone to be in such a state as to seem incurable, driven to the extremity of injustice, then, taking thought for the others, so that they might not be corrupted by him, just like cutting off a part from the whole body, it thus appropriately sends such a person to death. “But when we are judged by the Lord,” says the Apostle, “we are disciplined, so that we may not be condemned along with the world.” For the prophet foretold: “Disciplining, the Lord disciplined me, but he did not deliver me to death.” “For the sake of teaching you his righteousness,” he says, “he disciplined you, and tested you, and afflicted you with hunger and thirst in the desert, so that all his justifications and judgments might be known in your heart, as many as I command you this day; and you shall know in your heart that just as a man will discipline his son, so the Lord our God will discipline you.” That the example also brings one to his senses, he immediately says: “The cunning man, seeing the wicked being punished, himself is strongly disciplined; for the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord.” ^B An even greater and most perfect good is when one is able to lead someone from doing evil to virtue and a good life; which is what the law accomplishes. So that when one has fallen into some incurable evil, being captive to injustice and greed, he would be treated with kindness if he were put to death; for the law is kindly, being able to make the ones who are just out of the unjust—if only they are willing to listen to it—and delivering others from their present evils; for it aims to render those who have chosen to live temperately and justly immortal. To know the law, however, is a sign of a good mind. And again: “Evil men do not understand the law; but those who seek the Lord will understand in every good thing.” Thus, the Providence that governs must be both mistress and good; for the power of both works salvation: the one, disciplining with punishment, as mistress; the other, bestowing kindness through good deeds, as a benefactor. And it is permitted to be no longer a son of disobedience, but to cross over from darkness to life, and, having applied the ear to wisdom, to be a lawful servant of God. ^{C D}

^A And if one should ascend further, he is enrolled in the number of the sons. But after ^B "charity shall cover the multitude of sins," one may then, with the consummation of blessed hope and having been increased in charity, be received, and be enrolled into the chosen adoption of sons, which is called the friend of God, already singing the vow and saying: "Let the Lord be to me for a God." The Apostle declared the beneficence of the Law, through that passage in which he deals with the Jews, writing thus: "But if 69 thou art called a Jew, and restest in the Law, and gloriest in God, and knowest the will of God 70, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the Law, and art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them that are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the Law;" for it is acknowledged that the Law can do these things, even if those who do not order their lives according to the Law boast as if they were living in the Law. "Blessed is the man 71 who hath found wisdom, and the mortal who hath seen prudence. And from her mouth," that is to say, from wisdom, "justice goeth forth; she carrieth law and mercy upon her tongue." For it is the operation of one Lord, who is the "power 72 and wisdom of God," both the Law and the Gospel; and the fear which the Law begat, this same is merciful 75 unto salvation. "Let not alms 74, and faith, and truth depart from thee: but bind them about thy neck." ^C Similarly also, the prophecy 75 upbraids the people, as not understanding the Law: "Destruction and unhappiness are in their ways, and the way of peace they have not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools." But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully 76. "But they that desire to be teachers of the law understand not," 77 says the Apostle, "neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm." "Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned."

Chapter XXVIII.

Quadripartite division of the Mosaic Law.

The philosophy according to Moses is divided into four parts, into the historical and that which is strictly called the legislative: which two would belong to the moral discipline ^D

^A, the third to the sacred, which is already the contemplation of physics; and lastly, the fourth species, the theological, which is the "viewing" or inspection of the sacred mysteries, which Plato says is the contemplation of those that are truly great mysteries. Aristotle calls this species Metaphysics. And that which is dialectic according to Plato, as he says in the *Statesman*, is a certain science which finds the explanation of beings. It is to be acquired by a good and prudent man, not for the sake of saying or doing anything in relation to men (as those who are now called dialecticians, who are occupied with sophistical matters, do), but in order to be able to say things acceptable to God and to do those which are acceptable, as far as one has the power. Since true dialectic is a philosophy commingled with truth, ^B observing things and examining faculties and powers, it ascends to the most excellent essence of all, and dares even to progress beyond to the God of all things, proclaiming not an experience of mortal things, but a knowledge of things divine and heavenly: to which there follows also the proper use concerning human affairs, both in speaking and in acting. Rightly, therefore, does Scripture also, wishing us to be such dialecticians, exhort us thus: "Become expert money-changers, rejecting some things, but holding fast to what is good." For this is truly dialectic, the science of dividing those things which are perceived by the intellect, and of showing the subject-matter of individual beings purely and clearly: or a faculty of dividing things into their genera, descending even to those which are most specific, and showing each thing that exists to be pure, and as it is in itself, to be seen. ^C Wherefore, this alone leads by the hand to true wisdom, which is a divine faculty, which knows beings *insofar as they are beings*, having reached that which is perfect, and is stripped of every passion; not without the Savior, who by the divine Word has brought down to the contemplative part of our soul the misty ignorance poured upon it from an evil upbringing, and has restored the best, so that we might know ^D[Everything examine, hold fast to what is good.]

^A God, and also man. This is he who in truth has shown how we are to know ourselves; this is he who reveals the Father of all to whomsoever he wills, and as far as human nature is able to grasp [the perception of]. For ^B «No one knows the Son, except the Father; and no one knows the Father, except the Son, and he to whom the Son shall reveal him.» Appropriately, then, does the Apostle say that by revelation he came to know the mystery, as I wrote briefly before, «by which, when you read, you can understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.» «By which you can understand,» he said, because he knew that some had received only milk, and not yet solid food, and not even milk alone. And the intention of the law must be understood by us in four ways: either as representing some sign, or as establishing a commandment for right conduct, or as prophesying in the manner of a prophecy. But I well know that there are men capable of discerning and stating such things; for the whole Scripture is not one Myconos for the purpose of understanding, as those who use proverbs say; but it should be approached as dialectically as possible by those who are hunting for the sequence of divine teaching.

CHAPTER XXIX.

That the Greeks were rightly called children by the Egyptian, in view of the Hebrews and their institutions.

^C Whence the Egyptian priest, who appears in Plato, most beautifully said: «O Solon, Solon, you Greeks are always children, having no ancient opinion whatever in your souls derived from ancestral hearing; for there is no old man among the Greeks.» By «old men,» I suppose, he meant those who know the older things, that is, our things; whereas, conversely, he called those «young» who report newer things—those practiced by the Greeks, which happened yesterday and the day before—as though they were old and ancient. Therefore he added: «No learning gray with time,» for we are accustomed to use simple and obscure metaphors in a certain barbarian manner. Those, then, who are endowed with a good mind approach the whole of this artifice of interpretation without any affectation. ^D

^A For he says that their opinion “differs little from fables.” For one must not listen to puerile fables, nor indeed to those fables that are fabricated by children. He calls the fables themselves “children,” inasmuch as those who think themselves wise among the Greeks perceive but little; by this word “childish fable” he hints at the “venerable learning,” that is, the truth that is most ancient among the barbarians. Using this term, he has contrasted it with “the child fable,” confuting the mythical character of the recent writers’ mode of thought, in that it has nothing older in it, like children; representing both their fables and their discourses as being childish. ^B Therefore, the Divine Power who speaks to Hermas in the revelation says: “The visions and the revelations are for the sake of the double-minded, who reason in their hearts whether these things are so or not.” Similarly, they also strengthen, confirm, and ground demonstrative arguments out of an abundance of varied learning, as long as their minds, like those of youths, are still fluttering in uncertainty. “For the lamp is a good commandment,” as Scripture wills: “and the law is a light of the way; for education convicts the ways of life.” “Law is king of all, mortals and immortals,” says Pindar. But I understand through these words Him who gave the law; and I accept that saying of Hesiod as referring to the God of all men, even if it was said by the poet by way of conjecture and not by way of comprehension:

For this law has the Son of Cronos ordained for men, For fishes and wild beasts and birds of flight, To devour one another; since justice is not with them. But to men He gave justice, which is by far the best. ^C

Whether, therefore, he refers to the law that is natural and co-existent with birth, or ^D to the eternal law’s command. Thus, he says, they used to call the Divine mind and counsel; or, as Cicero in *De Legibus* puts it, the “right reason of the supreme governor.” And it was in this sense that Pindar spoke, as is found in Plato’s *Gorgias*, which Chrysippus had also set down in one of his books *On Laws*—even as in Euripides’ *Hecuba* it is said that even a god obeys that law: “For the gods are strong, and the law that rules over them.” And those verses from a little before about the minds of youth are from Homer’s *Iliad* [Γ]:

Always the minds of younger men are fluttering.

COLLECT. — Clement cites the same sentiment of Pindar later in *Stromata*, book [IV], page 367. Origen, in *Contra Celsum*, book V, page 255: “And Pindar seems to me to have spoken rightly in saying that law is the king of all.” These things are taken from Herodotus, book III, chapter 58. Chrysippus seems to have had the same in mind in his definition of law, which Marcianus reports in the [first] book of the Digest, *De Legibus*: “Law is king of all things, both divine and human.”

further given, yet it is out of God, and the law of nature and the law of discipline are one and the same; just as Plato also in the *Politicus* declares that there is one lawgiver; and in the *Laws*, one who shall understand things pertaining to music: by these things teaching that there is one Logos, and one God. ^A Moses also appears to call the Lord the covenant, saying: "Behold I," (6)—that is, "my covenant is with thee." And since he said before that one ought not to seek a covenant in writing, for there is a covenant which God, the author of the universe, establishes. And God (*Theos*) is so called in Greek from "position" (*thesin*), and order, or constitution. In the *Preaching of Peter* (8), you may find the Lord addressed as Law and Logos. But let the first Stromateus of gnostic commentaries, according to the true philosophy, be concluded here.

THE CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA STROMATEIS IN EIGHT BOOKS: BOOK TWO

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA STROMATA BOOK TWO: CHAPTER ONE (OR PREFACE)

The author proposes the subjects to be treated by him in the following sections.

^C Next it follows that we should discuss, since Scripture holds the Greeks to be thieves of the barbarian philosophy (10), ^D that this will be shown in a few words. For these things were refuted not only among the Greeks by the Logos through Socrates, but also among the barbarians by the Logos Himself having been formed and having become man, and having been called Jesus Christ;

Furthermore, Tertullian ^A asserts (in his book *De Anima*, ch. 2, as also Lactantius, cited above) that the Greek philosophers learned their dogmas from the Jews.

Book Two

^A A consequence follows, that we should show how useless is the so-called circle of disciplines; and we must handle astrology, mathematics, magic, and sorcery only in passing. For the Greeks boast of these as if they were the greatest sciences. But he who reproves with freedom is a man of peace. We have often said that we have neither practiced speaking Greek, nor do we set any store by it. For this is profitable to those who lead the masses away from the truth. But true philosophy benefits the minds of the hearers rather than their tongues. For I think that one who cares for the truth ought not to use an ornate and laboriously composed speech, ^B but should endeavor only to explain what he intends in whatever way he can. For those who are attached to words and occupied with them let the actual things escape them. It is the characteristic of a farmer to pluck the rose that grows among thorns without injury; and of a craftsman to find the pearl that is buried in the flesh of the oyster. They say, moreover, that hens have the sweetest quality of flesh when, no abundant food having been set before them, they themselves, scratching with their feet, gather their food with labor. If, therefore, anyone, being a student of the similar, desires to track down the truth, which has eluded him among many plausible and Greek arguments, he must, by being industrious, hunt it out as if it were the true face hidden behind masks. For in the vision of Hermas, the Power that appeared says: "Whatever is permitted to be revealed to you, shall be revealed."

CHAPTER II

^C But do not be puffed up on account of your own wisdom, the Proverbs say; "But in all thy ways acknowledge her, that she may rightly direct thy paths, and thy foot shall not stumble." For He wishes by these words to show that deeds must be in accordance with reason; and furthermore, that we must choose what is useful from every doctrine. There are, moreover, various ways of wisdom, that we may walk upon the right path toward the way of truth. And the way is faith. "And thy foot shall not stumble," he says, concerning certain ones who seemed to oppose themselves to the one divine providential administration. Whence he adds: "Be not wise in thine own conceit," according to the impious reasonings which contend against the providence of God; "but fear the only powerful God," to whom it is a consequence that nothing is opposed to God. Furthermore, the sequel also clearly teaches ^D that the fear of God is a turning away from evil. For he says: "And turn away from every evil." This is the discipline of wisdom. "For whom the Lord loves, He disciplines," causing pain that he may attain understanding, but restoring him to peace and incorruptibility. Therefore, the barbarian philosophy, which we follow, is truly perfect and true. For it says in Wisdom: "For He himself...

^A gave me the true knowledge of the things that exist, to know the constitution of the world," and what follows, until "and the virtues of roots." In all these He has encompassed natural contemplation, which is concerned with the sensible world of all things that have come into existence. Next, He also hints at intelligible things, through which He proceeds: "And all things that are hidden and manifest I learned; for wisdom, the artificer of all, taught me." You have in brief the profession of our philosophy. This learning, when practiced with a correct way of life, leads through wisdom, the artificer of all, to the governor of the universe—a thing difficult to grasp and impossible to track down, always withdrawing and moving far away from the one who pursues it. But the same God, while being far off, has also drawn very near, a ^B miracle truly ineffable. "Is God, in truth, an approaching God?" says the Lord. Far off in essence—for how could the originated ever approach the unoriginated?—but very near in power, which has embraced all things in its bosom. "If anyone does anything in secret," He says, "and I look not upon him?" And indeed, He is always present through the power that touches us—the power that is supervisory, beneficent, and instructive: the power of God. Whence Moses, convinced that God could never be known by human wisdom, says: "Show me yourself," and, "into the darkness," where the ^C Word of God was, he strives to enter—that is, into the unapproachable and invisible. A note: (19) far removed as to essence; (20) very near as to power; (21) which has embraced all things; (22) If one does... secretly... and I see him not; Jer. xxiii, 24. (23) into the darkness].

Note on the Theology of Clement regarding the Divine Nature

(19) We do not say that God is far off as to essence, as if one might think Him to be circumscribed by the limits of heaven, for we assert that He contains all things, as taught in *Strom.* v, and is everywhere present, and not enclosed in certain defined places. (20) It is possible to read in the dative case *η*, as Sylburg says. But *ᾗ* is found in the more recent editions. But the previously accepted *ᾗ*, which means "by which," is established as the true reading from the words of Philo, which are to be placed here immediately. (21) "Has embraced." Thus the author says in *Strom.* v, pg. 587, that God encompasses all things and embraces them in His own bosom. This phrase is taken from Philo the Jew, in the book *On the Confusion of Tongues*, pp. 339-340, where, describing the immensity of God, he says: "But that power which founded and ordered the universe is truly called God, and He contains all things in His own bosom, and pervades all parts of the whole universe; but the divine Numen itself is invisible and incomprehensible everywhere," etc. (22) "If he shall do something in secret, I will not see him?" Jer. xxiii, 24. (23) "Into the darkness." *Conf. Exod.* xxxiv, 5. Moreover, Clement also drew these things from the beginning of the book of Philo, *On the Mutation of Names*, p. 1045: "Wherefore Moses, spectator of the invisible nature and inspector of God (for they say he entered into the darkness, thus darkly signifying the invisible essence); having cast aside the hope of learning such things through others, he resorted to the thing itself which he was investigating, and used this prayer: 'Show me yourself, that I may see you clearly.'"

' ^A The voice of God struggles to enter, that is to say, into the secluded and unseen notions concerning the Existent Being. For God is not in darkness or in a place, but above place, and time, and the properties of created things; wherefore He is never contained in a part, nor is He comprehending or comprehended, either by way of definition or by way of division. For what house will you build for me? says the Lord; but He did not even build one for Himself, being uncontainable, and even if heaven is called His throne, not even in this way is He encompassed; rather, He rests, finding delight in His creation. It is clear, therefore, that the truth is hidden from us; and if this has already been shown by one example, a little later we shall demonstrate it through many more. For why are those not deservedly to be welcomed who both desire to learn, and are able, according to Solomon, to know wisdom and instruction, and to understand the words of prudence, and to receive ^B the tropes of discourse, and to understand true justice? As there is also another kind of instruction, which is taught not according to the truth, by the laws of the Greeks and by other philosophers. And to direct judgments, he says—not meaning forensic courts, but signifying that we ought to possess a sound and unerring judgment within ourselves: That it may give craftiness to the innocent, and to the young child sensation and benevolence. For when the wise man, who is persuaded to obey the commandments, hears these things, he shall become wiser in knowledge; and the man of understanding shall acquire governance; he shall understand a parable and an obscure saying, the sayings of the wise and riddles. For those inspired by God do not put forth counterfeit discourses, nor do those who trade in these; nor do they spin the snares with which most sophists entangle the young, ^C who have no leisure for anything true; but those who possess the Holy Spirit search the depths of God, that is, they become participants in the concealment surrounding the prophecies. But it is forbidden to share holy things with dogs, as long as they remain beasts; for it is never fitting to mingle with those who are envious and chaotic, and still unfaithful in their habits, and who are prepared to bark shamelessly against the inquiry of truth, the divine and pure stream of living water. Let not your waters, he says, be poured out far from your fountain; but let your waters flow through your squares. For many do not think such things, but in darkness they wander; nor do they understand, even when they have learned; but they seem to themselves to know, according to the noble Heraclitus. Does it not seem to you that this man also ^D [was blaming those who do not believe?] "But my righteous one," says the Prophet, "shall live by faith."

^B And another prophet says, "If you do not believe, neither shall you understand." For how could a soul, while incredulity regarding learning is struggling within it, ever grasp the transcendent contemplation of these things? Yet faith, which the Greeks malign by regarding it as empty and barbaric, is a voluntary anticipation, an assent of piety, the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen, according to the divine Apostle; for by it the elders were most especially attested. And without faith it is impossible to please God. Others again have defined faith as an unifying assent to an obscure thing; just as, indeed, demonstrative proof is a clear assent to an unknown thing. ^B If, therefore, 35 it is a choice—being appetitive of something, and this appetite is intellectual—and since choice is the principle of action, faith is found 34 to be the principle of action, for it is the principle of action and the foundation of prudent choice, as some beforehand 55 demonstrate the proof through faith. And voluntarily following what is advantageous is the beginning of prudence. Indeed, a firm and unshakable choice provides great momentum toward knowledge. Immediately, therefore, the meditation of faith becomes knowledge, resting upon a firm foundation. The sons of the philosophers define knowledge 56 as a state that cannot be overturned by reason. Is there, then, another such state, the true 37 piety itself, of which the Word is the only teacher? I do not think so. Theophrastus says that sensation 58 is the beginning of faith; for from it, the principles ^C toward the Word that is in us and the intellect extend.

^A He, therefore, who has believed the divine Scriptures, having a firm judgment, receives as irrefutable demonstration the voice of God who has gifted us with the Scriptures. Faith, then, is no longer the result of demonstration, which is reinforced. Blessed, therefore, are they who have not seen, and yet have believed. For the songs of the Sirens, displaying a power beyond that of a human, used to astonish those who chanced by, preparing them—almost against their will—to receive what was being said.

CHAPTER III.

He disputes against heretics who maintain that faith arises from the necessity of nature.

The followers of Basilides ^B think that faith is natural, for which reason they also attribute it to election, as a thing which finds its teachings without demonstration by intellectual apprehension. But those from Valentinus, while attributing faith to us, the simple, claiming for themselves—who are saved by nature—the "knowledge," according to the preeminence of the seed that is within them, wish it to be distinct, and say that it is far more separate from faith than the spiritual is from the animal. Furthermore, the followers of Basilides say that faith and election are proper to each distinct interval; and again, that by way of consequence from the super-mundane election, there follows the mundane faith of the whole of nature, and that the gift of faith is also appropriate to the hope of each. Faith, therefore, is no longer an achievement of the faculty of choice, if it is a prerogative of nature; nor will he who has not believed receive just retribution, for he is not to blame; nor is he who has believed, since he was not the cause. ^C But all that is peculiar and different in faith and unbelief would be subject neither to praise nor to blame, if we were to reason correctly, possessing as it does the preceding natural necessity that has been brought about by Him who can do all things. But if we, like inanimate things, are drawn by natural operations, as if by strings, then involuntary action is in vain, and the impulse that precedes these. And I no longer understand such a living being, the impulsive power of which has received necessity, being moved by an external cause. And where, then, is the repentance of him who was once an unbeliever, through which there is forgiveness of sins? So that neither is baptism reasonable any longer, nor the blessed seal, ^D nor the Son, nor the Father; but, I suppose, God is found to be the distribution of the natures among them...

which does not have voluntary faith as the foundation of salvation.

CHAPTER IV. Again, concerning the utility of believing, and that faith is the foundation of all knowledge.

We, however, who have received from the Lord through the Scriptures that a free power of choosing and ^A avoiding has been given to men, let us acquiesce with firm and immovable judgment in faith, showing a keen and ready spirit; for we have chosen life, and have believed in God through His voice. And he who has believed the Word knows that the thing is true; for the Word is truth. But he who has not believed the speaker has not believed God. "By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear," says the Apostle (Heb. xi, 3). "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained ^B testimony that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it, being dead, he yet speaks" (Heb. xi, 4), and what follows, down to that which concerns "the temporary pleasure of sin" (cf. Heb. xi, 25). These, then, even before the Law, did faith justify, and constitute them heirs of the divine promise. Why then do I still bring forward testimonies of faith, recounting them from our history? For time will fail me as I tell of Gideon, Barak, ^C Sampson, Jephthah, David, Samuel, and the prophets, and the things that follow these.

Now, since there are four things in which the true consists—sense, intelligence, knowledge, and opinion—by nature the first is intelligence, but for us and with respect to us, it is sense. From sense and intelligence, the essence of knowledge is constituted; but the common ground of both intelligence and sense is that which is evident. But sense is as it were a step toward knowledge; faith, however, having progressed through sensible things, ^D leaves behind opinion, but strives toward those things that are free from falsehood, and remains in the truth. If, however, anyone should say that knowledge is demonstrative by means of reason, let him hear that the principles are also indemonstrable; for they cannot be known either by art or by prudence. For the one is concerned with things which are capable of being otherwise, while the other is productive and, in a manner, contemplative. By faith alone, therefore, do they think they attain the principle of the universe. For any knowledge can be taught; but that which can be taught is taught from that which is previously known; but the principle of the universe was not previously known to the Greeks—neither to Thales, who understood water to be the first cause, nor to the others.

who followed thereafter, those physicists. For Anaxagoras was the first to set mind over things. ^A But not even he preserved the dignity of the efficient cause, describing certain mindless revolutions, along with the mind’s idleness and folly. Therefore the Word also says: "Do not call anyone your master on earth." For knowledge is a demonstrative habit; but faith is a grace, which leads one from things that cannot be demonstrated ^B toward that which is simple, universal, and common, which is neither with matter, nor is it matter, nor under matter. But the unbelievers, as it seems, drag everything down from heaven and from the invisible realm to the earth, simply grasping stones and oaks with their hands, according to Plato; for touching all such things, they maintain that this alone exists which admits of contact and touch; defining body and substance as the same thing. ^C Contradicting them, those who are quite piously defending from above—from the invisible somewhere—certain intelligible and incorporeal forms, are forcing these to be the true substance. Lo, indeed, says the Word, "I am doing new things," which "the eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor did they enter into the heart of man"; with a new eye, a new ear, and a new heart, whatever things can be seen and heard are to be grasped through faith and understanding, as the disciples of the Lord say, ^D hear, and do these things spiritually. For there is genuine money, and there is another that is counterfeit, which none the less deceives the untaught, though not the money-changers, who have learned to separate and distinguish the stamped from the genuine. Thus the money-changer says to the untaught man that this coin is merely counterfeit; but how, only the one who is an acquaintance of the banker, and who is practiced in this, learns. Aristotle, too, sets mind over matter, beginning his work in this way, which is interpreted pleasantly and with greatness of soul: "All things were together, then mind came and arranged them"; on account of which he was also called Mind. For just as the eye is in the body, so certainly is faith in the intellect; or rather, just as the eye needs light through which visible things are shown to it, in the same way the intellect needs faith, which shows it divine things and preserves the conviction about them stable. But listen also to how Plato accuses those who are unwilling to contemplate with the mind what is perceivable by the intellect alone: "See," he says, "looking about, that no one who is not initiated hears these things; such are those who suppose nothing else to exist except what they can grasp tightly with their hands; but they do not admit actions, and generations, and everything invisible into the category of substance."

Faith, then, O friends, is a common thing for all, both for those who desire to learn some art, and for those who sail, and for those who farm, and for those who attend upon physicians; but expertise is not of all, but only of those who hold the knowledge of those arts. Therefore, if for the sake of example we should wish to distinguish genuine and refined gold, we do not ourselves subject it to the test, but we command one who is skilled in such things to test it; and he, applying it either to the touchstone or to fire, declares whether it is counterfeit or genuine. Therefore, knowledge is not of all, but of those who have learned these things through instruction, through length of time, and through experience; but faith, on the other hand, belongs to all those who desire to learn anything.

It is in this way that the money-changer distinguishes the genuine coin from the counterfeit. Let no one, therefore, my friends, disparage faith; for Aristotle himself called faith the criterion of knowledge.

^A Faith, indeed, requires knowledge, just as knowledge requires faith; for neither can faith exist without knowledge, nor knowledge without faith. Yet faith leads the way to knowledge, and knowledge follows upon faith. It is said that faith is an anticipation of the mind. Faith, therefore, is more authoritative than knowledge, and is its criterion. Surmise, on the other hand, mimics faith, being a weak opinion, just as a flatterer mimics a friend, or a wolf a dog. ^B For since the craftsman, seeing that by having learned certain things he becomes an artisan, and the navigator, having been trained in his craft, will be able to navigate, does not deem it sufficient merely to wish to become good and noble, but knows it is necessary to learn by obeying someone—and to obey the Word, whom we have proclaimed as Teacher, is to believe in Him alone while in no way resisting Him; for how could one possibly be ignorant before God?—it follows that knowledge is characterized by faith, and faith by knowledge, through a certain divine consequentiality and mutual interdependence.

Moreover, Epicurus, who preferred pleasure above all else to the truth, also assumes that faith is an anticipation of the mind. He defines anticipation as the concentration of the mind upon something evident, and as an understanding of an evident thing; for no one can search, or doubt, or even hold an opinion, or even refute anything, without anticipation. But how could someone who does not possess an anticipation of what he desires learn that about which he is inquiring? For he who has learned already turns his anticipation into comprehension. If, then, the one who is learning does not learn without an anticipation that is receptive to what is spoken, he himself possesses ears capable of hearing the truth; and blessed is he who speaks into the ears of those who hear, just as, indeed, he is blessed who practices obedience. ^C For to hear fully is to understand. If, therefore, faith is nothing other than an anticipation of the mind concerning what is being said, and this is called obedience and understanding and persuasion, it is not something that is merely learned; rather, they call anticipation a kind of comprehension, or a correct opinion, or a conception, or a universal notion stored within the mind—that is, the memory of something that has frequently appeared from without. For example: "Such is man." For as soon as the word "man" is uttered, immediately, through anticipation, his form is also perceived, with the senses having led the way. Therefore, every thing is manifest by the name first assigned to it; and we would not have searched for what we were seeking if we had not already known it. Epicurus accordingly said that faith itself is an anticipation of the mind; but that anticipation, having received knowledge, becomes comprehension. Blessed is he who is also of that obedience. ^D

Hearing, however, is understanding. If, therefore, faith is nothing else than an anticipation of knowledge regarding the things which are said, and this is called obedience and the persuasion of intelligence, then without faith no one will learn, since they cannot learn without anticipation. It is therefore proven to be thoroughly true, that which was said by the prophet: "Unless you believe, you shall not understand" (Isa. VII, 9). Heraclitus the Ephesian also, paraphrasing this saying, expressed it thus: "Unless one hopes for the unhoped-for, he will not find it, since it is inscrutable and impenetrable."

But also Plato, the philosopher, says in his *Laws* ^A that he who is to be blessed and happy must be a partaker of truth from the very beginning, in order that he may live for the longest possible time as a truth-teller; for he is faithful. But the unfaithful man is one to whom voluntary falsehood is pleasing; whereas he to whom it is involuntary is senseless, and is neither a living being nor anything else to be desired. For every unfaithful and ignorant person is devoid of friendship. And might he not be speaking here of this royal wisdom in the *Euthydemus*, though ^B hiddenly? At any rate, in the *Politicus* he says verbatim: "Does it not follow that the knowledge of the true king is royal? And whoever possesses this, whether he be a ruler or a private individual, will rightly be called royal in respect to that very art."

Immediately, those who have believed in Christ are both called and are "good," as those who are cared for by the King who is truly King. For just as those ^C who are true to the King, because they are truly kingly, are those who are subjects of the true King ^D and we shall say that he who is able to advise and instruct a man who is a ruler of a state, even if he himself is a private citizen, possesses the knowledge which the ruler himself ought to have? And we shall say "Yes." But is not the knowledge of the true king royal? "Yes." Will not he who possesses this, whether he happens to be a ruler or a private citizen, be called royal in every respect in accordance with that very art? [alt-version omitted]

^A Thus those who are Christ’s are kings ^B under Christ the King, and those who belong to Christ are Christians. Then, lower down, he clearly adds: "That which is right would be lawful, and law by nature is right reason, and not in writings, nor in other things." And the Eleatic stranger declares the royal and political man to be an animate law. Such a one is he who indeed fulfills the law, but does the will of the Father, being inscribed openly upon a ^C certain high tree, ^D as an exemplar of divine virtue set forth to those who are able to discern it. The Greeks know the signals (scytalae) of the Lacedaemonian ephors, which were written by law upon pieces of wood; but my law, as has been said before, is both royal and animate, and it is right reason: "Law, which is the king of all mortals and immortals," as the Boeotian Pindar sings. For Speusippus, in the first book of his *Against Cleophon*, seems to write things similar to Plato through this: "For if royalty is a good thing, and the wise man alone is king and ruler; and law, being right reason, is a good thing; which indeed is how matters stand." Consistent with these things, the Stoic philosophers dogmatize that royalty, priesthood, prophecy, the science of legislating, riches, true beauty, nobility, and liberty are attributed to the wise man alone; and they themselves also admit that he is found with great difficulty.

CHAPTER V.

He proves by many examples that the Greeks drew most things from the sacred writers.

^C It seems, therefore, that all the dogmas mentioned before were handed down to the Greeks from the great Moses. And by these things he teaches that everything belongs to the wise man: "And because God has had mercy on me, I have all things." He indicates, moreover, that he is dear to God, saying: "The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob." For one of these is found to be called openly the friend; and the other, having his name changed, is shown as one "Seeing God"; and, allegorizing Isaac as a consecrated victim, He chose him for Himself, as a type that would be the future account of the economy of salvation. And among the Greeks, Minos is celebrated, who for nine years

reigned and was familiarly conversant with Jove, when they heard that God spoke with Moses, as if one were speaking to his own friend. Now Moses was indeed wise, a king, a legislator. But our Savior transcends all human nature; He is so beautiful that He alone is loved by us who desire the true beauty: for He was the true light. And He is shown to be King, both proclaimed by untaught children and by the Jews who do not believe and are ignorant, and declared by the prophets themselves. And He is so rich that He despised all the earth, and the gold under the earth and above the earth, which with all its glory were offered to Him by the Adversary. What need is there to mention that He is the only high priest, who alone possesses the knowledge of the service of God? The King of peace, Melchisedech, ^B who alone is most capable of all to preside over the human race; and a legislator, as one who gives the law in the mouth of the prophets, most clearly commanding and teaching what things are to be done and what are not. And who could be more noble than He, whose only father is God? Come, then, let us show that Plato also supports these same dogmas; for in the *Phaedrus* he said that the wise man is rich, saying: "O beloved Pan, and whatever other gods are here present, grant me to become beautiful within; and that whatever I have externally may be friendly to those within; and may I consider the wise man alone to be rich!" And the Athenian guest, rebuking those who thought that those who possess much money are rich, says: "But that it is impossible for them to be at once very rich ^C and good; by rich, I mean what the multitude means—asserting that they are rich, who, being few, possess the most valuable property out of many, which even any wicked man might possess." To the faithful belong the whole world of wealth, says Solomon; but to the infidel, not even a penny. We must therefore put much more faith in the Scripture, which says that a camel will sooner pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man become a philosopher. On the other hand, it counts the poor as blessed, just as Plato understood, saying: "For one is to be considered poor not whose financial resources are diminished, but whose insatiability is increased. For poverty is not a lack of money, but an insatiability [which grows]. For it is not ^D

ever the lack of money, but the insatiability; from which the good man would be free, and he would also be wealthy. In the *Alcibiades* he calls vice a slavish thing, but virtue a liberal thing. “Take,” says he, “away from you the heavy yoke, and take up the mild one,” as the Scripture says; just as the poets, too, call it a slavish yoke. And the “You were sold for your sins,” to those mentioned before, agrees. Every one, therefore, who commits sin is a slave; but the slave does not remain in the house for ever. But if the Son shall free you, you will be free, and the truth will set you free.

Now, the Athenian stranger says that the wise man is good in this way, just as if one were to claim that the just are good, even if they happen to be ugly in body: as far as regards their most just character, one would hardly seem to speak incorrectly in saying that they are good in this respect; and “His appearance was failing beyond all the sons of men,” the prophecy foretold. And Plato called the wise man a king in the *Statesman*; and the passage is set forth. These things having been demonstrated, let us return again to the discourse concerning faith. Yet Plato also, with every proof, shows that there is a need for faith everywhere, celebrating at the same time peace: For one would not indeed be faithful and sound in civil disturbances without complete virtue. But very many mercenaries are pugnacious and willing to die in war, of whom the most part are almost all bold and unjust, insolent and ^B experts in nothing, with very few exceptions. But if these things are said correctly, any legislator, from whom there is any utility, looks ^C primarily to the highest virtue. For such are strong and willing to die in war, but we say that they are far better in our—that is, the most important—war; just as even justice, temperance, and prudence when brought together with courage are better. For one would never be faithful and sound ^D in civil disturbances without complete virtue; but as for those who have passed through well and are fighting and willing to die in war, Tyrtaeus points out that there are very many of the mercenaries, of whom the most part turn out to be bold and unjust and insolent and most foolish, almost all of them, except for some very few. We, however, since these are excellent, judge those who excel in our greatest war to be far more excellent. And we also have as a witness the poet Theognis, a citizen of the Megarians in Sicily, who says: A faithful man is worth his weight in yellow gold and silver In a grievous time, O Cyrnus, of civil discord. This man we say is far better in a more grievous war than that one, almost by as much as justice, temperance, and prudence united with courage are better. For no one can be found who is upright and faithful in civil disturbances without the full number of virtues. But many mercenaries also, Tyrtaeus says, are found who fight fearlessly in foreign war: of whom the most next page begins part is bold and unjust, insolent and most foolish, except for very few. We however, when these are excellent, consider those who excel in the greatest war as far more excellent.

^A For this is trustworthiness, of which we have need at all times, both in peace and in every war, and indeed in the entire course of life; for when it is seized, it seems to encompass all others. That which is best is neither war nor sedition—for one would pray to be spared from the need for these—but peace and mutual kindness toward one another is the most excellent thing. From these things it is manifest that, according to Plato, peace is the greatest prayer, and faith is the greatest mother of virtues. Reasonably, therefore, has it been said by Solomon: "Wisdom is in the mouth of the faithful." ^B Since Xenocrates also, in his book *On Prudence*, says that wisdom is the knowledge of the primary causes and of the intelligible essence, considering prudence to be twofold: the one practical, the other theoretical, which indeed he posits as human wisdom. Wherefore, while wisdom is prudence, not every prudence is wisdom. It has been shown, moreover, that the first principle of all things is known through faith, and not through demonstration. For it would be absurd for the disciples of Pythagoras of Samos, rejecting the demonstrations of the things that were being sought, to deem that the "He himself said it" ^C is sufficient for faith, and to hold that this expression is enough to confirm what they had heard; but for those who contemplate the truth, [it should not be so]. ^D For to what end does this discourse of ours now lead? And what is it that it has desired to make manifest in saying these things? It is clear: that this, as something above all else, is what the lawgiver appointed by God in this place—and every man who is of even the slightest benefit—always looking to the greatest virtue, will establish as laws. And this is, as Theognis says, that trustworthiness in the midst of terrors, which one might rightly call perfect justice.

^A they are possessed by desire—not to have faith in the Master worthy of belief, the only Savior God—but to demand from him proofs of what is said. But he who has ears to hear, let him hear, he says. And who is this? Let Epicharmus say: "Mind sees, and mind hears; the rest are blind and deaf." Heraclitus, reproving some unbelievers, says: "Knowing not how to hear, nor how to speak," helped indeed by Solomon who says: *If thou shouldst love to hear, thou shalt receive; and if thou inclinest thy ear, thou shalt be wise.* ^B

CAPUT VI. Of the excellence and utility of faith.

*Lord, who hath believed our report?* saith Isaiah. For faith is by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, saith the Apostle. *How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent?* As it is written: *How beautiful are the feet of them that preach good tidings!* ^C See how he leads faith up through hearing and the preaching of the Apostles to the word of the Lord and the Son of God? We do not yet understand that the word of the Lord is a demonstration. Just as the game of ball does not depend only upon the one who throws the ball with skill, but also requires the other person who receives it rhythmically, so that the exercise may be performed according to the laws of ball-play: so also instruction is seen to be worthy of faith only when the faith of those who hear—which is a natural art, so to speak—contributes to the learning of it. ^D Therefore, [a disposition] that is productive also contributes to the sowing of seeds; for neither is there any benefit to the best teaching without the reception of the one who learns, nor indeed [is there benefit to] prophecy, nor to the docility of the hearers if it be not present. For indeed, things that are deaf and dumb have need of the word.

^A For dry straw, being ready to receive the burning power, is more easily kindled; and the stone, which is celebrated as Heraclean, attracts iron by reason of affinity; just as the tear of the cedar tree draws away straw, and amber moves chaff. Those things which are drawn are persuaded by them, drawn by an ineffable spirit, not as primary causes, but as secondary causes. Since there is a double kind of vice—one which acts with deceit and stealth, and another which attacks and seizes with open force—the divine Word has cried out, calling all together; and although He knows most certainly those who will not be persuaded, nevertheless, because it is in our power to obey or not, so that no one may be able to allege a pretext of ignorance, He has made a just calling, and demands from each what is according to his power ^B. For to some, both the willing and the being able are present at once, having grown in this through exercise and having been purified; while others, even if they are not yet able, already have the will. For the work of willing belongs to the soul, but acting is not without the body. Nor are things measured by the end alone, but they are also judged by the choice of each—if he chose easily, if he repented for the things in which he sinned, if he received understanding concerning the things in which he erred, and "thought" (metegno)—which is to say, "knew afterwards." For repentance is a slow knowledge; but the first knowledge is innocence. Therefore repentance is an achievement of faith; for if one does not believe that there is sin by which he was previously held, he will not even change. And if he does not believe that punishment hangs over the wrongdoer, and salvation is ready for him who lives according to the commandments, not even in this way will he change. Now also, hope consists of faith. The followers of Basilides, therefore, define faith as an assension of the soul towards some of those things which do not move the sense, because they are not present. But hope is an expectation of possessing a good. And it is necessary for the expectation to be faithful. A faithful person is one who keeps without transgression those things which have been entrusted to him; and the things entrusted to us are the discourses about God, and the divine words, the commandments, ^D along with the performance of the precepts. This is the faithful servant who is praised by the Lord. But when He says, "Faithful"

STROMATA BOOK II

^A God is, he indicates to the one to whom he is declaring it that it is worthy of belief; for the Word of God also declares that He himself is faithful. How then, if to believe is to hold an opinion, do the philosophers think the things from themselves are firm? For it is not an opinion, a voluntary assent to a preceding demonstration, but an assent to someone powerful and mighty. And who could be more powerful than God? But unbelief is a weak and negative opinion ^B of the opposite; just as the difficulty of believing is a habit that admits faith with difficulty. Now faith is a voluntary opinion and a preoccupation of prudent fore-comprehension. Expectation, moreover, is an opinion of the future; and other expectations are opinions about uncertain things: but trust is a firm apprehension concerning something. Wherefore we believe in Him in whom we have trust, that we shall obtain divine glory and salvation. And we have trust in the one God alone, whom we know, because He will not transgress the things that have been beautifully promised to us, and which, having been created to this end, were benevolently given to us by Him. Benevolence, moreover, is to wish well to another for his own sake; for He is in need of nothing: but the beneficence, and the kindness which is from the Lord, terminates on us, being divine benevolence, and being toward doing good. ^C But if to Abraham who believed it was reckoned unto righteousness, and we are the seed of Abraham, we too must believe through hearing. For we are Israelites, we who are obedient not through signs, but through hearing. Therefore, "Rejoice, O barren one, you who do not bear; break forth and cry, you who are not in labor; for many are the children of the desolate one more than of her who has a husband." You have lived in the circuit of the people; your children are blessed in the tabernacles of your fathers. But if the same mansions are announced by prophecy both to us and to the Patriarchs again, one God of both testaments is shown. He adds, therefore, more clearly: "You have inherited the testament of Israel," addressing her who is from the Gentiles, the calling, ^D which was once barren of this husband, who is the Word, who had formerly been deserted by the Bridegroom. "But the righteous one shall live by faith," namely, the one which is in accordance with the testament and the commandment; for these two, given providentially by name and by time, according to age and progress, though they are one in power, the one old and the other new, are supplied by one God through the Son. For which reason the Apostle also says in the Epistle to the Romans: "For the righteousness of God is revealed in Him from faith to faith," the one that is perfected from prophecy unto the Gospel, teaching salvation through one and the same Lord. "The nations shall surely inherit. The covenant of your peace shall not be removed."

^A I commend this charge unto you, child Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on you, that you might war in them the good warfare, having faith and a good conscience, which some having put away, concerning faith have made shipwreck; because they polluted the conscience which comes from God with unbelief. Therefore, faith is not reasonably to be calumniated as being easy, common, and for the first comer. For if it were a human pursuit, as the Greeks supposed, it would have long since vanished; but since it grows, there is no place where it does not exist. I say, then, that faith, whether it be founded by love or even by fear, as the accusers say, is something divine; not being torn apart by any other worldly friendship, nor dissolved by present fear. For love makes the faithful by the friendship it has toward faith, but faith is the foundation of love, bringing back beneficence; since also fear—the pedagogue of the Law—is believed in, and fear itself is believed to be. For if it is shown by its acting ^B that it exists, but is believed in when it is future and threatening, though not yet acting and present; then that which is believed to be does not itself produce faith, since it is proven by faith to be worthy of it. Such a transformation, therefore, from unbelief to becoming something faithful, is divine, as is believing through both hope and fear. And indeed, faith appears to us as the first inclination toward salvation, after which fear, hope, and repentance, progressing with continence and patience, lead us to love and to knowledge. With reason, therefore, the apostle Barnabas says: "From that part which I received, I have made haste to send to you little by little, that together with your faith ye may have also perfect knowledge." ^C The helpers of our faith are therefore fear and patience; those that fight on our side are long-suffering and continence. For these, he says, remaining pure in those things which pertain to the Lord, wisdom, intelligence, science, and knowledge rejoice together with them. Thus, of the elements of knowledge of the aforementioned virtues, faith happens to be the more elementary, being as necessary to the Gnostic as breathing is to one living in this world. As ^D [the rest is missing from the scan]

four elements, so neither can we attain to knowledge without faith. This is, therefore, the basis of truth.

CHAPTER VII.

It has therefore appeared clever and most excellent, even to those who accuse us, that the commandment should be understood through a change of name. Caution is thus shown to be rational, being a turning away from that which harms; from which, repentance for past sins arises. "For the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord; and good understanding belongs to all who perform it." Does it call wisdom an "achievement," or is it the fear of God, which opens a path to wisdom? If the Law is productive of fear, then the beginning of wisdom is the knowledge of the Law; and there is no wise man without the Law. Those who reject the Law are, therefore, unwise, ^D which leads to them being considered godless. "Discipline is the beginning of wisdom." 45

^A The Scripture says: "The ungodly will despise wisdom and instruction." Let us see what the fearsome things are that the Law proclaims.

If it means those things which lie between virtue and vice—such as poverty, sickness, disrepute, low birth, and whatever is similar—these are indeed things which the laws of cities propose and are praised for; and this opinion corresponds with the Peripatetics, who introduce three kinds of goods and consider their opposites to be evils. But the Law that has been given to us commands that we flee those things that are truly evil: adultery, wantonness, pederasty, ignorance, injustice, ^B the sickness of the soul, and death—not that which separates the soul from the body, but that which separates the soul from the truth. For these are truly grave and fearsome evils, and such are the actions that stem from them.

"For it is not in vain," say the divine responses, "that nets are spread for winged creatures; for they themselves, being partakers of blood, store up evils for themselves." How then is the Law still called evil by some heresies, which cry out that the Apostle says: "For through the Law comes knowledge ^C of sin"? To them we say: The Law did not create sin, but revealed it. For by commanding what must be done, it reproved what must not be done. It is the part of a good man both to teach what is salutary and to point out what is deadly, counseling to use the former and commanding to flee the latter.

Immediately the Apostle, whom they do not understand, said that the knowledge of sin has been manifested through the Law, not that it has received its substance. How, indeed, is the corrective Law not good, which has been given as a tutor unto Christ, ^D so that by being directed in a corrective way through fear, we might be turned toward the perfection that is through Christ? "I desire," He says, "not the death of the sinner, but his repentance." And a commandment produces repentance—being prohibitive of things not to be done, and preceptive of good works. And by "death," I think, he means ignorance.

"And he who is near the Lord is full of lashes"; that is, he who draws near to knowledge—of dangers, fears, distresses, and afflictions—enjoys this on account of his longing for the truth. "For a disciplined son has turned out wise; and a prudent son has been saved from the burning heat. And a prudent son shall receive commandments." And Barnabas the Apostle, having commanded, "Woe to those who are prudent in their own eyes and intelligent before themselves,"

added: "Let us become spiritual, a perfect temple to God, as much as in us lies."

^A Let us meditate on the fear of God, and strive to keep His commandments, so that we may rejoice in His ordinances." Whence, the "fear of the Lord" is rightly called the "beginning of wisdom."

CHAPTER VIII.

Here the followers of Basilides, expounding this saying, state that "the Prince himself, upon hearing the message of the ministering Spirit, ^B was struck with amazement at the sound and the sight, having experienced an evangelization beyond his expectations; and that his amazement was called fear, which became the beginning of wisdom, as something judgment-discriminating, distinguishing, perfecting, and restorative. For he who presides over all things sends forth [the message], after having judged not only the world but also the election." And it seems that Valentinus also, in a certain letter, conceived of such things in his mind. For he writes in these very words: ^C "And as, on account of that creation, fear came upon the angels, when he spoke things greater than the creation, on account of Him who invisibly had bestowed in him the seed of the substance from above, and [he] spoke with boldness; so also in the generations of the worldly men, the works of men became fears to those who made them, such as statues and images; and the hands of all effect everything in the name of God; for Adam, having been formed in the name of a man, provided fear ^D to the one who existed before man, as indeed he existed in him, and they were amazed, and quickly made the work disappear." But since there is one First Principle, as will be shown later, these men will be seen to be fabrication-weaving certain melodic trifles and fictions. Since, however, it seemed beneficial to God that men should first be instructed through the Lord by the Law and the Prophets, the "fear of the Lord" is called the "beginning of wisdom," given by the Lord through Moses to those who are disobedient and hard-hearted. For those whom reason (Logos) does not win over, fear tames.

^A Since the Logos who educates had foreseen this from above, he suitably fashioned an instrument for piety, purging men through both methods. For amazement (ekplexis) is fear arising from an unusual appearance, or an appearance arising from something unexpected, as, for example, from a message; but fear is an intense admiration for something that either has happened or exists. Those who have rendered God, the greatest and the One hymned even by them, subject to perturbation through amazement, do not perceive that He dwelt in ignorance even before the amazement—if indeed ignorance existed before the amazement. If, however, amazement and fear—that is, the fear of God—have become the "beginning of wisdom," one runs the risk of saying that ignorance is the causal principle that preceded not only the wisdom of God and the entire creation of the world, but also the restoration and the very election itself. ^B Is ignorance, then, of good things or of bad? But if it is of good things, why does it cease with amazement? And the minister, the preaching, and the baptism become superfluous for them. But if it is of bad things, how is bad the cause of the best things? For if ignorance had not pre-existed, the minister would not have come down; nor would amazement have seized the "Archon," as they themselves say; nor would he have taken the beginning of wisdom from fear for the discernment of the election and of worldly things. But if the fear of the pre-existing man made the angels plot against their own creature, as though the invisible seed of the substance from above were implanted within the creation, or if they were jealous out of an empty assumption—which is improbable—that angels became authors of a creation entrusted to them as if it were someone’s child, having condemned all ignorance: they are moved, being possessed by foreknowledge ^C; but they would not have plotted through the means they attempted, had they foreseen it; nor would they have been amazed at their work, having understood through foreknowledge the seed from above; or, finally, trusting in knowledge, they dared to do it, which is itself impossible. Having learned the difference of that which is in the Fullness (Pleroma), they dared to plot against man, and also against that which is "according to the image," in which is also the archetype, and which, along with the rest of knowledge, they received as imperishable. To these and certain others, therefore, especially those from the school of Marcion ^D, the Scripture is not understood. "But he who hears me shall dwell in hope, trustfully, and he shall be at rest, without fear from any evil." Why then do they find fault with the Law? They will not say it is evil, but they distinguish the good from the just. And the Lord, who commands to fear evil, does not deliver the evil through evil, but destroys the opposite by its opposite. And to the good, evil is contrary, as

justice is to injustice. ^A If, then, the Scripture has called the "beginning of evils" the "fearlessness" (which the fear of the Lord works), then fear is a good thing; and the fear that comes from the Law is not only just but also good, as it removes wickedness. By fear it introduces fearlessness, not by passion introducing passionlessness, but by instruction producing moderation of passions. When, therefore, we hear, "Honor the Lord, and you shall be strong; but fear no one else besides Him," we understand "to fear" as to fear to sin, and to follow the commandments given by God, which is the honor we expect from God. ^B Fear (*deos*) is the fear of God. But even if fear is a passion, as some would have it, not every fear is a passion. For superstition is a passion, being a fear of demons, filled with suffering and irrational impulses. Conversely, therefore, the fear of the impassible God is impassible; for one fears not God, but falling away from God. And he who fears this, that he might not fall into evil, fears and dreads evils; and he who fears a fall, wishes to be incorruptible and impassible. "A wise man, fearing, has turned away from evil; but the fool," the Scripture says, "trusting, joins himself to it." And again, "In the fear of the Lord," it says, "is strength of hope."

CHAPTER IX.

That the Christian virtues are connected with one another.

Such fear, then, leads one both to repentance and to hope. And hope is the expectation of good things, or a good anticipation of a good that is absent. Certainly, even a fall is taken as an occasion for good hope, which we have learned leads to love. ^C Love would be a consensus of those things which are in reason, life, and character; or, to speak briefly, a communion of life; the intensity of friendship and affection with right reason concerning the use of companions. And a companion is "another self." Or we call those "brothers" who have been regenerated by the same Word. Closely joined to love is hospitality, which is a kind of art of using strangers; and strangers are those for whom worldly things are strange; for we call those worldly who are related to the earth.

^A We hear the Apostle saying: "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God." Hospitality, therefore, will be concerned with what is useful to strangers. Strangers are those who are also called guests; and guests are friends; and friends are brothers. "Dear brother," says Homer; and humanity, through which a good affection is produced, which is the friendly use of people; and good affection itself, which is a kind of artificial system of friendship concerning the loves of friends or relatives, is accompanied by charity. If, however, the human being who is in us is truly spiritual, humanity is brotherhood to those who are participants in the same Spirit. Affection, in turn, is the preservation of goodwill or love. Love is a perfect and absolute demonstration: and to be loved, which is to please in character, to be led and brought away. But they are led into identity through unanimity, which is the knowledge of common goods. For unanimity is the agreement of minds. And, "Let love," he says, "be without hypocrisy among us, and abhorring what is evil, let us become joined to what is good" in brotherly love, and the rest until: "If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men." ^B Next, he says, "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." And the same Apostle confesses that he bears witness to the Jews that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge; for "being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own, they have not submitted to the righteousness of God." For they did not know and perform the will of the Law, but what they themselves assumed, that they also thought the Law willed; nor did they believe the Law as prophesying, but as a mere word; and they followed it out of fear, and not out of disposition and faith. For "Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness" to everyone who believes, he who is prophesied by the Law. ^C Whence it has been said to them by Moses: "I will provoke you to jealousy by those who are not a nation, I will anger you by a foolish nation," that is, by one having become disposed to obedience. And through Isaiah, "I was found," he says, "by those who did not seek Me; I became manifest to those who did not ask of Me"—that is, before the coming of the Lord, after which those things that were prophesied are now also appropriately said to Israel; ^D I stretched out my hands

all the day ^A to a disobedient and gainsaying people. Do you see the reason for the calling of the nations, clearly stated by the prophet as the disobedience and contradiction of the people? Then, the goodness of God is displayed even toward them. For the Apostle says: "But by their transgression salvation has come to the nations, so as to provoke them to emulation, and that they might desire to repent."

The *Shepherd*, however, applying the expression simply to those who had fallen asleep, knows that there were some just persons among the nations and among the Jews, not only before the coming of the Lord, but even before the law, who were pleasing and acceptable to God, as Abel, as Noah, as any other righteous man. He says, therefore: "The apostles and teachers, who preached the name of the Son of God, and having fallen asleep, preached by the power and faith to those who had fallen asleep before." Then he adds: "And they gave them the seal of the preaching. They went down, therefore, with them into the water, and again came up. But these went down alive, and again came up alive; but those who had fallen asleep before went down dead, but came up alive. By these, therefore, they were made alive and came to know the name of the Son of God; for this reason, they also came up with them, and were fitted into the building of the tower, and were built up without cuts; for they had fallen asleep in righteousness and in great purity; only this seal they had not."

For "when the nations who have no law do by nature the things of the law, these, having no law, are a law unto themselves," according to the Apostle. ^B Why then is it necessary to say how the virtues follow one another, when we have already shown that faith indeed hopes because of repentance, and fear because of faith, and the perseverance and training which are in these, together with instruction, terminates in charity, but that is perfected by knowledge?

It must, however, be necessarily noted that only God is to be understood as being wise by nature. Therefore also is wisdom the power of God, which has taught the truth; and here somewhere is reached the perfection of knowledge. Yet the philosopher also loves and cherishes the truth, being, from being a ^C genuine servant, already considered a friend on account of love. ^D

^A Its beginning, however, is to wonder at things, as Plato says in the *Theaetetus*; and Matthias too exhorting in his *Traditions* says, "Wonder at the things present," establishing this as the first step toward knowledge beyond. Even in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, it is written: "He who has wondered will reign, and he who has reigned will rest." It is impossible, therefore, for the ignorant man, as long as he remains ignorant, to philosophize; for he has not received any notion of wisdom, since philosophy is the striving for that which truly exists and for the studies that contribute to this. Even if one has been trained in doing well, one must labor to know how one ought to use, and act, and work together; wherein also one is likened to God, I mean the Savior, worshipping the God of all through the high-priestly Word, by whom are perceived the things that are truly honorable and just. Piety is an action that follows and attends God.

^B Consequently, our philosopher holds fast to these three things: first, contemplation; second, the fulfillment of the commandments; third, the formation of good men; which, when combined, make the gnostic. Whatever is lacking in these makes knowledge limp. Whence the Scripture says divinely: "And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Speak to the children of Israel, and you shall say to them, I am the Lord your God. You shall not do according to the practices of the land of Egypt, in which you dwelt, and you shall not do according to the practices of the land of Canaan, into which I am bringing you there; and you shall not walk in their statutes; my judgments [you shall keep...]"

^C CAPUT X. What the Christian philosopher claims for himself.

These three things, therefore, our philosopher claims for himself: first, contemplation; second, the execution of the commandments; and third, the formation of good men. And these indeed, when they have come together, produce the gnostic man. But if anything is missing from these, knowledge is lame. Whence the Scripture said divinely: "And the Lord said to Moses, saying: Speak to the sons of Israel, and you shall say to them: I am the Lord your God. According to the practices of the land of Egypt, in which you dwelt, you shall not do, and according to the practices of the land of Canaan, into which I am bringing you there, you shall not do, and in their statutes you shall not walk. My judgments you shall do, and my precepts you shall keep."

^D (Concerning the text of Socrates and Theodorus, see the critical apparatus in the footnotes, which is here omitted.) [alt-version omitted]

^A *Walk in them. I am the Lord your God. And you shall keep all my precepts, and you shall do them. The man who shall do them shall live in them. I am the Lord your God.* Whether Egypt and the land of Canaan are a symbol of the world and of deception, or of the perturbations of the soul and of vices, from which we must abstain and to which we must apply ourselves, the oracle shows us that we should look to what is divine rather than to what is worldly. But when it says, *The man who shall do them shall live in them,* it speaks of life both for the Hebrews themselves—as a correction for them—and for our neighbors—as an exercise and advancement for them—and for us as well. For those who are dead in their trespasses are brought to life with Christ, through our covenant. But the Scripture, by often repeating that *I am the Lord your God,* most beautifully exhorts us to shame, teaching us to follow the God who has given the commandments. Furthermore, it silently admonishes us to seek God and, as far as possible, to endeavor to know Him; which indeed is the highest contemplation, peering into sacred mysteries, truly a knowledge made certain and immutable by reason. This is the only knowledge of wisdom from which upright action is never separated. ^B

CHAPTER XI. The knowledge which is handed down through faith is the most certain of all.

But the knowledge of those who esteem themselves wise, whether they are barbarian heresies or the philosophers among the Greeks, puffs up, according to the opinion of the Apostle. ^C But true knowledge is that which is a scientific demonstration of those things which are handed down in true philosophy. And we would say that this is reasoning which, regarding things that are doubted, produces faith from those things which are certain and beyond controversy. Since faith is twofold—the one joined with knowledge, the other with opinion—nothing prevents demonstration from also being termed twofold, the one producing knowledge, the other opinion; just as cognition and precognition are also said to be twofold, the one having its own nature accurate and exact, the other imperfect. But is not that demonstration which is among us the only true one, as being supplied from the divine Scriptures, which are the sacred letters, and from that wisdom which is taught by God, as the Apostle says ^D? Therefore, there is a certain doctrine of obeying the precepts, which is believing in God; and faith is a certain power of God, being the strength of truth. For He said: *If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall move the mountain.* And again, *According to your faith let it be done to you.* And the one is healed, having obtained healing by faith; and the one ───

who had died rises again by the power of Him who had believed that he would rise. Now the demonstration that generates opinion ^A is both human and arises from rhetorical arguments or even dialectical syllogisms. For the highest ^B demonstration—which we have already hinted at—instills scientific faith through the citation and opening up of the Scriptures to the souls of those who desire to learn, which is truly knowledge. For if the things received for the purpose of proving what is sought are taken as true, as being divine and prophetic, it is clear that the conclusion drawn from them will follows as true; and knowledge would thus correctly be for us a demonstration. When, therefore, the memorial of the heavenly and divine food ^C was commanded to be consecrated in a golden urn, it says: *The omer was the tenth part of the three measures.* For in us ourselves there are three measures, three criteria indicated: sense for sensible things, speech for the words and terms that are spoken, and mind for intelligible things. The Gnostic, therefore, will abstain from sins committed in speech, in thought, and in sense and action, having listened to the text, *He who looks with lust has committed adultery*;* and having grasped in his mind ^D that *blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God*;* and knowing also that *not what enters into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out through the mouth, that defiles a man; for out of the heart come forth evil thoughts.* This, I think, is the true and just measure according to God, by which things that fall under measurement are measured—the decade that contains man, which the three aforementioned measures indicated in summary. It would also be soul and body, or the five senses, and the power of speech and generation, and the deliberative or spiritual power, or however else you wish to call it. It is necessary, so to speak, [to ascend] above all other things.

and to make the mind take its stand, just as, indeed, even in the world, once we have passed over the nine parts: first, that which consists of the four elements, which are placed in one area for the sake of an equal transformation; then the seven wandering ones, and the unwandering one, the ninth, in order to arrive at the perfect number ^B (10) above the gods (11), and the tenth share (12) toward the knowledge of God—to put it briefly—desiring the Creator after the creation. For this reason, the tithes (13), both of the sacrifices and of the offerings, were brought to God; and the feast of the Passover (14) began from the tenth day, being a passage from every passion and every sensible thing. The Gnostic, therefore, is steadfast in faith; but the self-deceived man does not touch those things that belong to the truth, being carried away by weak and unstable affections. Rightly, therefore, is it written: ^C *And Cain went out from the presence of God, and dwelt in the land of Naid, opposite Edem.* Now, Naid is interpreted as "commotion," and Edem as "delight"—and faith and knowledge and peace are delight, from which the one who disobeys is cast out. But the self-deceived man does not even wish to perceive the beginning of the divine commandments, but, as if self-taught, having broken away, he willingly moves himself into a surging commotion, descending to mortal and generated things from the knowledge of the Unbegotten (16), imagining different things at different times. Those who lack a pilot fall ^D like leaves; but the reason and the ruling faculty, remaining untouchable and guiding the soul, is said to be its pilot; for in truth its approach to the Immovable is immovable. Thus Abraham (17) stood against the Lord, and approaching, he spoke. And it is said to Moses: *But do you stand here with me.* And those around Simon [pay honor] to the "Standing One" (18), whom they worship (19).

whom they worship. The followers of Simon, indeed, wish to liken themselves in their conduct to the "Standing One" whom they worship. Faith, therefore, and the knowledge of the truth cause the soul that has chosen them to be always disposed in the same way and to remain likewise. But with falsehood there are associated by nature transition, declination, and defection; just as with the Gnostic there is rest, quiet, and peace. As, therefore, arrogance and boastfulness have brought philosophy into disrepute, so too does false knowledge—that which is also called by the same name—brings knowledge into disrepute; concerning which the Apostle writes: *O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: which some professing have erred concerning the faith.* Confuted by this saying, those who belong to the heresies reject the Epistles to Timothy. Come then, if the Lord ^C be truth, and the wisdom and power of God, as indeed He is, let it be shown that he who has known Him, and through Him his Father, is in reality a Gnostic; for he is conscious of Him who says: *The lips of the righteous know high things.*

CHAPTER XII. On twofold faith.

Since faith, like time, is twofold, we might find distinct virtues, both dwelling together. For to the part of time that is past belongs memory, and to that which is future, hope. We believe that things past have occurred, and that things future shall come to pass; and we love ^D [the Lord, and approaching, he spoke. And it is said to Moses: *But do you stand here with me.* And those around Simon [pay honor] to the "Standing One" (18), whom they worship (19).]

Would he not, upon divine promises, have come to know both himself and the nothingness of the mortal race, and to have fallen before the "Standing One" in demonstration of the opinion he held concerning himself and God, that the One who stands according to these [doctrines] moves the entire standing [creation]? It is clear, however, that the first God is standing, while the second, on the contrary, is moved. This Simon, having practiced himself greatly in Alexandria, and having become very powerful in magic, and having become puffed up, wishes to be thought some supreme power, even above the very God who created the world; and sometimes, by insinuating that he himself is Christ, he calls himself "the Standing One." And he uses this appellation as one who would stand always, and who has no cause for corruption, that he might fall through [the corruption of] the body; and he does not say that the God who created the world is supreme.

"You are not the Standing Son. For if you were the Son, you would surely have known those worthy of such a revelation."

The Lord says to him: *I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father but by me.* Christ, the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

^A And so, being persuaded by faith, they await the things to come. For love pervades the Gnostic in all things, since he knows the one God: *And behold,* (26) *all things, whatsoever he has fashioned, are very good;* he knows them and wonders at them. Piety (27) adds length of life, and the fear of the Lord adds days. Since, then, the days are a portion of life in its progression, so too is fear the beginning of love, becoming, by way of increase, faith, and then love. But I do not fear and hate [the Father] as I fear and hate a wild beast, for fear is twofold; rather, I stand in awe of the Father, whom I fear and love at once. Again, fearing lest I be punished, I love myself, choosing fear; but he who fears to offend the Father loves himself. ^B Blessed, then, is he who becomes faithful, tempered by love and fear; and faith is strength for salvation and power for eternal life. Again, prophecy is foreknowledge; and knowledge is the understanding of prophecy, that is, the knowledge of those things foreknown to them by the Lord, who manifests all things beforehand. Knowledge, therefore, of things foretold reveals a threefold outcome: either that which happened long ago, or that which is already present, or that which is to be hereafter. The extremes, (29) then, fall under faith, whether of things completed or of things hoped for; but present operation provides conviction for the confirmation of both extremes. For if, prophecy being one, one part is already being accomplished and the other part has been fulfilled, from this the thing hoped for and the thing that has passed are rendered credible. For what is now past was previously present; so that the faith of things past is a comprehension of the past, and hope, indeed, is a comprehension of the thing that is to come. ^C The assents (30) are said to be in our own power, not only by the Platonists, but also by the Stoics. Every opinion, therefore, and judgment, and apprehension, and discipline by which we always live and associate with the human race, is an assent. And this could be nothing other than faith. And unbelief, or infidelity, which is the undoing or destruction of faith, shows that assent or faith can exist; for there would be no deprivation of that which could not exist. And if anyone considers the truth, he will find that man is by nature inclined towards giving his assent to falsehood, yet possesses inclinations to faith in the truth. ^D The one, therefore, (32) that holds together the Church (33), as...

as ^B the Shepherd says, is a virtue, it is faith, by which the elect of God are saved; and that which behaves itself virilely and strongly is continence. Simplicity, knowledge, innocence, honesty, and love follow these. And all these are daughters of faith. And again: faith precedes, fear edifies, but love perfects (34). One must fear (55) the Lord, he says, for edification, but not the devil for destruction. And conversely, the works of the Lord—that is, the commandments—are to be loved and done, but the works of the devil are to be feared and not done; for the fear of God instructs and chastens, and restores one to love; but the fear of the works of the devil has within it hatred. » The same man also says that repentance (36) is a great understanding. For he who is led by repentance for what he has done, no longer does or says [evil]; but by tormenting his soul for the things in which he has sinned, he performs good works. The forgiveness (37) of sins, therefore, differs from repentance; and he shows that both are in our power.

The one, therefore, who has received the forgiveness of sins must no longer sin; for in the first and only repentance of sins, this relates to those who have previously lived according to the Gentile and first life—I mean that which was in ignorance (58); and there is immediately proposed to those who are called repentance, which cleanses the place of the soul from transgressions, so that faith may be founded.

CHAPTER XIII.

Of the first and second repentance.

For it does not behoove him who has received the forgiveness of sins to sin any more; for in the first and unique repentance of sins, that was for them, the things which were before in the Gentile and first life—that, I say, which was in ignorance—to those also who are called, there is immediately proposed repentance, which cleanses the place of the soul from sins, so that faith may be founded.

^B But the Lord, being a knower of hearts and foreknowing things to come, both the changeableness of man and the fickle and crafty nature of the devil, saw from above, from the beginning, how he, having envied man for the remission of sins, would stir up certain causes of sins for the servants of God; wisely contriving, so that they also might fall with him. Therefore, since He is of great mercy, He gave to those who, even in the faith, fall into some transgression, a second repentance, so that if anyone should be tempted after his calling, being constrained and craftily circumvented, he might still obtain one repentance that is not to be repented of. ^C For "if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries" (Hebr. X, 26, 27). But the constant and successive repentances for sins differ in nothing from those who have never believed at all, save only in the realization that they are sinning; and I know not which of the two is the worse: to sin while knowing, or, having repented of what one has sinned, to transgress again. For in either case the sin is shown to be proven: the one being condemned by the worker of iniquity at the time it is done, the other by him who, knowing beforehand what is about to be done, undertakes it as evil. And he indeed perhaps yields to wrath and pleasure, not ignorant of what he is being gratified by; but he who, having been led by repentance, because he was gratified, then recurs again to pleasure, is akin to him who from the beginning sins willfully. For of whom repentance has been a guide, this one, doing again that which was ^D condemned by himself, performs this of his own free will. He, therefore, who comes to the faith from the nations and from that previous life, has once obtained remission of sins; but he who has sinned even after this, and then is led by repentance, even if he obtains pardon, ought to blush, as one who is no longer washed into the remission of sins. For it is proper not only to abandon the idols which he previously held as gods, but also the deeds of the previous life, for him who is born "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh" (Joan. I, 13), but is regenerated in the spirit; which would be to have repented without having been carried into the same transgression. For the practice of sins is the repenting many times, and a fitness for transgresion from lack of exercise. The appearance, then, of repentance is not repentance, to ask for forgiveness many times for those things in which we transgress many times. But "Righteousness makes straight the ways," as the Scripture cries out. And again, "The righteousness of the innocent will make straight the way."

Lord has pitied those who fear him,” writes David. They, therefore, who sow in tears shall reap in joy, speaking of those who confess in repentance. For blessed are all they who fear the Lord. Do you see the similar beatitude in the Gospel? “Do not fear,” it says, “when a man becomes rich, and when the glory of his house is multiplied; for when he dies he shall not take everything, nor shall his glory descend with him.” But I, in the multitude of your mercy, will enter into your house; I will worship toward your holy temple in your fear. Lord, lead me in your righteousness. ^A Now, an *impulse* is an agitation of the mind toward or away from something. An *affection*—or perturbation—is an excessive impulse, one that exceeds the measures of reason, or an impulse that is carried away and does not obey reason. The *affections*, therefore, are movements of the soul contrary to nature and against reason. ^B *Distraction*, *ecstasy*, and *disobedience* are within our own power, just as obedience is also within our own power; on this account, those things which are voluntary come into judgment. If one were to examine each of the affections, one would find them to be irrational impulses.

The involuntary, therefore, is not judged. This is of two kinds: that which occurs through ignorance, and that which occurs through necessity. For how could you judge those who are said to act in involuntary ways? For either one is ignorant of oneself—as were Cleomenes and Athamas, who were seized by madness—or one is ignorant of the thing that one does, as was Aeschylus, who, having divulged the mysteries on the stage, was tried in the Areopagus and was acquitted, having shown that he ^C was not initiated. Or one is ignorant of that which is being done, as the one who [is striking the enemy, or the thing in which one acts, just as one practicing with blunted spears... ^D

CHAPTER XIV. In how many ways the involuntary occurs.

^A in leaving an opponent, and killing someone of one’s own instead of the enemy, or in the manner in which it is done, such as the man who was training with blunted spears and killed someone because the ball had fallen off the spear; or in the means, as the man in the stadium who killed his antagonist—for he was not struggling for the sake of death, but for victory; or in the motive, as when a physician has given a salubrious antidote, and the patient has died. Yet the physician did not give it for this reason, but in order to save him. The law did indeed punish at that time even the one who killed unintentionally, as it did the one who suffered an involuntary emission of seed, though not to the same degree as the one who did so voluntarily. And yet, even the former shall be punished as if for a voluntary act, if one should transpose the passion to the truth; for in reality, the man who is incontinent regarding the generative word is to be punished—which is itself an irrational passion of the soul, coming close to empty prattle. "But the faithful man is said to hide matters by his spirit." ^B The voluntary, therefore, is judged. "For the Lord tries hearts and reins," and he who looks with desire is judged. Wherefore He also says, "Do not desire." And, "This people," He says, "honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me." For God looks to the intention; since He even left Lot’s wife, who had of her own will turned back only to worldly wickedness, as insensible, having shown her as a pillar of salt, and having set her there, so that she would not proceed further; not as a foolish and useless image, but as one capable of seasoning and strengthening him who is able to perceive spiritually.

CHAPTER XV.

On the diverse kinds of the voluntary and the sins following therefrom.

^C The voluntary, or spontaneous, is either from appetite, or from choice, or from the intent of the mind. Now these things are in a certain way positioned close to one another: sin, misfortune, and injustice. And sin is, for example, to live luxuriously and intemperately. Misfortune, however, is to kill a friend by mistake, as if he were an enemy. But injustice or wrong is grave-robbing or sacrilege. To sin, moreover, consists in this: that one does not know how to judge what one ought to do, or that one is unable to do it; just as, indeed, one falls into a pit either because one did not know, or because one could not jump across it on account of bodily weakness. But it is certainly in ^D our power to apply ourselves to receiving instruction and to obeying the commandments; if we should be unwilling to participate in these, surrendering ourselves to anger and desire, we shall sin, or rather, we shall do injustice to our own soul. For that Laius in the tragedy says: "A double-tongued man reveals plans in council; but a faithful man hides matters by his spirit."

rather, we shall do injustice to our own soul. For that Laius in the tragedy says: "A double-tongued man reveals plans in council; but a faithful man hides matters by his spirit." ^A Nothing of these things, which you admonish me of, escapes me; but nature forces me against my will, though I am of a sound mind; meaning that he has surrendered himself to his passion. Medea also herself likewise cries out on the stage:

And I learn what evils I am about to do; But anger is stronger than my deliberations.

Yet not even Ajax is silent, but, about to slay himself, he cries out:

There was no bane, then, that bites the heart Of an honorable man as much as dishonor. I have suffered such things, and a deep stain, Spreading together, stirs me from the depths, Incited by the bitter goads of madness. ^B

To these, then, anger drives; but desire leads countless others into tragedy: Phaedra, Anthia, Eriphyle, “who accepted precious gold for her beloved husband.” For concerning that comic character Thrasonides, another scene says: “A cheap slave girl has enslaved me.” And a fault ^C is a transgression of the mind against reason; and that

^A which relates to error or inability is not voluntary. But injustice alone is found to be voluntary. Therefore, sin is a voluntary injustice; and voluntary injustice is wickedness. ^B For the Word says: “Sin shall not have dominion over you; for you are not under law, but under grace”; speaking to those who have already believed, “For by his stripes we were healed.” Misfortune is an involuntary action of another upon me. But injustice is found to be only voluntary, whether it be my own or another’s. And the Psalmist signifies these differences of sins, calling them blessed, whose iniquities God has blotted out, and whose sins He has covered; and did not account the others, and forgave the rest. For it is written: “Blessed ^C are they whose iniquities have been put away, and whose sins have been covered; blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not account sin, and there is no guile in his mouth.” This blessing came upon those elected by God through Jesus Christ our Lord. For “charity covers a multitude of sins.” And He blots them out, who prefers the repentance of the sinner rather than his death. And those things which do not proceed from free choice are not accounted. “For he who has looked with desire,” He says, “has already committed adultery.” And the illuminating Word forgives sins: “And in that time,” says the Lord, “they shall seek the injustice of Israel, and it shall not exist; and the sins of Judah, and they shall not be found. For who is like me? And who shall stand against my face?” You see one God proclaimed as good, both the disburser of recompense and the forgiver of sins. ^D John also appears in the greater epistle to be teaching the differences of sins in these words: “If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and He will give him life to those who sin not unto death,” he said. “For there is a sin unto death; I do not say that one should pray concerning that. All injustice is sin; and there is a sin not unto death.” But even David, and before David, Moses, through these three dogmas, demonstrate knowledge. “Blessed is the man who has not walked in the way of the ungodly,” and so forth, down to, “and there is no guile in his mouth.” Is this blessing, then, upon the circumcision, or also upon the uncircumcision? “I will be merciful to those who are left.” “For who is like me? And who shall withstand me? And who is this shepherd who shall stand against my face?”

^A As for the verse: “Blessed is the man who has not gone in the counsel of the ungodly,” ^B even before David, Moses also reveals the knowledge ^A of the three dogmas through these things: “Blessed is the man who has not gone in the counsel of the ungodly,” just as fishes go in darkness into the depths; for those without scales, which Moses forbids us to touch, feed at the bottom of the sea. “Nor has he stood in the way of sinners,” just as those who think they fear the Lord sin like the pig; for when it is hungry, it cries out, but when it is full, it does not acknowledge its master. “Nor has he sat in the chair of pestilence,” just as birds prepared for plunder. For Moses advised us not to eat the pig, nor the eagle, nor the hawk, nor the raven, nor any fish that does not have scales upon it. Such are the words of Barnabas.

I, however, have heard from a man wise in such matters, who said that the “counsel of the ungodly” signifies the nations; the “way of sinners,” the Jewish opinion; and the “chair of pestilence,” he interpreted as heresies. Another said more properly that the first beatitude is to be understood of those who have not followed the wicked opinions that have departed from God; and the second, of those who do not remain in the wide and broad way, ^C whether they were nurtured in the Law or have converted from the nations. Now, the chair of pestilence refers to theaters and tribunals, where men are accustomed especially to follow wicked and destructive powers and to become participants in their works. “But his will is in the law of the Lord.” Peter, in his *Preaching*, called the Law and the Word the Lord. ^D There are those who interpret it differently. [alt-version omitted]

^A It seems to me, however, that the legislator teaches three ways in which sin is accepted; those that occur in speech, by means of the mute fish—for there truly is a time when silence is more excellent than speech; there is also an honor in silence that is free from danger—and those that occur in deed, by means of predatory and carnivorous birds; the pig delights in mire and dung, and it is necessary also not to have one’s conscience polluted. Deservedly, therefore, the prophet says: “Not so,” he says, “the ungodly, but as the dust which the wind drives from the face of the earth. Therefore, the ungodly shall not rise in judgment,” for they have already been condemned: “for he who does not believe has already been judged.” Nor shall “sinners” [rise] “in the counsel of the righteous,” for they are already condemned, so that they may not be united with those who have lived without stumbling, “because the Lord knows the way of the righteous, and the way of the ungodly shall perish.”

Again, the Lord openly shows that both failings and sins are within our power, while setting forth ways of healing suited to the maladies of the soul, and advising that we ought to be corrected by the shepherds through Ezekiel; accusing, I imagine, some of them because they did not keep the commandments: “That which was weak you have not strengthened,” and what follows, ^B reaching to the point: “And there was none who was looking for, nor turning back.” For “there is great joy before the Father when one sinner is saved,” the Lord says. Wherefore Abraham is more to be praised, because he walked just as the Lord spoke to him. Having drawn from this source, one of the wise men among the Greeks uttered that saying: “Follow God.” “But the pious,” says Isaiah, “have consulted things that are wisdom.” Consultation, moreover, is a search regarding how we might act rightly in present circumstances; but good counsel is prudence in counsel. What then? Does not God also, after the pardon granted regarding Cain, ^C consequently, not long after, introduce Enoch, who had been led by repentance, signifying that repentance is accustomed to generate pardon? Furthermore, pardon consists not of remission, but of healing. This same thing occurs also in the case of Aaron in ^D penitence, says Lowth. The received reading, the meaning of which we have explained in the Latin version, does not seem to me as if it should be changed.

^A Following this, not long after, he introduces Enoch who has repented, signifying that penitence is naturally productive of pardon. But pardon does not consist in the remission of sin, but in the healing of it. The same thing happens also in the case of the making of the calf by the people, in relation to Aaron. Hence, one of the wise men among the Greeks pronounced that "Pardon is better than punishment." ^B Just as, indeed, the saying "Give a pledge, and mischief is near," is taken from the voice of Solomon, which says, "My son, if thou become surety for thy friend, thou shalt deliver thy hand to the enemy. For a strong snare to a man are his own lips, and he is caught by the words of his own mouth." But the "Know thyself" is taken even more mystically from thence: "Thou hast seen thy brother, thou hast seen thy God." In this way, perhaps, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbour as thyself." In these commandments, he says, the whole law and the prophets hang and depend. To these things those words also accord: "These things have I spoken to you, that my joy might be fulfilled;" and this is my commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you. ^C For the Lord is merciful and compassionate, and Christ is Lord to all. But Moses, exhorting to the "Know thyself" more clearly, says often: "Take heed to thyself."

That it is the same thing to follow God and to obey the Word; to live in accordance with nature, when it is practiced according to the agreement of each person's own indwelling spirit. The repentance and improvement of those who have sinned holds the second place after hope; whence he records in succession the one who has changed from a worse life to a better, who is called among the Hebrews Enoch, but as the Greeks would say, "Gracious." Concerning him it is said: "For he was well-pleasing to God, and he was not found, because God translated him." For translation signifies conversion and change; and this change was for the better, since it happened by the providence of God. ^D Pamphila, in the second book of her Commentaries, says that when his son Tyrrhaeus was sitting in a barber’s shop at Cyme, a certain smith killed him with a hatchet. When the people of Cyme sent the murderer to Pittacus, he learned what had happened and released him, saying: "Pardon is better than penitence." And Heraclitus maintains that Alcaeus, having taken his captive and released him, said: "Pardon is better than punishment."

^A And sins are cleansed by alms and faith; but by the fear of the Lord every one declines from evil. And the fear of the Lord is instruction and wisdom. ^B Here again, the accusers arise, calling joy and sorrow passions of the soul. For they define joy as an elation consistent with reason, and to exult and be glad as a rejoicing in what is good; but mercy they define as a sorrow on account of him who suffers evil unworthily; and such things as these they hold to be transformations and passions of the soul. But we, as it seems, do not cease to understand the Scriptures carnally, and, led astray by our own mental affections, we expect the will of the impassible God to be similar to our own movements. If we think that things are thus in the omnipotent God, just as we are able to hear and perceive them, we err impiously. For God, as He is in Himself, could not be described; but the prophets spoke to us as we were able to hear, who were entangled in flesh, the Lord salubriously accommodating and lowering Himself to the weakness of men. Since, therefore, it is the will of God that he be saved who obeys His precepts and is led to repentance for his sins; and we rejoice on account of our own salvation; the Lord, who spoke through the prophets, attributes our joy to Himself as His own, as He says humanly in the Gospel: "I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; for what you have done to one of these least ones, you have done to me." Just as, therefore, He is nourished, though not needing nourishment, because He has nourished the one whom He wills; so He rejoiced without change, because he who was led by repentance to become as He wished was affected with joy. Since, however, God shows mercy abundantly, being good, and giving precepts through the Law and the prophets, and now more closely through the advent of the Son, saving and showing mercy to those who have obtained mercy: and properly the greater shows mercy to the lesser; but man is not greater than man, in so far as he is man, ^C but God is greater than man in all things: if, therefore, the greater shows mercy to the lesser, God alone will show mercy to us. For man obeys the rules of justice, communicating willingly, and imparts what he has received from God, both on account of natural benevolence and on account of the precepts which he obeys. But God has no natural habit or relation toward us, as the founders of heresies desire; nor, if He should create from things that are not, or if He were to fashion from matter—since the former is "not at all," and the latter is in every respect different from God—unless someone dares to say that we are a part of Him and consubstantial with God. ^D They clearly say that the whole world is God; the Stoics, the first; those from Plato, the second; and some of them, the third.

And I know not how anyone who has heard this and knows God can endure it, when he looks at our life and the evils in which we are wallowing. For it would follow from this—a thing which it is not even lawful to speak—that God sins in part, if indeed the parts are parts of the whole and complete the whole; but if they do not complete it, they would not even be parts. ^A But in truth, since God is by nature rich in mercy, He cares for us because of His own goodness, though we are neither His parts nor His children by nature. And this happens to be the greatest proof of God’s goodness: that although we are thus disposed toward Him, and are by nature entirely alienated, He nevertheless cares for us. For affection toward one's offspring is natural to animals, and friendship arises from habit among those who are like-minded; but God’s mercy is poured out richly upon us, ^B who in no way belong to Him, whether I speak of our essence, our nature, or the power proper to our essence, but strictly because we are the work of His will. And so, He calls to adoption him who of his own accord, through discipline and instruction, has taken up the knowledge of the truth, which is the greatest of all progress. “The iniquities of a man ensnare him,” and “each is bound by the chains of his own sins,” and God is blameless. And in truth, “blessed is the man who fears everything because of piety.”

CHAPTER XVII.

On the various kinds of knowledge.

^C As, therefore, science is a habit of knowing, from which it follows that one knows—and comprehension comes to be for it, which cannot be moved by reason—so also is ignorance a yielding conception, which can be moved by reason. That which is moved, as that which is established and confirmed by reason, is in our power. Joined to science are experience, and that which is called in Greek *eidēsis*, and *synesis* and *noēsis*, and *gnōsis*. And *eidēsis* would be the science of things in general, *synesis* according to form, and experience is comprehensive science; so that it is able to examine minutely what each thing is. *Noēsis* is the science of a thing intelligible, and *synesis* is the science of a subject for comparison, or an unchangeable comparison, or a comparative power, of which prudence is the science. And ^D *synesis* is also the science of each and every thing, and of all things into one account; and *gnōsis* is the science of that which is itself, or a science in harmony with the things that come to be; and truth is the science of the true. The Stoics, then, call the whole world together with its parts, God.

^A Knowledge consists through reason, and it cannot be moved by any other reason; and here it investigates knowledge. What we do not do, we do not do either because we cannot, or because we do not will to, or because of both. We do not fly, therefore, because we neither can nor will. We do not swim, however, for the sake of example, at present, because we can, but we do not will to; we are not as the Lord, because we will to, but we cannot. For no disciple is above his master; but it is enough if we have become as the master, not in essence (for it is impossible that that which is by adoption should be equal in essence to that which is by nature), but in that we have been made eternal, and admitted to the contemplation of those things which are, and have been called sons, and see the Father only from those things which are joined to Him. To will, therefore, precedes all things; for rational faculties are the ministers of the will. "Will," he says, "and you shall be able." But for the Gnostic, the will, the judgment, and the exercise are the same. For if the intentions of the soul are the same, the dogmas and the judgments will also be the same, so that both his words, and his life, and his character may be consistent with his training. A straight heart seeks after cognitions, and listens to them. ^B "God taught me wisdom, and I have known the cognition of the holy ones."

CHAPTER XVIII.

That the Mosaic Law is the fountain of all moral doctrine, and that the Greeks drew their ethics from it.

It is clear, therefore, that all other virtues, which are written in ^C Moses, also provided the Greeks with the principle of the entire moral locus; I speak of fortitude, and temperance, and prudence, and justice, and tolerance also, and patience, and modesty, and honesty, and continence, and that which surpasses them, piety. But concerning piety, it is manifest to everyone that it teaches us to worship and honor the supreme and most ancient Cause. The same law also exhibits justice: and it teaches prudence as well, by abstinence from sensible idols, and by the summons to the Creator and Father of all; ^D from which...

^A source, as from a fountain, all intelligence is increased. For "the sacrifices of the wicked are an abomination to the Lord, but the prayers of the upright are acceptable to Him." For justice is more acceptable to God than sacrifice. Such also are the things written in Isaiah: "What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says the Lord," and all that follows. "Loose every bond of iniquity; for this is the sacrifice acceptable to God: a contrite heart, and it seeking Him who fashioned it." ^B A false balance is an abomination before the Lord, but a just scale is accepted by Him. Hence, Pythagoras advises not to overstep a balance. And "false justice" has been called the profession of heresies; and, "the tongue of the unjust shall perish, but the mouth of the just distills wisdom." For they call the wise and prudent "vain." It would be a long task to bring forward testimonies about these virtues, since the whole of Scripture celebrates them. Since, however, they define fortitude as the knowledge of things that are difficult, those that are not difficult, and intermediate things, and ^C temperance as a habit, which in choosing and avoiding preserves the judgments of prudence; attached to fortitude is patience, which they call endurance, which is the knowledge of things that are to be sustained and those that are not; and greatness of soul, which is a knowledge by which one has risen superior to whatever may befall. Moreover, to temperance is attached caution, which is a decline directed by reason. The guarding of the commandments, which is their blameless observance, ^D is the procuring of a life of safety. And it is not...

possible for anyone to be enduring without fortitude, nor continent without temperance. But the virtues follow one another; and he with whom the successions of the virtues are found, with him also is salvation, which is the preservation of a good state. Justly, therefore, if we have discussed these virtues further, we shall have considered them all: since he who possesses one virtue gnostically, possesses them all through their mutual connection. Now, continentia (which is a state ^A that has not overstepped those things which seem consistent with right reason) is an affection; and he is continent who contains those appetites which are contrary to right reason, or who contains himself, lest he be carried away by appetite contrary to right reason. Temperance, however, is not without fortitude, since from the commandments arises prudence, which follows God, who has disposed all things, and justice, which imitates the divine disposition; through which, since we are continent, we tend purified toward piety and actions conformable to the example of God, being made like to the Lord so far as is possible for mortals. This, moreover, is to become just and holy with prudence. For God is in need of nothing, and is not subject to passions: whence he is not properly continent. For no affection or perturbation ^B ever falls upon him which he would need to contain. Our nature, however, which is subject to affections, has need of continence, through which, while it is exercised so as to be in need of few things, it endeavors by habit to approach the divine nature. For the good man is in need of few things, as one who is in the confines of mortal and immortal nature; acting indeed, both on account of the body and on account of mortal origin; but taught to need few things, on account of the continence accepted by reason. For what sense does it have, that the law prohibits a man from putting on female clothing*? Does it not wish us to be men, and not to be effeminate in body, nor in deeds, nor in mind, nor in words? For it wishes him to be a male who gives himself to the truth, in bearing labors and sufferings, in life and conduct, and in speech and ^C habit. Nor can one be enduring without fortitude, nor, again, be continent without temperance. But the virtues follow one another; and he in whom the successions of the virtues are found, in him also is salvation, which is the keeping of what is well-disposed. And it is reasonable that, having discussed these, we should have considered them all, because he who possesses one virtue gnostically possesses all, on account of their interconnection. Straightway, continence is an insuperable disposition of those things that have appeared according to right reason. And he is continent who holds in check the impulses contrary to right reason, or who holds himself in check, so as not to impel himself contrary to right reason. Temperance ^D is not without fortitude, since it comes into being from the commandments, following the God who has ordained it; and prudence, and that justice which is an imitation of the divine disposition, by which, being continent, we are prepared, pure for piety and the action that follows consistently with God, being made like to the Lord as far as we are able, being such as we are by nature. This is to become just and holy with prudence. For the divine is indeed in need of nothing and is impassible; whence it is not even continent in the strict sense; for it never falls under passion, so as to hold it in check; but our nature, being subject to passion, has need of continence, through which, being trained toward having need of few things, it attempts to approach the divine nature in its disposition; for the excellent man is in need of few things, being a boundary between immortal and mortal nature; having need of things because of the body and because of generation itself; but having been taught to need few things because of rational continence; since what reason is there to command a man to take up a woman's garment? Does it not wish us to be manly, neither softened in body and deeds, nor in mind and reason? For it wishes him to be manly who is devoted to the truth in endurance, in patience, whether in life, or in character, or in word, or in exercise, by night and by day, and if ever the need of martyrdom through blood should overtake him, it wishes it. Again, he says, "If any one has newly built a house, and has not yet dwelt in it; or has worked a newly-planted vineyard, and has not yet partaken of its fruit; or has betrothed a virgin, and has not yet married her; let these depart."

^A To refrain from military service, the philanthropic Law commands as a matter of strategy, so that, not being distracted by desires, we may not serve reluctantly in the war. For those who, without pretext, buckle on their armor against dangers are free; and it is philanthropic, because, since the events of wars are uncertain, the Law considered it unjust that one should not be able to enjoy his own labors, while another should reap without effort the fruits of those who have toiled. The Law also seems to reveal the courage of the soul, in legislating that he who has planted must partake of the fruit, he who has built must dwell in the house, and he who has betrothed must marry. For it does not render the hopes of those who have practiced according to the Gnostic discourse ^B incomplete; for the hope of a good man, whether he is dead or alive, does not perish. "I love those who love me," says Wisdom, "and those who seek me shall find peace," and so forth. What then? Did not the women of the Midianites, by their beauty, lead the Hebrews who were warring against them from temperance, through incontinence, into impiety? For having enticed those who were engaged in the solemn exercise of virtue into harlot-like pleasures by their beauty, they incited them to the sacrifices of idols and to strange women. Overcome at once by women and by pleasure, they fell away from God, and they fell away from the Law; and the whole people had well-nigh come into the hands of the enemies and into their power ^C by a womanly stratagem, until fear, having admonished them as they were in danger, restrained them. Immediately, those who remained, having audaciously taken up the struggle on behalf of piety, became masters of their enemies. The beginning, then, of wisdom is the worship of God; and understanding is the providence of holy things; and to know the Law is of a good mind. Those, therefore, who have supposed that the Law produces a slavish fear, neither understand how to be good, nor have they truly understood the Law. For "the fear of the Lord works life." But he who is wandering will be pained in labors, in which he is not visited by knowledge. Indeed, Barnabas says mystically: "And may God, the Lord of the whole universe, give you wisdom, ^D and understanding, and knowledge of His ordinances, and patience. Be then God-taught, seeking out what the Lord seeks from you, that you may find... [index: entries preserved]

^A He has ^B addressed them gnostically as children of love and peace (44). Regarding distribution and communion, while there is much that could be said, it suffices to say only this, that the law forbids usury against a brother; naming as "brother" not only him who is born of the same parents, but also whoever is of the same tribe, of the same mind, and a partaker of the same Word; for it does not deem it just to exact interest on money, but rather to give freely to those in need with open hands and a willing mind. For God is the author of this gift; so that he who gives liberally also receives sufficient interest: those things which are most precious among men, namely, gentleness, kindness, magnanimity, good repute, and renown. Does not this commandment seem to you to be one of philanthropy? Just as that other one: He teaches that the wages of a poor man must be paid on the same day ^C without delay; for the eagerness of the poor man who is hungry for his daily bread is, I think, broken if it is postponed. And further He says: Let not the creditor stand in the debtor’s house, seizing a pledge by force; but let him command the other to bring it out; and let him who has it not be hesitant. And in the harvest (48) the things that fall...

[alt-version omitted]

^D ...He forbids lending to a brother at interest, calling a "brother" not only him who is born of the same parents, but also whoever is a townsman or of the same tribe; counting it iniquitous to collect interest on money as if it were the offspring of cattle; but that one should rather give to the needy with open hands and minds, considering also that grace is in a way a loan... nor were those who contributed (about to) suffer what they deserved, (receiving instead) kindness, magnanimity, good fame, and renown. He further says: Let not the creditor enter the houses of debtors, taking pledge and gold by force, but let him stand outside at the doors and wait, commanding them to bring it out quietly; and let them not be hesitant if they have it. For He commands that at harvest time neither the things falling from the sheaves be gathered, nor the whole crop be reaped, but that part of the field be left uncut; at once fostering those who are well-off into being magnanimous and sociable, by letting go of some of their own, and at the same time making the poor more cheerful.

of the sheaves to be carried away, and just as at the harvest it advises that something be left unreaped; by this it very well trains the owners in sharing and magnanimity by letting go some of their own to those in need, and provides the poor with a source of food. You see how the legislation proclaims God's justice along with His goodness, He who provides food for all in abundance. ^A In the very vintage (49) it has forbidden that one should go back to glean what was left, and that one should gather the fallen grapes; and the same is ordered for those who gather olives. Indeed, the tithes (50) of the fruits and of the flocks also taught them to be pious toward the Divine and not entirely greedy of gain, but to share in philanthropy with their neighbors (51). For from these first-fruits, I think, the priests were also fed; we now perceive, therefore, that we are being instructed by the law toward piety, and toward sharing, and toward justice, and toward ^B philanthropy. For does it not command that in the seventh year (52) the land be allowed to rest, and does it not command the poor to use without fear the fruits that grew by the will of God (53), with nature herself farming for those who wish? How, then, is the law not good (54) and a teacher of justice? Again, in the fiftieth year (55) it orders the same things to be done as in the seventh, restoring to each his own, if anyone had been deprived of his land in the interval due to some circumstance, and limiting the desire of those who long to possess by a measured time of harvesting, taking up those who had undergone the penalty of long poverty so that they are not punished throughout their lives (56). ^C Alms (57) and fi- ^D [This page ends here; the following text is a repetition and apparatus.]

faith are royal guards. ^A And “blessing is on the head of him who gives;” and, “He who is merciful to the poor shall be blessed,” because he shows love to one like himself, by reason of that love which he has for the Creator of the human race.

The matters mentioned before have, however, other more natural interpretations concerning rest and the reception of an inheritance, but they are not stated here for the present. Charity is understood in many ways: through gentleness, through kindness, through patience, through the absence of envy and emulation, through the removal of hatred, through the forgetting of injury. ^B It is of such a nature in all these things that it cannot be divided or separated, willingly sharing its own.

Again, he says: “If you see a pack animal belonging to those you need or your friends, or of men whom you know, wandering in the wilderness, lead it away and return it; and if the master is far away, after you have kept it with your own belongings until he returns, return it.” He teaches a natural fellowship, specifically that we should consider what is found as a deposit, and that we should not be mindful of an injury received from an enemy.

The commandment of the Lord is truly a fountain of life and causes one to turn away from the snare of death. What then? Does he not also command us to love strangers, ^C not only as friends and relatives, but as ourselves, both in body and in soul? Indeed, he has honored the nations, and toward those who have done evil he exercises a hatred of the evil. Consequently, he says quite explicitly: “You shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in Egypt,” calling either the gentile or every worldly person an “Egyptian.” ^D

^A And he does not want those who are enemies, even if they are already standing at the walls trying to take the city, to be considered enemies until they have been formally invited to peace. Furthermore, he commands that one should not treat a female captive with indignity; but after allowing her the thirty days to mourn as she wishes, and having her change her garments, he says one may later enter into relations with her as if with a lawful wife. For he does not desire these relations to be for the sake of lust or for wages, as with a harlot, but solely for the sake of the procreation of children. ^B Do you see this humanity combined with self-control? He does not allow the man who loves a captive to indulge his pleasure, but checks his desire with a stipulated interval, and further has the captive’s hair shorn, so as to curb the disgraceful passion; for if reason persuades him to marry, he will hold onto her even if she should become unsightly. Then, if someone, having had his fill of desire, no longer thinks it worthy to have conjugal relations with the captive, he is forbidden from selling her; and he is not even allowed to keep her as a servant, but rather she must be free and released from servitude, so that, if another woman enters the household, she might not suffer some irremediable harm through jealousy. ^C And what else? He commands one to help lift up and raise the beasts of burden of enemies when they are carrying a load, teaching us from afar that the Lord does not welcome malice, nor does he want us to rejoice over our enemies; in order that, having trained ourselves in these things, he may teach us to pray even for enemies. For it is not fitting to envy and be pained by the good fortunes of one’s neighbor, nor indeed to reap pleasure from the misfortunes of one’s neighbor. Yet if, he says, you find an enemy’s beast of burden wandering, put aside the sparks of the old difference and lead it back and return it; for goodness of character follows upon the ^D forgetting of wrongs, and by this, the restoration of friendship.

^A From this point we are fashioned towards concord; and it leads us by the hand towards happiness. And if you take hold of an enemy from habit, but apprehend him being led astray irrationally either by desire or by anger, turn him back towards nobility of character. Does not the law, which is a pedagogue unto Christ, already appear humane and kind? And is it not the same good God, who acts with justice, using each thing from beginning to end in the appropriate way for the sake of salvation? "Have mercy," ^B says the Lord, "that you may be shown mercy; forgive, that you may be forgiven; as you do, so shall it be done to you; as you give, so shall it be given to you; as you judge, so shall you be judged; as you show kindness, so kindness shall be shown to you; the measure with which you measure, it shall be measured back to you." Furthermore, it forbids those who are subservient for the sake of food to be treated with indignity; and to those enslaved on account of debts, it grants on the seventh year a cessation of servitude. But it also forbids handing over suppliants for punishment. Therefore, that saying is true above all: "As ^C silver and gold are tested in the furnace, so the Lord chooses the hearts of men." And, "The merciful man is long-suffering; and there is wisdom in every person who is anxious; for anxiety will befall a thoughtful man; and being careful, he will seek life; and he who seeks God shall find knowledge with righteousness." But those who rightly sought Him found peace. It seems to me that Pythagoras also took the gentleness regarding brute animals from the Law. Straightway, of those born among the flocks and among the herds, ^D

nor even under the pretext of sacrifices, did it allow usage forthwith; rather it forbade it for the sake of the offspring and the mothers, so as to rear man from below, starting from the irrational animals, toward gentleness. "Bestow," says He, "upon the mother her offspring, even if only for the first seven days." For if nothing ^A happens without cause, and milk is showered upon those who have brought forth for the nourishment of the offspring, whoever tears away the newborn from the economy of milk insults nature. Let the Greeks, therefore, blush—and whoever else is a detractor of the Law—if it treats even irrational animals with kindness, while they expose the offspring of humans, although the Law, by the aforementioned commandment, had long since and prophetically suppressed their savagery. For if it forbids the offspring of irrational animals to be separated from the dam on account of lactation, much more does it provide a remedy for that cruel and inhuman state of mind in men, so that, if they do not respect nature, they may at least not neglect discipline. For it is permitted to feed upon kids and lambs; and there might perhaps be some ^B excuse for one who separates the offspring from the mother, but for the exposure of a child, what cause could there be? For one ought from the beginning not even to have married, if one was not desirous of procreating children, or else, through the incontinence of pleasure, one has become a child-slayer. Again, the good Law forbids on the same day ^C the sacrificing of the offspring and the mother. Because of this, the Romans, even if a pregnant woman is condemned to death, do not allow the penalty to be inflicted until she has given birth. For the Law directly forbids even those of the animals that are pregnant to be slaughtered until they have given birth, checking from afar the readiness of those who act unjustly toward man. Thus, even to [the point of suppressing] the irrational ^D animals' [propensity to violence], it extends its gentleness, so that having been trained in all the laws, they might, with great abundance, make use of...

fellow creatures. ^B But some, even kicking the bellies of certain animals before birth, so that they may feast on flesh mixed with milk, have made the womb, created for generation, a tomb for the fetuses carried in it, while the Law explicitly commands: "Thou shalt not seethe a lamb in its mother's milk" (Deut. XIV, 21). For, it says, let not the nourishment of the living become a seasoning for the slaughtered animal; nor let that which is the cause of life be an aid to the consumption of the body. The same Law (Deut. XXV, 4; 1 Tim. V, 18) ordains that the mouth of the ox that treads out the corn be not muzzled; for it says that the worker is worthy of his food. It also forbids yoking together the ox and the ass for plowing the earth; perhaps because it considers the difference between the animals, but also signifying at the same time that one should not wrong those of another race, nor bring them under the yoke, having nothing to charge them with, except that they are of a different species, which is blameless, neither having vice, ^C nor acting from vice. But it seems to me that the allegory also signifies that one ought not to teach the cultivation of the Word equally to the pure and the impure, to the believer and to the unbeliever; for the ox is considered clean, but the ass has been reckoned among the unclean.

As the good Word, being generous with its philanthropy, extends fairness even to the irrational animals, so that being exercised in all the laws, we may the more cultivate mutual humanity, neither doing nor returning injury. In this passage, whereas a useful meaning cannot be elicited from the words "out of which," we must write, following our Clement, that by exercising humanity towards those that are of a different species, we may learn to cultivate the same much more towards one another. Some push red-hot spits into the slaughter of pigs, so that ^D the blood, extinguished and diffused by the heat of the iron, may soften and tenderize the flesh; others jump upon the udders of pregnant sows and kick them, so that they may blend blood and milk and filth, as the embryos perish together in the labor pains—O Zeus, the purifier!—to devour the most inflamed part of the animal.

Saying, "Thou shalt not seethe a lamb in its mother's milk," he judged it to be a very terrible thing that the nourishment of the living should become a condiment and seasoning for the slaughtered one. And he is amazed that the intemperance of men has gone so far as to misuse that which is the cause of life for the consumption of the remainder of the body. He refers to the law which ordains: "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treads out the corn" — for the worker is worthy of his reward (1 Tim. V, 18; Luc. X, 7; Matt. X, 10). He forbids yoking the ox and the ass together for plowing, not only considering the incompatibility of the animals—since the one is clean and the ass is among the unclean—but he did not neglect the safety of the impure, nor did he allow the pure to use their strength arbitrarily; but he cries out, as it were, to those who have ears in their soul, not to wrong any of another race, having nothing to reproach them with, except that they are of a different species, which is blameless. For whatever is neither vice nor proceeds from vice stands outside of all blame.

^A Moreover, it teaches that it is not fitting to cut down trees that belong to useful material, nor to harvest grain to one's detriment before the harvest; nor, in fact, to destroy any useful fruit at all, whether of the earth ^B or of the soul; for it does not even allow one to cut down the territory of enemies. And indeed, those who are farmers have benefited from the law in these matters as well; for it commands ^C that the newly planted trees be nurtured for three years in succession, cutting off the superfluous outgrowths, so that they may not be burdened and weighed down, and so that they may not become weak through lack of food when the nourishment is broken up and divided; and it commands one to plow around them and dig around them, so that nothing growing nearby may hinder their growth. And it does not allow the fruit to be plucked—imperfect fruit from imperfect trees—but after three years, in the fourth year, having consecrated the first-fruits to God, after the tree has reached maturity. This model of agricultural instruction would be a way of teaching; it teaches that one must prune the offshoots of sins, and the vain thoughts which grow up along with the fertile fruit, until the branch of faith is matured and becomes firm. For in the fourth year—since time is also needed for the catechumen to be surely and firmly grounded—the quaternion of virtues is consecrated to God, as only the third already unites with the fourth manifestation of the Lord. But a sacrifice ^D of praise is better than whole burnt offerings. For "He," it says, "gives you strength to act."

On the Cultivation of the Soul according to the Law

Furthermore, in his overflowing kindness, he forbids one outright to cut down trees that are of useful material, or to harvest a plain that is bearing grain before the time, or to destroy any useful fruit at all, whether of the earth or of the soul; nor does he allow one to cut down the territory of the enemy. For it commands the new plants of trees to be nurtured for three years in succession, cutting off the superfluous outgrowths so that they may not be burdened and weighed down, and so that they may not become weak through lack of food when the nourishment is broken up, and to plow and dig around them, so that nothing may sprout up to their detriment. Nor does he allow the fruit to be plucked for the sake of enjoyment, not only because it was destined to be imperfect, coming from imperfect sources... [alt-version omitted] ...and to cultivate the plants, and to cast in all seeds. He explains "to cultivate" as: to plant or to dig a pit in which the plants are placed; or to dig around them well, that is, to surround the plants in a circle with earth upon the surface so that they might not get cold, for the warmth helps them; or to cultivate, that is, to heap up earth in a circle around the plants. After three years, it is able to produce fruit in the fourth year according to the perfect number; but in the fourth year he commands that the fruit be plucked, not for enjoyment, but to consecrate all of it as first-fruits to God.

^A If, however, matters have been illumined for you, once you have received and acquired strength, manifest power in knowledge. For by these things He signifies that both goods and gifts are provided by God, and that we, having become ministers of divine grace, ought to sow the benefits of God and prepare those who draw near to be good and noble. So that, as much as possible, 17 the temperate man may make those around him continent, the brave man those who are courageous, the prudent man those who are intelligent, and the just man those who are just. For it says, "He gives you strength to make power." If matters have been illumined for you, having received and acquired bodily strength, which perhaps you did not expect, display power. It is necessary that the prudent and sharp-witted man should be as much as possible such a person, and should prepare those who approach him—the temperate man to be continent, the courageous man to be noble, the just man to be just, and in sum, the good man to be good. Furthermore, he teaches a lesson most suitable to the rational nature: to imitate God as much as possible, leaving nothing undone that contributes to the possible likeness. Whoever shall do and teach, this one shall be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. ^B This is the Gnostic according to the image and likeness 18, the one who imitates God as far as is possible, leaving nothing undone that contributes to the possible likeness; being continent, enduring, living justly, ruling over the passions, sharing what he possesses as much as he is able, doing good both in word and deed. This one, he says, is greatest in the kingdom, whoever shall do and teach, imitating 20 God by bestowing similar gifts; for the gifts of God are of common benefit. But whoever attempts 21 to do anything with pride, he irritates God, he says; for arrogance is a vice of the soul, from which it must truly repent 22 of other vices. ^C You shall imitate God by a similar bestowal of benefits; for the gifts of the supreme Ruler bring public utility. Whoever attempts to do anything with pride, he irritates God. Why? Because, first, arrogance is a vice of the soul. And the soul which acts with a hand of pride, whether from those native-born or from those who are proselytes, such a one irritates God. He also makes instructions toward repentance, by which we are taught to remodel our life from disorder into a better transformation. For he says that this matter is not excessive, nor set far away, but is very near, residing in three parts of our own nature: in the mouth, and heart, and hands—through symbols, words, and designs, and deeds. ^D The mouth is the symbol of the word, the heart of designs, and the hands of actions. Thus it is beautifully commanded that we learn to compose our life and to reform it from disorder into a better state. For he says that this is not too arduous, nor to be sought from afar, but is at hand, namely, in the mouth, heart, and hands; that is, in words, deeds, and designs. For the symbol of words is the mouth, of designs the heart, of actions the hands. At which point he refers to Deut. xxx, 14: "The word is very near you, in your mouth, and in your heart, and in your hands to do it." Similar things were said above by Clement, *Protrepticus*, page 63, Paris edition, where see the notes.

^A it commands, for those who are adjusting their lives from disharmony to a better transformation through these three: mouth, heart, and hands. And these would be a symbol: the hands of action, the heart of intention, and the mouth of speech. Well, therefore, 23 it has been said concerning those who repent in that oracle: "You have chosen God today to be your God; and the Lord has chosen you today to become a people for Him" 24. For God adopts as familiar the one who hastens to serve the Existing One 25, even if he be a servant; and even if he be one in number, he is honored equally with the people. For being a part of the people, he becomes a complement to it, having been restored to that from which he was; and the whole is also called by the part.

And this nobility 26 is demonstrated in choosing and practicing the most beautiful things. For what did such nobility profit Adam? And he had no mortal father 27, since he himself was the father of men who are in generation. He 28 chose shameful things readily, following the woman, but neglected the true and good things, in exchange for which he exchanged a mortal life for an immortal one, though not 29 to the end. But Noah, who did not become as Adam was, is saved by divine visitation; for he kept himself 30 and dedicated himself to God. And Abraham 31, who brought forth children from three women, not for the enjoyment of pleasure, but for the sake of hope, I think…

^B Unless someone should grasp this harmony, becoming at once a lover of God and beloved of God. Whence that oracle was well and harmoniously used in accordance with what has been said: "You have exchanged the Lord today to be your God, and the Lord has exchanged you today to become a people for Him." …for the one who, being [a suppliant], *the Existing One*, to serve the Existing One, being a suppliant, God adopts as familiar. Most beautiful indeed is the reciprocity of the choice, of a man hastening to serve God, and of God without delay adopting the suppliant as familiar, and meeting the one who approaches Him sincerely and unadulteratedly in His purpose leading to His service. And the true servant and suppliant, even if he is one man in number, in power, just as he himself chooses, is the whole people, having become equal in honor to the whole nation; and he is naturally as follows: for as in a ship the pilot is equivalent to all the sailors, and in a camp the general to the whole army, etc.

…no mortal, nor author, but God. And he chose shameful and evil things readily, but disregarded the good, and beautiful, and true, for which he exchanged a mortal life instead of an immortal one. …Tatian having been the first to introduce this blasphemy, [bringing them]... they dedicated themselves entirely to God. …he was the first who brought forth children from three women, not for the enjoyment of pleasure, but for the sake of the hope of increasing the race. But out of the many, one alone was shown to be the heir of the paternal goods; and all the others, having slipped from a holy intention, and having kept nothing of the one who begat them, were separated, having become alienated from the celebrated nobility.

^A For the sake of the multiplication of the race in the beginning, only one inherits the paternal goods; while the others were separated from the kinship. And from him, twins having been born, the younger inherits, having become pleasing to the father, and he receives the blessings; but the elder serves him, for the greatest good for the base man is not to be his own master. This economy is both prophetic and typical. That all things belong to the wise man, he clearly indicates, saying: "Because God had mercy on me, all things are mine." For he teaches that we must seek one thing, through whom all things were made, and who distributes the promised things to those who are worthy. He therefore records as a citizen of the kingdom the one who has become diligent through divine wisdom, and lists him among the just men of old, those who lived lawfully according to the law and before the law, whose actions have become laws for us.

And again, teaching that the wise man is a king, he introduces certain foreigners saying to him: "You are a king from God among us," for those who are ruled by him, out of admiration for his virtue, obey the wise man of their own free will. ^B Plato the philosopher, setting the end of blessedness, says it is assimilation to God as far as possible; whether by running somewhat with the dogma of the law—for great natures and those free from passions, as the Pythagorean Philo says in interpreting the things of Moses, somehow hit the mark concerning the truth—or whether he was taught it by certain wise men of that time, as children of the founder of the race have many children from three women, not indulging in lust, but in the hope of enlarging the family. One, however, of many alone succeeded to the inheritance; all the others, just as they degenerated from piety, were so separated from his kinship, of whose virtues they had expressed none, and fell from that most celebrated nobility. Yet in the order of things, O friend, there are two patterns: the one divine and most blessed, the other godless and most miserable; not seeing that it is so, they are occupied by folly and extreme senselessness, and they secretly happen to be made like to the one through unjust actions, and unlike the other. ^C They address him (Gen. xxxii, 11). ^D For the minor was winning the benevolence of both parents by his obedience: and so it happened that they made the most ample prayers for him, which God willed to be ratified without any exception: but they took pity on the other, namely the elder, that they might confer this benefit upon him, that they might subject him to his brother, thinking that it would be useful for him if a base man were not left in his own power: who if he had borne this servitude willingly, might have earned, as in games, the second prizes of virtue. For it is impossible, Theodore, that evils should be utterly rooted out. For it is always necessary that something be opposed to the good. Nor yet can they have a place among the gods; but they necessarily patrol mortal nature and the lower region. Wherefore one must strive to flee from hence to there as quickly as possible; and the flight is to become like to God as far as possible; and to become like to God is to become just and holy with wisdom. For the end of goods has been set as being made like to God as far as possible. For great natures introduce many novelties into the sciences.

thirsting always for knowledge. ^A For the law says: "Walk after the Lord your God, and keep my commandments." For the law calls assimilation a "following," and such a following assimilates us according to our power. "Become," says the Lord, "merciful and compassionate, as your heavenly Father is compassionate." From this, the Stoics also decreed that to live consistently with nature is the end, having elegantly changed the name of God into nature; since nature extends even to plants, and to sowings, and to trees, and to stones. Clearly, therefore, it has been said: "Evil men do not understand the law; but those who love the law build a wall for themselves." For the "wisdom of the crafty will discern its ways; ^B but the folly of the foolish is in error." "For upon whom shall I look," the prophecy says, "but upon the meek and quiet and him who trembles at my words?"

We are taught that there are three kinds of friendship; and of these, the first and best is that according to virtue, for love proceeding from reason is firm. The second and middle one is by way of reciprocity; this is communal, shares with others, and is useful for life, for friendship from favor is common. But the last and third, we say, is that from habit, while others call it that which is fickle and changeable according to pleasure. And it seems to me that Hippodamus the Pythagorean writes most beautifully of friendships: ^C one from the knowledge of the gods, another from the giving of men, and another from the pleasure of animals. Thus, there is one friendship of the philosopher, another of man, and another of the animal. For man is in very truth an image of God when he acts beneficially, in which he is also himself benefited; for just as the pilot at once saves and is saved. Therefore, when one happens to be asking, [it is said] not to the giver, "You have given well," but "You have received well." Thus, the one who receives [gives] something...

and the one who gives [receives]. ^A “The just,” it is said, “show mercy and give; the kind shall be inhabitants of the earth; the blameless shall be left upon it; but those who act lawlessly shall be blotted out from it.” And it seems to me that Homer, divining a faithful truth, said: “Give to a friend.” But aid must also be brought to an enemy, so that he may not remain an enemy; for aid is bound by good will, and enmity is dissolved. But if a readiness of mind be present, according to what one has, it is accepted, not according to what one has not. “For it is not that there should be relief for others and affliction for you, but out of equality in the present time,” and what follows. “He dispersed, he gave to the poor; his justice abides unto the age of the age,” says Scripture. For that which is according to the image and likeness, as we have also said before, does not shine forth in the body (for it is wrong for the mortal to be made like the immortal), but in mind and reason: with which the Lord seals that likeness which is in doing good, and that which is in ruling. For rule is not carried out correctly by the qualities of bodies, but by the judgment of the mind. For by the counsels of holy men cities are governed rightly, and houses rightly.

CAPUT XX.

That the Gnostic practices endurance and abstinence

^B Furthermore, endurance itself also strives toward the divine likeness, as it enjoys impassibility in a certain manner through patience, if one keeps in memory those things which are told concerning Ananias; of whom one also was the prophet Daniel, filled with divine faith. Daniel dwelt in Babylon, just as Lot dwelt in Sodom, and Abraham in the land of the Chaldeans, who shortly after was the friend of God. The King of the Babylonians therefore brought Daniel into a den full of wild beasts; but the King of all, the faithful Lord, led him forth unharmed. The Gnostic will possess this endurance, insofar as he is of this kind; if he is tempted, he will bless, like the noble Job; if he is devoured by a sea-monster, he will pray, like Jonah, and faith will restore him to preach to the Ninevites; and if he is shut up with lions, he will tame the beasts; and if he is cast into fire, he will be refreshed by dew, and will not be burned by fire. He will be a martyr by night, he will be a martyr by day; in his speech, in his life, in his character, he will be a martyr. ^C And he shows mercy without restraint. “The kind shall be inhabitants of the earth, and the blameless shall be left in it.” (For the upright shall inhabit the land, and the holy shall be left in it.) “But the ways of the ungodly shall perish from the earth; and the lawless shall be driven out from it.”

^A A martyr, dwelling with the Lord and having familiar intercourse with Him, remains in the spirit; pure in flesh, pure in heart, having been sanctified in the Word. The world, he says, is crucified to him, and he himself to the world. He, carrying the cross of the Savior, follows the footsteps of the Lord, having become as God, holy among the holy. Since, therefore, the divine law is mindful of every virtue, it disciplines man especially toward continence, establishing this as the foundation of virtues; and indeed it pre-educates us for the attainment of continence by forbidding us to partake of the use of animals that are by nature fatty, such as the race of swine, which happens to be very fleshy; for such use is supplied to those who are given to luxury. It is said, at any rate, that one of the philosophers, in providing an etymology for the pig (ὖν), said it was called "thun" (θῦν), as being fit only for sacrifice (θῦσιν) and slaughter; for the soul had been given to this animal for no other purpose than that its flesh might grow fat. In the same way, He forbade them to partake of fish, reining in our desires, [forbidding] those that have neither fins nor scales; for these differ from other fish in the richness and fatness of their flesh. ^B From this I think the mysteries also forbid one not only to touch certain animals, but also to abstain from using some parts of those that are sacrificed, for reasons which those who are initiates know. If, then, the belly and what is under the belly must be mastered, it is clear that we have received from the beginning from the Lord through the law that we ought to excise desire. This would be accomplished perfectly if we were to judge without hypocrisy the tinder of desire, I mean pleasure. They say that its definition is a smooth and pleasant movement with some sense perception. They say that Menelaus, while in servitude to this after the fall of Troy, when he rushed to kill Helen, as one who had been the cause of so many and such great evils, nevertheless could not prevail in his action, being overcome by her beauty, through which he arrived at the recollection of pleasure. ^C Whence the tragic poets, mocking him, cried out against him with reproach:

But you, looking upon her breast, cast aside your sword, And give a kiss to the traitress, you hound. ^D

^A And again: Does the sword grow blunt at her beauty? But I accept the words of Antisthenes, who says of Aphrodite, that even if I could shoot her with arrows, I would, because she has corrupted many of our good and noble women. He calls Cupid a defect of nature, to which miserable men, succumbing, call the sickness a god. For it is shown through these things that the more ignorant are defeated by the ignorance of pleasure, which ought not to be admitted, even if it is called a god, that is, even if it happens to be given from God for the sake of procreation. And Xenophon, speaking of pleasure as openly a vice, says: "O miserable one, what good do you know, or what noble thing do you observe? You who do not even await the desire for pleasant things, eating before you are hungry, and drinking before you are thirsty; and in order to eat pleasantly, you devise appetizers, and in order to drink pleasantly, you procure ^B costly wines, and in summer, you look for snow to put around them; and in order to sleep pleasantly, you provide not only soft beds, but also supports for the beds." Wherefore, as Aristo used to say, regarding the whole tetrachord—pleasure, I mean, and pain, fear, and desire—there is need of much exercise and struggle. For they, truly they, enter within through the very viscera, and stir the heart of mortals.

[Lines of verse omitted as they repeat the previous content]

^C And you would not even wait for the desire, but fill yourself with everything beforehand. You provide not only soft coverings, but also beds, and supports for the beds. Regarding the whole tetrachord, Pleasure, desire, pain, fear, There is need of much exercise and struggle: For they, truly they, enter within through the very viscera, And stir the heart of mortals.

^D Then he notes the following: "This sentiment is attributed to Aristo in Clement. I, by conjecture, attributed it to Agatho, because I did not find Aristo among the tragic poets. The first two verses exist in a confused state in the same place." But Gataker, in his *Adversaria*, chapter 9, after having brought forward the entire passage of Clement, says this: "The most distinguished man, Hugo Grotius, attributes all these things to Agatho in his *Excerpta*, because he could find no Aristo among the tragic poets. And so he endeavors to reduce them to the laws of meter: It is not difficult to translate many things written in prose even into the laws of pure iambics; which we find that the most distinguished man did elsewhere as well. However, to me, those earlier parts seem to be entirely those of the philosopher Aristo; only the very last part, comprised in a distich, seems to be of the poet, and perhaps a tragic one, but an uncertain one."

^A For even those who are considered grave, pleasure makes their spirits waxen, according to Plato: because every pleasure and every pain affixes the soul to the body of him who does not separate and crucify himself from the passions. "He who has lost his soul," says the Lord, "will save it"; that is, by hazarding it for the Savior, bestowing it, as He Himself did for us, or by losing it in respect of the communion with the customary life. For if you should wish to release, and distance, and separate (for this is what the cross signifies) the soul from the pleasure and delight in this life, you will have it found and resting in the hope that is expected. This would be the "meditation of death," if we should wish to be content only with those desires that are measured according to nature, not transgressing those that are according to nature, or things beyond nature—where the source of sin arises. We must, therefore, put on the armor of God, so that we may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil; for "the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty in God for the pulling down of strongholds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ," the divine Apostle says. ^B A man is indeed needed who will use in an admirable and in-confused way those things from which the passions arise: such as wealth and poverty, glory and ignominy, health and sickness, life and death, labor and pleasure. For that I may use different things indifferently, there is need of much discernment, seeing that we are previously ill-affected by much weakness, and have previously lived in ignorance with a bad upbringing and training. The simple rationale of our philosophy, therefore, says that all the passions are impressions of a soft and yielding soul, and, as it were, seal-impressions of the spiritual powers against which our struggle lies. For it is the work of the maleficent powers, I think, to try to imprint something of their own habit into each thing, in order to conquer and claim as their own those who have renounced them. ^C It follows, then, that some are thrown down in the struggle; but whoever handles the contest more athletically, having wrestled in every conflict, and having reached the crown—these aforementioned powers...

Omnis voluptas atque dolor, quasi clavum tenens, animam corpori affigit atque connectit. ^D

ing wrestled in every conflict, and having reached the crown—these aforementioned powers, however, amid much sweat and blood, then fail, admiring the victors. For of the things that move, some move by appetite and imagination, as do animals; others move by displacement, as do inanimate things; and among inanimate things, some say that plants also move by passing into growth, if one were to concede to them that plants are inanimate. ^A And stones have "habit"; plants have "nature"; but appetite and imagination—and the two things previously mentioned—are also shared by brutes. The power of reasoning, however, which is proper to the human soul, must not be impelled in the same way as animals lacking reason, but must discriminate what is perceived by the imagination and not be led away by it. These, therefore, of which we have spoken—powers, pulchritudes, glories, adulteries, pleasures, and such entangling images—are held out to those souls that can be easily seduced, just as those who drive cattle hold out green branches to them. Then, when they have craftily surrounded those who cannot discern true pleasure from false, ^B or distinguish the fleeting and perishable and that which is subject to violation from holy beauty, they lead them into servitude. Each deception, pressing constantly upon the soul, imprints an image upon it; and the imprudent and unsuspecting soul carries about the image of the passion which arises from the enticement and our own assent. Those around Basilides are accustomed to call the passions ^C "appendages"—spirits, that is, which possess an existence of their own, attached to the rational soul through a certain original disturbance and confusion. They further say that other adulterous and diverse natures of spirits are grafted onto these, such as those of the wolf, the ape, the lion, or the goat; the properties of which, appearing around the soul, are said to assimilate the soul’s desires to these animals. For the soul imitates the works and deeds of those whose properties it bears; and it is not only conformed to the appetites and imaginations of irrational animals, but also emulates the movements and beauties of plants, because it has the properties of plants also attached to it. It even has the properties of "habit," such as the hardness of adamant. But we shall discuss this doctrine later, when we treat of the soul; for now, this only must be noted: that as in the Trojan horse, ^D whose story is captured in that image, the man according to Basilides hides within himself many-faceted and diverse vices. That many of the Greek princes were enclosed within the wooden horse constructed by Epeus is well known.

the poetic myth, the man according to Basilides preserves the image, being enfolded in one body by an army of so many diverse spirits. Indeed, Isidorus, the son of Basilides ^A (85), in his book *On the Attached Soul*, being aware of this dogma, as if accusing himself, writes word for word: “For if you give someone the persuasion that the soul is not simple, but that by the force of the appendages the passions of the baser parts come to be, the wicked of men will have no ordinary excuse for saying: ‘I was forced, I was dragged away, I did it against my will, I acted without wanting to,’ while he himself was the leader of the desire for evils, and did not contend against the forces of the appendages. But it is necessary, having become stronger through the rational faculty, to appear as having overcome the lesser creation that is in us.” For he also supposes two souls in us, just as the Pythagoreans, concerning whom we shall examine later. ^B But also Valentinus, in a letter to some, writes with these very words concerning the appendages: “There is one good, whose freedom is the manifestation through the Son (84), and by him alone the heart could become pure, every evil spirit being expelled from the heart. For many spirits dwelling in it do not allow it to be pure; but each of them performs its own works, in many ways insulting it with base desires. And it seems to me that the heart suffers something similar to an inn; for that too is bored into and dug through, and is often filled with dung, as men behave wantonly and take no care of the place, as if it belonged to another. In this way also the heart, as long as it does not receive providence, being unclean, is the habitation of many demons ^C (85); but when the only good Father visits it, it is sanctified and shines with light; and thus he is called blessed (86) who has such a heart, because he will see God.”

The followers of Basilides

^A Since it is seen by Him who alone is the good Father, it is sanctified and shines with light; and thus he who is endowed with such a heart is blessed, because he will see God.

What, therefore, is the cause that such a soul is not cared for and provided for from the beginning? Let them tell us. For either it is not worthy—and how, then, does providence approach it as if out of repentance?—or it happens to be saved by nature, as He Himself wills. And it is necessary that such a soul, being provided for from the beginning because of its kinship, should offer no access to unclean spirits, unless it be forced and proven weak. For if He were to grant that it, having repented, might choose better things, He would be saying involuntarily that which truth, according to us, proclaims: namely, that salvation is from an obedient transformation, not from nature.

For just as exhalations, arising both from the earth and from marshes, gather together into mist and cloudy masses, so too do the vapors of carnal desires brand the soul with a bad state, scattering the images of pleasure before the soul on all sides. They cast shadows, therefore, upon the intellectual light, the soul drawing to itself the vapors of desire and thickening the masses of passions through the persistence of pleasures. But a lump of gold is not taken from the earth, ^B but it is separated by smelting; then, having become pure, it is called gold—it is earth that has been purified. For, "Ask, and it shall be given to you," is said to those who can choose the best things from themselves.

As for how we say that the operations of the devil and foul spirits are sown into the soul of a sinner, I have no need of many words if I bring forward as a witness the apostolic Barnabas (who was indeed one of the seventy and a helper of Paul), ^C who says in these words: "Before we believed in God, the habitation of our heart was perishable and weak, truly a temple built by hand: because it was indeed full of idolatry, and was a house of demons, because it did was contrary to God." He says, therefore, that sinners perform the operations that are appropriate to demons; he does not say that the spirits themselves dwell in the soul of the unbeliever. For this reason he also adds: "Attend, that the temple of the Lord may be built up gloriously. ^D Learn that you have received the remission of sins, and having hoped in the name, we have become new, being created again from the beginning." For demons do not...

^A obtain it, but sins, he says, are forgiven, which we committed likewise before believing. Rightly, therefore, did he add what follows: "Wherefore in our habitation God truly dwells; in us is in a certain sense His Word of faith, the calling of His promise, the wisdom of the ordinances, the commandments of the teaching." I know that I have encountered a certain heresy, whose leader, through the use of pleasure, claimed to fight against pleasure, while this noble Gnostic was actually defecting to pleasure through a feigned struggle; for he claimed, indeed, that he himself was a Gnostic. For he said it was no great thing for a man to abstain from pleasure who had not experienced it, but rather for one who had been involved in it not to be conquered by it; hence, that he was training himself by it, in it. But the wretched man was unwittingly deceiving himself with his pleasure-loving art. ^B It is evident, then, that Aristippus the Cyrenian also set upon this opinion, that sophist who boasts of possessing the truth; for when reproached for constantly keeping company with the Corinthian harlot, he said, "I have Laïs, but I am not had by her." Such also are those who claim to follow Nicolaus, citing a certain saying of the man, but perverting it, namely, that we must abuse the flesh. But that noble man was signifying that we must restrain pleasures and desires, and by this exercise render the impulses and assaults of the flesh withered and flaccid. But these others, having poured themselves out into pleasure like goats, as if insulting their own body, live in luxury and delicacy, not knowing that while it is naturally fluid and wasted away, their soul is buried in the mud of wickedness, pursuing ^C the dogma of pleasure, not that of an apostolic man. For in what do these differ from Sardanapalus, whose life is shown by the epigram:

These I have, that which I ate, and the wantonness I committed, and With love I suffered delights; but those many and noble things Are left behind.

These things I have published, and which my sated desire has consumed, but many other excellent things lie left behind.

^A For the enjoyment of pleasure is not strictly necessary at all, but is an accessory and consequence of certain natural needs, such as hunger, thirst, cold, or marriage. If, therefore, it were possible to drink, or to take food, or to beget children without it, no other use for it could be shown. For pleasure is neither an operation, nor an affection, nor any part of ourselves; but it entered into life for the sake of an auxiliary service, just as they say salt was introduced for the sake of digesting food. But pleasure, having run wild and usurped the administration of the house, first generates concupiscence, which is a desire alien to reason, and the appetite for that which gratifies it. It persuaded Epicurus to set pleasure as the end for the philosopher. ^B He divinely, forsooth, defines it as a steady condition of the flesh and a sure hope concerning its good health. For what is luxury other than an intemperate gluttony and a superfluous, curious abundance for those who have given themselves over to delights and pleasures? Diogenes significantly writes in a certain tragedy:

Effeminatis queis mere ac fœtentibus Cor alligatum est usque et usque luxibus, Qui nec laboris diligunt tantillulum:

^C And in another order the verses are read in Athenæus, book XII, 167, in this manner:

Knowing well that you are mortal, nourish your spirit, Delighting in feasts; for to the dead there is no profit. For I too am ashes, who ruled over great Nineveh. What I ate, and the wanton acts I committed, and with love I experienced delights—these I took; but those many and noble things Are left behind.

These I hold, which I learned and pondered, and in the company of the Muses I understood noble things; but the rest, and all the sweet things, Are left behind.

Those who under the impulses of heart Are led by effeminate and filthy luxury, Willing to toil not even a little...

^D ...in the worst way, and remembering the things it did lawlessly. And all noble things have been dissolved; and those noble things are left behind, and all things have been seized. Eat, drink, and play, for the other things are not worth a snap of the fingers. Therefore, let us lament those who live like beasts and walk about, and let us bring to the dead the epitaph of Sardanapalus, for this was inscribed on his tomb:

I have as much as I ate, and the wanton acts I committed, and with love I experienced delights; but those many and noble things are left behind. For I too am ashes, who ruled over great Nineveh.

But see, this too is a lie which those who wrote the inscription inscribed; for he who has died does not possess what he ate and drank, but those things have departed into stinking corruption; he possesses only the stench of his lawless life, which continuously grieves his soul and torments the conscience concerning it.

^A And what follows these things: things which are spoken of basely, but are for the deserts of those who are given to pleasure. Divinely, therefore, it seems to me, the Law has willed that fear should hang over us of necessity, so that through caution and attention, the philosopher might acquire and preserve absence of care, remaining in all things unstumbling and sinless. For peace and liberty do not come about in any other way than through a perpetual and indefatigable battle against the movements of our passions. 11 For these adversaries are dense and Olympian, and, if I may say so, more bitter than wasps 12—and especially pleasure, which not only by day, but even at night in our very dreams, entraps us with the jugglery of illusions, lying in wait for us and biting. How, then, can the Greeks still justly attack the Law, when they themselves also teach that pleasure is to be enslaved to fear? Socrates, at any rate, 13 bids us beware of those enticements which persuade us to eat when not hungry, and to drink when not thirsty, and to watch the gazes and kisses of beautiful persons, as being something naturally more grievous than the poison which scorpions and spiders 14 inject. ^B Antisthenes 15 also chooses to be mad rather than to feel pleasure. And Crates the Theban says:

Conquer these things, exulting in virtuous conduct, and Neither enslaving yourself to gold nor to amorous desires; nor are those who provide such things any longer free. And he adds in full: Unenslaved and unyielding to slavish pleasure 17 18 They love an immortal kingdom and liberty.

He writes clearly elsewhere: ^C The cataplasm for the unbridled impulse toward sexual matters is hunger. 19

[alt-version omitted]

^D 670 And Antisthenes the Cynic, who was also a hearer of Socrates, said that to be mad is better than to take pleasure. Diogenes Laertius, book VI, section 3: "He used to say repeatedly: I would rather be mad than feel pleasure." Cf. Sextus Empiricus, *adv. Mathemat.*, book X.

[Regarding the verses:] The first is a pentameter, and is correct. In the following line, it is more correct to read with the penultimate diphthong. The third, if it is a hexameter, can be interpolated thus, "nor is there anything a partner to a lover."

[Regarding the verses:] Theodoret also recorded these in *Therapeut.*, p. 671. However, it can be tolerated. Hesychius: *Akamptoi*, *aknaptoi*. *Aknaptos*, immovable. Theodoret, in the place already mentioned, reciting these things again: and Sylburg notes in his commentary that it is more fitting to the words of Crates, as they are referred metrically by Diogenes Laertius in *Crates*, lib. VI, seg. 86: Hunger subdues love; if not, then time; But if you are not able to use these, a noose. Suidas recited the same verses under the word *Kratēs*. And in *Antholog.*, lib. 1, cap. 27, and apud Stobaeus.

^A And the comic poets, while attacking the philosophy of Zeno the Stoic, bear witness to what his teaching was, in this manner: This Zeno teaches wisdom truly vain, For those he leads he teaches to be lean, With but one loaf, a fig, and water plain.

All these, indeed, are not ashamed openly to confess the utility which is derived from caution. But that wisdom which is true and not devoid of reason—which trusts not in empty words and decrees, but in invulnerable covers and efficacious mysteries—meditating upon and practicing itself in the divine commandments, receives divine power through that portion of it which is inspired by the Word. ^B Indeed, even the poets depict the aegis of the poetic Zeus as: Terrible, which Terror vast encompasses and girds. In it also dwells Strife, and Prowess, and cold Horror, And the Gorgon’s head, that huge monster of old, Terrible, horrible, a portent of Zeus who holds the aegis.

But to those who are able to discern rightly what is salutary, I know not what will appear more lovable than the majesty of the Law and its daughter, caution and religion. ^C But when something is said to "sing at too high a pitch," just as the Lord said to some, so that those who emulate and follow Him might not sing out of tune and discordantly—this I interpret not as being "too high," but as high-pitched to those who are unwilling to take up the divine yoke. For to the slothful and infirm, that which is moderate seems too intense and to exceed the proper pitch; and to the unjust, that which is equitable seems to be extreme justice. For those whom, through their friendship with sins, indulgence creeps in, these consider the truth to be harshness, and severity [to be] brutality, and [consider] him who does not sin with them nor is dragged along with them, to be unmerciful. Rightly, therefore, does the tragedy write concerning Pluto: ^D "To what demon you are going, you ask?"

^A Who neither knows equity nor grace: ^B But looks to severe justice, and nothing more."

For if you are not yet able to do what is not commanded by the law, nevertheless, by considering that the most beautiful examples of liberty are set before us, we can nourish and increase the love of liberty; and by this means we shall be helped with a more ready and eager spirit, partly by being challenged, partly by imitating, and partly by being checked. For those ancient righteous ones who lived according to the law were not born of an aged oak, nor of a rugged rock: since therefore they wished to philosophize sincerely, they offered and dedicated their whole selves to God, and were accounted unto faith. Well did Zeno say concerning the Indians, that he would rather see one Indian being roasted, than learn all the arguments concerning the endurance of labor. But for us, there are daily abounding fountains of martyrs, which are viewed by our own eyes, who are roasted, who are tortured, and who are beheaded. All these the fear of the law, which led them as a pedagogue to Christ, trained, that they might show forth piety even through blood. ^B "God stood in the congregation of the gods; in the midst, however, He judges the gods." Who are these? Those who are superior to pleasure, who overcome their passions, who are cognizant of each thing they do, the Gnostics, those who are greater than the world. And again, ^C "I said, you are gods, and all of you are sons of the Most High": to whom does the Lord say this? To those who, as far as is possible, reject all mortal things. And the Apostle says: "But you are no longer in the flesh, but in the spirit." And again he says: "In the flesh though we be, we do not war according to the flesh": for "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does corruption inherit incorruption." "But behold," says the Spirit, ^D rebuking us, "as men you die." We must, therefore, train ourselves to beware of those things which are liable to vices, by fleeing them, as those who are truly philosophers do, those foods which incite to lust, and the dissolute relaxation in the bedchamber, and luxuries, and by living in such a way that the things which happen in the enjoyment of pleasures are to others

a heavy prize; but to us, no longer so. For the temperance of God ^A is the greatest thing. For He Himself has said: "I will not leave thee, nor forsake thee," having judged one worthy because of his genuine choice. Thus, then, as we try to approach piously and cautiously, the kindly and easy yoke of the Lord will receive us, leading us from faith to faith, with one charioteer, through progress, carrying each one of us to salvation, so that he who follows may attain the fruit of blessedness. And the exercise, according to the opinion of Hippocrates of Cos, comes to be health, not only of the body, but also of the soul, through readiness to undergo labors and through not having excessive satiation of food.

CHAPTER XXI.

He reviews the various opinions of the philosophers concerning the supreme good.

Epicurus, however, placing blessedness in not hungering, not thirsting, and not shivering, exclaimed with a voice equal to God’s, impiously saying that in these states he would even contend with Father Jove: as if he were decreeing a blessed victory for those who feed on the excrement of swine, and not for those endowed with reason and philosophers. For it is agreed that those who obey pleasure are the Cyrenaics and Epicurus; for they openly say that the end is to live pleasantly, and that the perfect good is pleasure alone. Epicurus, however, also says that the removal of pain is pleasure; and he says that that is to be chosen and sought which first draws one from himself toward himself, which is clearly being entirely in motion. Dinomachus and Callipho said that the end is to do whatever is in one's power ^B for the sake of attaining and enjoying pleasure. And Hieronymus the Peripatetic says that the end is to live without trouble and disturbance, but that the extreme good is happiness. Nor does Diodorus, who was of the same school, think otherwise; he proclaims that the end is to live without any trouble and honorably. And Epicurus and the Cyrenaics say that the first appropriate thing is pleasure; for it is for the sake of pleasure... ^C

...as for the calm of mind, it is in motion. For calm of mind and the absence of pain are constitutive pleasures, but joy and gladness are seen as an activity according to motion. But not only did Aristippus and his followers embrace pleasure in motion, but Epicurus and his followers did as well. For they thought that pleasure existed only in motion. Therefore, every pleasure, because it has an appropriate nature, is a good. ^D

^A And the Cyrenaics say that what is primarily appropriate and convenient to nature is pleasure. For they say that virtue, coming in because of pleasure, produced pleasure. According to the view of Calliphon, however, virtue was added for the sake of pleasure, but in the course of time, when it saw the beauty that surrounded it, it made itself equal in honor to the beginning, that is to say, to pleasure. But the followers of Aristotle define the end as living according to virtue; yet they do not judge that happiness or the end is present to everyone who possesses virtue. For they say that the wise man, when he is tested and falls into involuntary misfortunes, and for these reasons is even willing to gladly escape from life, is neither blessed nor happy. For virtue also requires some time, seeing that it is not produced in a single day, or [even] in a perfect one 44; since, as they say, a boy is never happy. But human life would be the perfect time. Happiness, therefore, is to be completed from the three kinds of goods 45. Neither, then, is the poor man, nor the man of no reputation, nor indeed the man who is diseased, nor even one who is a slave, according to them, happy. Then again, Zeno 46 the Stoic considers the end to be that which is primarily appropriate according to virtue, the primary good, the primary kindred good, and the innate good. And he set forth the end as the use of virtue in a perfect life. He said also that happiness is a completion from three kinds of goods, those ^B concerning the soul, which he also calls first in potentiality; and from the second, those concerning the body, such as health, strength, beauty, and the like; and from those external, such as wealth, nobility, reputation, and the like. And that virtue is not sufficient for happiness, for it further requires both those goods concerning the body and those external; as if the wise man were in a state of misery, even if he were in pain, in poverty, and the like. Among whom beauty, wealth, strength of body, and nobility are absent, among these, according to Aristotle, there is no happiness.

Theotokos

Cleanthes ^A held to consist in the choosing of things according to nature; and Antipater, his pupil, conceives the end to consist in choosing unceasingly and without wavering those things which are according to nature, and in rejecting those which are contrary to nature. Archedemus, in turn, explained the end to be the choosing of the greatest and most important things according to nature, which one cannot pass over. Beyond these, Panaetius declared the end to be living consistently with the opportunities [for action] given to us by nature. Finally, Posidonius ^B [held the end to be] living by contemplating the truth and order of the universe, and so conducting oneself, as far as possible, that one is in no respect led by that part of the soul that lacks reason. Some of the more recent Stoics thus rendered the end as: to live in accordance with the human constitution. Why should I recount Aristo to you? He ^C said the end was indifference; yet he leaves the indifferent as simply indifferent. Or shall I bring into the middle what is said by Herillus? Herillus posits the end as: living by knowledge. For some choose to attribute to the more recent [philosophers] of the Academy the end of "firm and stable abstinence from impressions." Moreover, Lycus the Peripatetic said the true joy ^D of the soul was the end, just as Leucimus [said it was that] which proceeds from honorable things. Critolaus, however, who was also a Peripatetic, said the end was the perfection of a life flowing rightly according to nature, signifying the perfection completed from the three kinds [of goods], handed down by the ancients.

We must not, however, stop, content with these, but must strive, as far as possible, to lay out what has been dogmatically formulated by the natural philosophers regarding the subject at hand. For they say that Anaxagoras ^A of Clazomenae said the end of life was contemplation and the freedom derived from it; and that Heraclitus the Ephesian said it was contentment.

Aristo of Chios, surnamed "the Siren," said the end was to live indifferently toward things between virtue and vice, leaving no difference whatsoever in them, but being equally disposed toward all; for [he says] the wise man is like a good actor, who, whether he assumes the role of Thersites or Agamemnon, performs both appropriately.

Herillus of Carthage said the end was knowledge, which is to live always referring everything to living with knowledge, so that we are not circumvented ^B through ignorance.

Anaxagoras of Clazomenae [said] the end of life [was] contemplation and the freedom from it. Asked once: "For what purpose were you born?" he said: "For the contemplation of the sun, and the moon, and the ^C heaven," as if all other things were of no account.

Democritus of Abdera has set forth "cheerfulness" in place of pleasure, having made a change of names, not of dogmas. And Heraclitus the Ephesian [held ^D that...

the "placid state of the mind" was the end. Heraclides Ponticus reports that Pythagoras taught that the knowledge of the perfection of the virtues of the soul is blessedness. Furthermore, the Abderites teach that there is an end; Democritus, indeed, in his book *On the End*, [defines it as] cheerfulness, which he also called "well-being" (εὐεστώ). And he often adds: "For pleasures and the lack of pleasures are the boundaries of those who have attained their peak." Hecataeus [identifies] self-sufficiency; and indeed Apollodotus of Cyzicus [identifies] "amusement" (ψυχαγωγία), just as Nausiphanes [identifies] "stupefaction," for he said this was called "fearlessness" (ἀθαμβία) by Democritus. In addition to these, Diotimus designated the absolute perfection of good things—which is called "well-being"—as the end. Again, Antisthenes [proposes] "freedom from pride," while those called Annicereans, from the Cyrenaic succession, set no defined end for the whole of life, but held that the end of each action is the pleasure resulting from the action. These Cyrenaics reject the definition of pleasure held by Epicurus—that is, the removal of pain—calling it the state of a corpse; for, they say, we rejoice not only in pleasures, but also in social interactions and in ambitions. Epicurus, however, thinks that all joy of the soul arises when the flesh is primarily affected. And Metrodorus ^C in his [treatise] concerning the end, in which he changed his mind, but did not abandon his general view; for he placed "contentment" in place of pleasure.

For Democritus the Abderite proposed "tranquillity of mind" in place of pleasure, having made a change not of judgment, but merely of names. Similarly, Heraclitus the Ephesian changed the name, but kept the meaning; for he said "well-pleasedness" instead of pleasure.

Pythagoras is said to have declared that blessedness is the knowledge of the perfection of the numbers of the soul. The renowned Pythagoras thought that the ultimate good consisted in the most perfect knowledge of numbers. It is well known that Pythagoras established numbers as the principles of all things. Specifically, he thought our souls consist of the number four. Plutarch, in *Opinions of the Philosophers*, book I, [translated] says: Pythagoras says our soul consists of a quaternion; for these four exist: mind, knowledge, opinion, sense; from which all arts and sciences proceed, and for which reason we ourselves are rational.

Democritus indeed said the end is a correct and quiet state of mind, which is not, as some incorrectly interpret it, the same as pleasure; but it is that according to which the soul is blessed with great tranquillity and constancy, when it is disturbed by no fear, no superstition, or any other kind of passion. He also calls it "well-being" (εὐεστώ), and by many other names. ^D And Anniceris, who is thought to have corrected the Cyrenaic sect and to have brought forward the Annicerean [sect] in its place.

^A [The thought of the] greater [cause] for happiness [being] from things [external] rather than from those within us, "What," he says, "is a good of the soul, if not the steady condition of the flesh and the trustworthy expectation concerning it?" But indeed, Plato the philosopher says that the end is of two kinds: ^B the one, which is participatory and primary, existing in the Forms themselves, which indeed he calls the Good; the other, which participates in that [former] and receives the likeness from it, which comes to be in those human beings who lay claim to virtue and true philosophy. For this reason Cleanthes, in the second book *On Pleasure*, states that Socrates teaches everywhere that the same man is both just and blessed, and that he curses the one who first divided the just from the useful, as one who has done an impious thing; for those who separate the useful from the just, which is according to law, are in reality impious. Plato himself says that blessedness (εὐδαιμονία) is "having a good *daimon*" (εὖ τὸν δαίμονα ἔχειν), and that the *daimon* is called the commanding part of our soul; and he calls blessedness the most perfect and full good. Sometimes he calls it a life ^C consistent and in agreement with itself; and sometimes that which is most perfect according to virtue. He places this in the knowledge of the Good, and in that likeness to God, declaring that likeness consists in being just and holy with wisdom. For do not some of our own [teachers] understand in this way the [scriptural] statement, that man received "according to the image" immediately at birth, but that he is to receive "according to the likeness" later, through perfection? Immediately Plato, teaching that this likeness will [belong] to the virtuous man with humility, [continues...].

CHAPTER XXII.

^B Now truly Plato the philosopher says that the end is twofold: one, that which is participable and primary, existing in the Forms themselves, which indeed he names the Good; the other, that which is a participant of the former and accepts its likeness, which is in those men who vindicate for themselves virtue and true philosophy. Wherefore also Cleanthes, in his second book *De Voluptate*, says that Socrates teaches everywhere that the same man is both just and blessed, and he excommunicates him who first separated the just from the useful, as one who has done an impious deed. For those are truly impious who separate the useful from the just, which is according to law. But Plato himself says that beatitude is to have a good *daimon*; and that the *daimon* is called the principal part of our soul; and that beatitude is the most perfect ^C and most full good. Sometimes, however, he calls it a life consenting and agreeable to itself, and sometimes that which is most perfect from virtue. He places this in the knowledge of the good, and in that likeness which is with God, asserting that the likeness consists in this, that one be just and holy with prudence. Do not they understand that saying from our side in this way, that man indeed received "to the image" immediately at his birth; but that he is to receive "to the likeness" later, through perfection? But now, Plato teaching this likeness to the virtuous man ^D and hoping for the expectation of such a constitution, as has been written by Metrodorus, is contained [therein]. A good *daimon*, that is, a mind perfect in virtue, is [attained]... Xenocrates, a disciple of Plato, [says] in his *Topics*, book II, ch. 6: Likewise, he whose *daimon* is good: just as Xenocrates says that he is happy whose soul is virtuous; for this is to each [man] a *daimon*.

^A And that which interprets: "Everyone who humbles himself shall be exalted." He says, therefore, in the *Laws*: "God, indeed, as the ancient account holds, having the beginning, the middle, and the end of all things, proceeds in a straight path, traversing according to nature. And Justice always accompanies him, the avenger of those who fall away from the divine law." You see how he himself also attaches caution, or fear, to the divine law. He subjoins, therefore: "To which he who is about to be happy must adhere, following humbly and with composure." Then, having joined the things that follow these and having warned them with fear, he adds: "What, then, is the act dear to and following God? One, and having one ancient and principal rule: that that which is like is dear to that which is like, provided it is moderate; but things that are measureless are friends neither to one another nor to those that are measured." ^B Therefore, he who is to be dear to God must, to the best of his power, become such himself. And according to this rule, the temperate man among us is dear to God; for he is like him; but he who is not temperate is unlike and different. By saying that this is an ancient decree, he tacitly signified the teaching that reached him from the Law. And in the *Theaetetus*, having conceded that evils necessarily circulate around mortal nature and this place, he adds: "Wherefore, one must attempt to flee from here to there as quickly as possible. And flight is assimilation to God, as far as is possible; and assimilation is to become just and holy with prudence." Speusippus, the son of Plato's sister, ^C says that happiness is a perfect habit in those things that exist according to nature, or a habit of goods, which condition all men desire, but only the good attain, being a freedom from annoyance; and that the virtues effect happiness. Xenocrates the Chalcedonian defines happiness as the possession of one's own virtue and the faculty that serves it. Then, he appears to be speaking of the soul as that in which it consists; of the virtues, as that by which it is attained; and of fine actions, honorable habits, affections, movements, and states as that from which it is derived as from parts, inasmuch as the bodily and external things are not without these. For Polemo, a disciple of Xenocrates, ^D appears to wish happiness to be the sufficiency of all goods, or of the most and greatest. He decrees, therefore, that without virtue there would never be happiness, but that without bodily and external goods, virtue is sufficient for happiness. And thus much for these matters; the refutations against the stated opinions will be presented in due time. But as for us, it is our purpose to reach an endless end, obeying the commandments, that is, God, and according to them

living blamelessly and intelligently, through the knowledge of the divine will. For assimilation to the right reason, or the Word, as far as is possible, is the end; and it is the restoration to perfect adoption through the Son, who always glorifies the Father through the great high priest, who has deigned to call us brothers and fellow heirs ^B of his. The Apostle, indeed, briefly describing the end in the Epistle to the Romans, says: "But now, being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life." And knowing hope to be twofold—the one that is awaited, the other that has been received ^C—he teaches that the restoration of hope is also an end. "For patience," he says, "worketh experience; and experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us." Through which love there is also a restoration into hope, which in another place he calls the rest that is laid up for us. Similar things you may also find in Ezekiel, which are as follows: "The soul ^D that sinneth, it shall die. The man who shall be righteous, and shall do judgment and justice, hath not eaten upon the mountains, and hath not lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, and hath not defiled his neighbor's wife, and hath not approached to a woman in the time of her impurity (for he does not wish the seed of man to be treated with disgrace or shame), and he oppresseth not any man, he will restore the debtor's pledge, he will not take any plunder, he will give his bread to the hungry, and will not take any increase, he will turn away his hand from iniquity, he will do true judgment between man and his neighbor; he will walk in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to do truth: he is just, he shall surely live, saith Adonai the Lord." And Isaiah, exhorting the one who has believed to honesty of life, but the gnostic to discernment, showing that the virtue of man and God is not the same, speaks thus: "Seek ye the Lord, and when ye find him, call upon him. But when he is near you, let the wicked forsake his ways, and the unrighteous man his ways."

up to: "My thoughts are not your thoughts." ^A We, therefore, following the noble Apostle, wait for the hope of righteousness by faith; for in Christ neither circumcision avails anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith working through love. But we desire each of you to show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope, up to: "Made a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." The All-Virtuous Wisdom also says things similar to Paul: "But he who listens to me will dwell in hope, confident." For the restoration of hope is equívocally called hope; therefore, to this word, "will dwell," it has added most beautifully "confident," showing that one of this sort has found rest, having received the hope he was hoping for; for which reason it also adds: "And he will be at rest, fearless from all evil." ^B But the Apostle in his first Epistle to the Corinthians says outright: "Become imitators of me, as I also am of Christ," that that result may come to pass: "If you are mine, and I am Christ’s, then you are imitators of Christ, and Christ is God’s." Therefore he establishes the assimilation to God—insofar as it is possible to become just and holy with prudence—as the goal of faith; and the end, strictly, as the restoration of the promise that comes about through faith. From these, then, flow the sources of those who have made pronouncements concerning the end, whom we have mentioned before. But enough of these.

CHAPTER XXIII.

On the benefits of matrimony and the precepts to be observed in its use; which is treated more fully in the following book.

^C Since pleasure and desire seem to fall into marriage, this too must be treated. Now, marriage is the first lawful union of man and woman for the procreation of legitimate children. Thus the comic poet Menander says: "For the sowing of legitimate children, I give you my daughter." We inquire, however, whether one ought to marry—a question which is of those things said to be relative to something; for to whom ^D

one should marry, and how having, and whom, and how having—for one should not just marry anyone, nor at any time, but there is also a time in which it is fitting, and a person to whom it is fitting, and an age up to which. Therefore, one should not marry just anyone to anyone, nor at any time, nor even completely and shamelessly ^A; but to the one who is how-having, and what sort, and when it is necessary, and for the sake of children, and the one who is similar in all respects, and not by force or necessity loving the man who loves her. Whence Abraham, defending that his wife was his sister, says: "She is my sister by my father, but not by my mother; and she became for me ^B also for a wife," teaching that those who are born of the same mother should not be taken in marriage. But let us briefly review the history. Plato, then, places marriage among external goods, having established the immortality of our race, and a kind of permanence, as if a lamp is handed on in turn to children's children. But Democritus rejects marriage and child-bearing because of the many annoyances and distractions from more necessary things arising from them. Epicurus also agrees with him, and whoever places the good in pleasure and freedom from annoyance, and also in freedom from pain. Furthermore, according to the Stoics, both marriage and child-rearing are indifferent; but according to those of the Peripatetic school, they are a good. In summary, these men, having brought their dogmas only as far as their tongues, were enslaved to pleasures: some using concubines, others courtesans, and most of them even boys. But that wise quaternion in the ^C garden, with the courtesan, was glorifying pleasure, not in the way of a true life.

On Marriage

Therefore, let these be the exhortations spoken concerning marriages, and also those things said before these, that one ought to cling to the ever-living nature, leaving behind children’s children to be servants to God in one's stead. For the sake of which, having left their mother and father and the relatives of the wife, they ought to dwell to themselves, as if departing to a colony, observing and being observed in turn, and begetting and rearing children, handing on life to others as a lamp is handed on from one to another. Wherein the human race has shared by some nature in immortality. The race of men, then, is something connate with time itself, and the immortal is with it and will accompany it through the end; in that by leaving children’s children, being the same and one always in generation, it has partaken of immortality. ^D And we approve of Plato, who has ordered marriage among goods, and has called it a device for immortality and the permanence of the race; but we severely rebuke Democritus and Epicurus, who command that both marriage and child-bearing be rejected. For they, having defined pleasure as the end, have entirely proclaimed against those things having cares and certain annoyances. But those of the varied school walked a certain middle path: for they joined marriage and child-bearing among the indifferent.

STROMATUM LIB. II.

^A the procreation of children; but from the Peripatetics, as a good. But, to speak once for all, they, while advocating their doctrines only in word, have been slaves to pleasures, some indeed to concubines, others to harlots, but the greater number to the use of young boys. But that wise man of the four, in his garden, practiced pleasure with a harlot. They shall not, therefore, escape that most grievous curse, who, while they judge certain things not to be conducive to themselves, exhort others to do them, or conversely. This the Scripture has briefly indicated, saying: "What you hate, do not do to another." But those who approve of marriage say: "Nature has made us fit for marriage," as is manifest from the physical construction of men and women; and they constantly shout that [precept]: "Increase and multiply." And even if these things are so, yet it seems disgraceful to them that man, who was fashioned by God, should be more intemperate than the brute animals, which do not couple with many and at random, but with one, and that of the same kind: such as doves, and wood-pigeons, and the race of turtle-doves, and those that are similar to these.

^B They say further: "The childless man falls short of the perfection that is according to nature, inasmuch as he has not substituted his own successor in his place; for he is perfect who has made from himself his like; or rather, when he sees that he also has done the same, that is, when the child has attained to the same nature as the parent." Marriage, therefore, must by all means be contracted, both for the sake of the fatherland, and for the succession of children, and for the perfection of the world, as far as lies in us; since even the poets lament a marriage that is semi-perfect ^C and without children, but call him blessed who has children from both parents. And physical diseases most of all show that marriage is necessary; for the care of a wife, and the constancy of her attendance, seem to surpass the patience of other relatives and friends, in as much as she chooses to assist and minister [to him] most of all out of sympathy; and in truth, according to the Scripture, she is a "necessary helper." The comic poet Menander, therefore, after having inveighed against marriage, but also opposing to this the useful points, replies to him who had said:

.... Affectus in rem sum male : Nam tu sinistre, nec bene, hanc quidem capis.

^D Thus this Epicurus, did he not have Leontion as his mistress, who became notorious for harlotry? And did she not, when she began to philosophize, cease from being a harlot, and associate with all the Epicureans in the gardens? And with Epicurus even openly, so that he, taking great thought for her, indicates this through his letters to Hermachus.

^A Then he adds:

Gravia fuerunt et molesta quæ tibi, Vides in ipso, sed bona haud contra vides;

and what follows. Marriage also brings aid to those who have advanced in age, in that it provides a wife who cares for them, and rears the children born of her, who will feed them in their old age. For children, ^B

Children

Are to a man, when he is under the earth, a testimony, And, like corks, they hold up the fishing net, Preserving the thread from the depths,

according to the tragic poet Sophocles. And the legislators do not allow those who have not married to hold the highest offices. Immediately, the Laconian legislator established a penalty not only for remaining unmarried, but also for monogamy, and for marrying late, and for living alone. And the noble Plato orders the man who has not wedded to pay for his wife's keep into the public treasury, and to pay the customary expenses to the magistrates; for if those who have not married ^C do not beget children, as far as it depends on them, there will be a lack of men. ^D

On the legislation of the Spartans

There were actions for celibacy in many places, and for marrying late, and for a bad marriage, in Lacedaemon. After this, [the text says]: "Having two wives, he lived with dual households, doing things in no way Spartan." [It refers to] a penalty for monogamy, for a bad marriage, for celibacy, for a bad marriage, or for marrying late; a penalty for living alone. "But if any man does not willingly obey, but considers himself separate and without a share in the city, and being unmarried has reached the age of thirty-five, let him be fined each year: he who possesses the highest valuation, one hundred drachmae; he who the second, seventy; the third, sixty; and the fourth, thirty. Let this be sacred to Hera. And he who does not pay it each year, let him owe ten times the amount. Let it be collected by the treasurer of the goddess; and if she has not collected it, let her owe it herself."

^A they will do, and they will dissolve the cities, and the world which consists of them. But such a course is impious, as they are destroying a divinely instituted generation. Furthermore, it is the mark of a cowardly and feeble spirit to flee from the companionship of life and the association with a wife and children. For if the loss of something is an evil, its possession is necessarily a good; and this holds true in other matters as well. But the loss of children, they say, is among the greatest of evils; therefore, the possession of children is a good; and if this is so, then marriage is as well.

"For without a father," he says, "a child could never be; Nor without a mother a child's conception." Marriage makes a father, just as a man makes a mother.

Homer also posits as a most important prayer, a husband and a home, ^B but not simply so; rather, with good harmony. For the marriage of others agrees for the sake of sensual pleasure, but that of those who philosophize leads to the concord according to the Word (Logos), which permits the women to be adorned not in their outward appearance (eidos), but in their moral character (ethos); and it instructs husbands not to use their wives as objects of desire, setting as their goal the gratification of the body, but to avail themselves of marriage for the help of their whole life and for the attainment of the best self-control. For, I think, compared to the seeds of wheat and barley, which are sown at the appropriate times, the human being who is sown is more precious, for whom all things grow; and those seeds, too, are cast by farmers who are sober. Everything, therefore, that is filthy and defiled in practice must be purged from marriage, so that we may not be reproached by the mating of the brute animals, which is more in accord with nature than human union is, in the very heat of lust. Some of them, at least, as soon as the appointed time is past, abstain at once, leaving the work of production to the administration of Providence ^C. And among the tragic poets, Polyxena is recorded as being sacrificed, yet even in dying...

[The following text appears in the marginal apparatus and fragments:]

"But if he does not comply, and is not married, having reached the age of thirty-five, let him be fined each year by so much and so much. [...] For children make a father, as a man makes a mother. And marriage makes a father, as a man makes a mother."

"With good harmony; Which becomes the greatest happiness, When a wife does not disagree with her husband." ^D

^A A tragic verse says of Polyxena that, even though she was being put to death, she took great care in dying to fall decently.

She covering what it was not permitted for men’s eyes to see.

Marriage was a calamity for her, too. Therefore, to succumb and yield to the passions and perturbations of the soul is the ultimate slavery, while to conquer them is, truly, the only liberty. Thus, divine Scripture says that those who have transgressed the commandments are sold to foreigners, that is, to sins which are alien to nature, until they convert and repent. Therefore, marriage must be kept pure, like some sacred statue, from those things which defile it; we should awake from sleep with the Lord, and go to bed with thanksgiving, and pray,

^B When you are sleeping, and when the nourishing light has come, testifying to the Lord throughout our whole life; possessing piety and religion in the soul, and bringing temperance down even to the body. For it is truly pleasing to God to translate moderation from the tongue to our deeds. The way to impudence is foul speech: and the end of both is the perpetration of base things. That Scripture advises marriage, and never permits separation from the union, it defines openly: "You shall not dismiss your wife, except for the sake of fornication." And it considers it adultery to be joined in marriage while the other of those separated is alive. It renders a wife unsuspected of reproach ^C if she does not adorn nor deck herself out beyond what is becoming, but attends assiduously to prayers and supplications; and if she avoids frequenting the exits of the house, and shuts herself off, as much as possible, from the sight of those who do not pertain to her, judging the keeping of the house to be more profitable than untimely loquacity. "But he who takes a woman who has been dismissed," it says, "commits adultery; for if anyone dismisses a wife, he makes her commit adultery," that is, he forces her to be an adulteress. And not only is he who dismissed her the cause of this, but also he who received her, providing the woman an occasion for sin; for if he did not receive her, she would return to her husband. What, then, does the law do? ^D In order to check the propensity toward vices, it commands that she who has committed adultery and been convicted of it be removed from the midst; but if she should be of a priestly family, it commands that she be delivered to the fire. The adulterer also is pelted with stones, but not in the same place, so that their death may not even be common to them. By no means, therefore, does the law contend with the Gospel; rather, it is in harmony with it. For how could it not be, when the Lord has provided both? For she who has fornicated lives indeed in sin, but is dead to the commandments.

from the commandments; but she who has been led by repentance, as having been generated again through the conversion of her life, possesses the regeneration of life—the old harlot ^A being dead, and she who was born through repentance having entered into life again. The Spirit bears witness to these things through Ezekiel, saying: "I do not desire the death of the sinner, but that he should be converted." Now, they are indeed stoned—as those who have died to the Law on account of the hardness of their hearts, to which they did not submit—but for the wife of the priest the punishment is increased, because to whom more has been given, of him more will be required. Let our second ^B book of Stromata also be brought to a close here, on account of its length and the multitude of its chapters.

THE STROMATA OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, BOOK THREE

CHAPTER I.

He refutes the opinion of Basilides concerning continence and marriage.

The followers of Valentinus, indeed, having derived the ^C conjugations from above, from the divine emanations, consider marriage acceptable. ^D But the followers of Basilides—

^A when the apostles asked, they say, whether it is better not to marry, the Lord is said to have replied: "Not all can receive this saying. For there are eunuchs who were born so, and there are those who were made so by necessity." ^B They interpret this saying in this way: "Some have a natural aversion to women from birth, and these, using this natural temperament, do well if they do not marry. These, they say, are the eunuchs from birth. Those who are so by necessity are the theatrical athletes, who restrain themselves for the sake of the desire for glory; and those who were maimed by some accident have become eunuchs by necessity." They say, therefore, that those who are eunuchs by necessity are not so according to the Word (the *logos*); but those who have castrated themselves for the sake of the eternal kingdom, on account of the difficulties that arise from marriage, take this calculation, fearing the labor of providing for the necessities of life. And as for the saying, "It is better to marry than to burn," they say the Apostle wishes to say: "Do not cast your soul into the fire, resisting day and night, and fearing lest you fall away from continence." For the soul, when it is occupied in resisting, is divided from its hope. ^C

Book Three

...those without understanding, saying in these very words: "Whoever has come into the world and has not loved a woman, so that she might be controlled, is not of the truth, and will not pass into truth." ^D ...those who have castrated themselves for the sake of the kingdom of heaven... having a most beautiful wife, yet not having intercourse with her. "Diogenes used to say it was terrible if the athletes and the citharists master their bellies and their pleasures—some for the sake of their voice, others for the sake of their body—yet no one will show such contempt for the sake of temperance. Endure, therefore, a quarrelsome wife, endure a quarrelsome one." "Whenever," he says, "your thanksgiving (eucharist) should fall into a request; and if you should stand henceforth, not to succeed, but so as not to stumble, marry."

^A Yet there is some young man, or poor man, or one who is prone to passion, and he does not wish to marry according to the Word: let not such a one separate from the brother; let him say, "I have entered into the holy places; I can suffer nothing." But if he has any suspicion, let him say, "Brother, lay thy hand upon me, that I may not sin"; and he shall receive help, both mental and physical. Let him only desire to accomplish the good, and he shall attain it. Sometimes, indeed, with the mouth we say, "We do not wish to sin," but the mind is set ^B towards sinning. Such a person, through fear, does not do what he would, so that he may not be led ^C into the state of falling. ^D

^A Humanity possesses certain things that are necessary and merely natural; for instance, the need for clothing is both necessary and natural; but as for sexual pleasure, it is natural, but not necessary. I have brought forward these expressions to refute the Basilidians, ^B who do not live rightly, as they either think they have the power to sin on account of their "perfection," or that they will be saved in any case by nature, even if they sin now, because they are elect by the dignity of their nature. Yet even the first architects of their doctrines do not grant them the power to commit such things. Therefore, let them not, while taking upon themselves the name of Christ, and while living more intemperately than those among the nations who have no self-control, bring reproach upon the Name. "For such persons are false apostles, deceitful workers," ^C as far as the passage: "Whose end shall be according to their works." Self-control, therefore, is a contempt for the body according to our confession towards God; for self-control is concerned not only with sexual matters, but also with other things which the soul wrongly desires, not being content with what is necessary. Self-control exists also in regard to the tongue, in acquiring, in using, and in desiring. And it does not just teach us to be temperate, but it actually provides us with temperance, being a power and a divine grace. It must be said, therefore, what is the view of our people regarding the matter proposed. We call blessed those who have the gift of eunuchism, provided it has been ^D granted to them by God; but we admire monogamy and the dignity that consists in a single marriage; while we say that we must sympathize and "bear one another's burdens," lest "anyone, while seeming to stand firm," should himself "fall." Concerning a second marriage, the Apostle says, "If you are burning, marry."

CHAPTER II. Refutation of the opinion of Carpocrates and Epiphanes concerning the community of women.

Those who descend from Carpocrates and Epiphanes contend that women ought to be common; from whom, against the name of Christ, the greatest blasphemy has flowed.

^A This Epiphanes, whose writings are also brought forward, was the son of Carpocrates and of a mother named Alexandria. On his father’s side he was an Alexandrian, but on his mother’s side a Cephallenian. He lived in all only seventeen years, and is honored as a god in Same, a city of Cephallenia; in which place a temple of large stones, altars, shrines, and a museum have been built and consecrated to him. And when the new moon arrives, the Cephallenians assemble, sacrifice on the birthday of his deification to Epiphanes, pour out libations, feast, and sing hymns. He was instructed by his father in the cycle of subjects and in the teachings of Plato; he became the leader of the monadic knowledge, from which also the heresy of the Carpocratians now derives. He says, therefore, in his book *On Justice*: “The justice of God is a certain communion with equality. For the heaven, having been stretched out from every side, encompasses the entire earth in a circle. The night also shows all the stars equally; and God poured forth the sun, the author of the day and the father of light, from above equally to all who are able to see (and they all see it in common), since it does not distinguish between rich or poor, or the ruler of the people, or the foolish and the ^B wise, or the female and the male, the free and the slave.” [But it offers] to the unbelieving nations a great abundance of blasphemy against the divine word, as the report of them is poured out to the defamation of the entire Christian nation. And thus it happened that the most impious and absurd suspicion concerning us was spread abroad among the unbelieving of that time; as if we were engaged in unlawful unions with mothers and sisters, and were accustomed to eating abominable foods. Regarding them, Irenæus also complains in book I, chapter 34: “They too, for the detraction of the divine name, just as the gentiles, have been sent forth by Satan, so that through one way or another, with men hearing of things that are theirs and thinking we are all like that, they may turn their ears away from the proclamation of the truth.” ^C And Epiphanes, who was the son of this man, having been led by Platonic instruction, expanded his mythology. There is some Pre-Arch, inconceivable, and ineffable, and Nameless, whom I call the Monad. ^D

^A and the prince of the people, the foolish and the wise, females and males, the free and the slaves. Nor does He do otherwise among the brute animals. For since He has poured forth that same justice, which is common to all, equally upon all living creatures, He confirms His own justice among both good and bad, so that no one can possess more, nor take away from his neighbor in order that he himself might have the light of the other doubled. The sun causes common nourishment to spring forth for all living beings, with the common justice given equally to all; and concerning those things which are of such a kind, the genus of oxen behaves in the same way, as do oxen; and of swine, as do swine; and of sheep, as do sheep; and all other things. For justice among them appears to be community. Then, through community, all things are sown in like manner according to their kinds, and common nourishment is eaten by all beasts grazing upon the earth, and ^B by all equally; so that, being bounded by no law, it may be present to all appropriately and justly by the providing care of Him who gives and commands. And neither is a law set for generation, for it would have been abolished long ago; but they sow and beget equally, having an innate communion from justice. The creator and father of all, bringing a law by His own justice, provided an eye in common to all equally for seeing, not distinguishing female from male, nor that which is a partaker of reason from that which is devoid of reason, and, to speak once, no one from anyone; but dividing sight equally and by community, He bestowed it upon all by one command. But the laws of men, he says, because they could not punish ignorance, taught them to commit illegality; for the property of laws has cut asunder and gnaws away the communion of the divine law; not understanding the saying of the Apostle, who says: “Through the law I knew sin” ^C (Rom. VII, 7). And he says that "mine" and "thine" have entered in through the laws, so that they no longer enjoy things in common (for they are common), neither land, nor possessions, nor even marriage. For He made vines common to all, which deny neither the sparrow nor the thief; and wheat likewise, and the other fruits. But communion and equality, being violated, have begotten the thief of flocks and fruits. When, therefore, God had made all things common to man, and had joined female with male in common, and had united all living creatures in the same way, He announced justice: communion with equality. And those who have become such have denied the communion that brings them together, and their own generation; and he says, if one having led... ^D

a wife, he might have [communion with others], since they can all be participants, just as the rest of the animals demonstrate.” Having said these things word for word, he again adds in the same words: “For He implanted in the males an intense and more vehement desire for the preservation of the generations, which neither law, nor custom, nor anything else of existing things can abolish; for it is God’s decree.” And how can this person still be examined in our present discourse, when he is openly destroying both the Law and the Gospel through these statements? For the one ^B says: “You shall not commit adultery.” The other says, “Everyone (62) who looks with desire has already committed adultery.” For the saying, “You shall not desire,” which is spoken by the Law, reveals the one God, who is proclaimed through the Law and the Prophets and the Gospel. For it says: “You shall not desire the wife of your neighbor.” Now the neighbor is not the Jew to the Jew; for he is a brother and has the same Spirit (63). It remains, then, to say that the neighbor is one ^C of another race; for how is he not a neighbor who is capable of being a participant of the Spirit? For Abraham is the father not only of the Hebrews, but also of the Gentiles (64). But if the one who has been adulterated, and the one who has committed fornication with her, is punished with death, it is surely clear that the commandment which says, “You shall not desire the wife of your neighbor,” speaks concerning the Gentiles; so that one, abiding by the law and refraining from the wife of a neighbor and from a sister, may hear directly from the Lord: “But I say, you shall not desire.” And the addition of the particle “I” ^D shows the action of the commandment to be more immediate. And that both Carpocrates and Epiphanes wage war against God in that much-vaunted book of theirs, “On Justice” (65), is clear from the fact that he adds these words, word for word: “Hence, as if the legislator had spoken ridicule, this word must be heard, ‘You shall not desire,’ to say something more ridiculous, ‘the things of your neighbor.’ For He himself, who gave the desire so that it might hold together the things of generation, commands it to be removed, while He removes it from no animal; but by forcing the ‘wife’ of the neighbor (66) into an individuality of communion, he spoke even more ridiculously.” And these are the things which the noble Carpocratians dogmatize; they say these things, and that they have denied—and he says, even if one who leads one wife has her, when all can be participants, as the rest of the animals declare. For that heretic thought that matrimony was repugnant to natural communion. (67) These things. Philastrius of Brescia (in his work on Heresies) says: “The Florians, or Carpocratians, are called those who deny judgment and resurrection, not believing that Christ was born of a Virgin, and imagining that the entire resurrection consists in the procreation of children of an unholy assembly, so that in their church, after sunset, when the lamps have been extinguished, they have not hesitated to mingle with women, thinking they are fulfilling the commandment of the Law: ‘Be fruitful and multiply,’ hastening to obey Judaism and profane paganism rather than to acquiesce to Christian Truth.” Theodoret (in book 1 of *On Heretical Fables*) does not attribute this to Carpocrates himself, but to his disciple: “He openly and plainly added to the decrees of Carpocrates that one should fornicate. For he decreed that women be common. For which reason, not only in public banquets, with the light of the candle removed a little further away, each would mingle with whomever he happened upon.”

^A Such are the dogmas established by those excellent Carpocratians. They say that these, and certain others who emulate similar evils, meet together for banquets—for I would hardly call their assembly an “agape”—and that after men and women have satisfied themselves at a feast of ^B lustful satiation, they turn aside the light by tipping over the lamp, to wallow as they please with whomever they wish; and having practiced this so-called “agape,” they claim the right to demand by day, from whatever women they desire, obedience to the Carpocratian—for it is not right to call it divine—law. Such laws, I think, Carpocrates should have legislated for the lusts of dogs, swine, and goats. It seems to me, moreover, that he has misunderstood Plato, who in his *Republic* says that women should be common to all. ^C He says they are common—those not yet married—to those who intend to request them, just as a theater is common to those who watch, but that once someone has laid claim to each, she belongs to him, and the married woman is no longer common. And Xanthus, in his work entitled *Magica*, says: “The Magi mingle with their mothers and daughters.” ^D And as for satiation: “In one who is sated, Cypris dwells; in one who is hungry, she does not.” For I would not call their assembly an “agape”; but rather, men and women, after being satiated at this banquet of lust, practice this shameful, harlot-like “justice,” where all women are common to all men, and no woman dwells privately with any one man; and the children, in turn, are common, so that neither does a parent know his own offspring, nor a child his parent. It also pleases them that wives should be common among the wise, so that whoever happens upon a woman may use her, as Zeno says in his *Republic*, and Chrysippus in his *On the State*, as do Diogenes the Cynic and Plato.

^A It is considered lawful for them to have intercourse with sisters and for women to be common, not by force or in secret, but by mutual consent, whenever one of them desires to marry the wife of another. I think that Jude, in his epistle, spoke prophetically of these and similar heresies: “Likewise, however, these also, dreaming” (for those who dream truly apply themselves to the truth) ^B—up to the point: “And their mouth speaks great swelling words.”

CHAPTER III.

Now, if Plato himself and the Pythagoreans, ^B just as later the followers of Marcion, considered generation to be evil, it was far from the case that he himself posited that wives should be common. But the followers of Marcion say that nature is evil, being made from evil matter and by a just ^C Creator. By this reasoning, wishing not to complete the world which was made by the Creator, they desire to abstain from marriage, resisting their maker and hastening toward the good who has called them—but not toward him who, as they say, is a God endowed with different character. Whence, since they wish to leave nothing of their own here, they do not become continent by deliberate choice, but out of the hatred conceived against the one who cre- ^D ated them.

[As for the claim that] the Persians do not forbid mothers to be joined to their sons, nor daughters to their fathers, [Jude says:] “Likewise, however, these also, dreaming, defile the flesh.” ^A [Regarding the word] “dreaming,” the blessed Jude did not speak of those dreaming in their bodies. For he immediately adds and shows that he speaks of those who are dreaming, those who speak their own words as if through dreams, and not with the awakening of waking reason. “For he does not,” [he says]… [Regarding Pythagoras], when asked when one ought to have intercourse, he said: “Whenever you wish to become weaker than yourself,” ^B neither separating, nor acting in pursuit of Venus, nor being drunk. Pythagoras advised: “Do not often [distance] man from man,” implying that one should not engage in sexual acts continuously.

[Regarding the Marcionite division of God:] He called one good and unknown, whom he also addressed as the Father of the Lord; but the creator and just one he named evil. ^C And in addition to these, [he claimed] that matter is evil and is subject to another evil; but that the Creator took matter and created all things from it. ^D And [he] pronounced marriage to be corruption and fornication, similarly to Marcion and Saturninus.

^A nor to use those things which have been created by Him. But these men, in impious opposition to God, having departed from the reasonings which are according to nature, and scorning the long-suffering and kindness of God, even if they do not wish to marry, yet they use created foods and breathe the air of the Creator, being themselves His works and remaining in His things; and they proclaim as good news an unknown and, as they say, new knowledge; and even for this they ought to be grateful to the Lord of the world, because they have received the Gospel here. But against these, when we take up the argument concerning the first principles, we shall dispute most accurately.

As for the philosophers whom we mentioned, from whom the followers of Marcion impiously learned that generation is evil, they glory in it as if it were their own dogma, not wanting it to be evil by nature, but because of the soul which spread the truth. For they bring the soul, which they confess to be divine, down into this world as into a place of punishment ^B. And according to their opinion, it is fitting for those souls that are embodied to be purified. This dogma is not peculiar to the followers of Marcion, but also to those who deem it appropriate for souls to be embodied and to be transmuted into other forms and to be poured from one to another. Against these, there will be another time to speak, when we discuss the soul.

Heraclitus at any rate appears to disparage generation: "Since," he says, "upon being born they wish to live, and to have deaths, or rather to rest; and they leave behind children, that deaths may come to be." It is clear that Empedocles also agrees with him, saying ^C:

I wept and wailed, seeing the unaccustomed place.

[FOOTNOTE APPARATUS OMITTED]

^A And further: "For of living things He made dead, changing the form." And again: "Woe is me! O unhappy race of mortals, ^B O wretched! From what strifes and what lamentations were you born!" The Sibyl also says: "Mortals, men of flesh, and you are nothing;" Similarly to the poet who writes: "No creature does the earth bring forth more feeble than man." Indeed, Theognis also shows birth to be an evil, speaking ^C in this way: "Of all things, it is best for those upon the earth not to be born, Nor to behold the rays of the sharp sun, But as soon as born, to pass through the gates of Hades." Consistent with these, the tragic poet Euripides also writes: "It were proper for us, meeting in assembly, To weep for the one born, into how many evils he comes, But the dead, and the one who has ceased from toils, With joy and good words to send forth from the house." ^D And again he will say similar things thus: "Who knows if to live is to die, And to die is to live?"

^A Since this part of the verse requires distinction and explanation, it should have been rendered: "Who knows if that living, which is so called by us, is not dying?"

The same thing also appears to be what Herodotus is doing when he introduces Solon saying: "O Croesus, every man is nothing but a calamity." And his myth concerning Cleobis and Biton ^B clearly intends nothing else but to disparage generation and praise death. "Just as the generation of leaves, such is that of men," says Homer.

But Plato in the *Cratylus* attributes the discourse to Orpheus, where the soul is said to be punished in the body: "For some say this is the monument ^C of the soul, as if it were buried in the present time; and because it signifies whatever the soul can signify, it is for this reason rightly called a 'sign' (σῆμα). The followers of Orpheus, however, especially seem to have conferred this name, as if the soul were paying the penalty for the things on account of which it is paying it."

It is also worth remembering the words of Philolaus; for this Pythagorean speaks thus: "The ^D ancient theologians and seers also testify that the soul has been yoked to the body on account of certain punishments, and is buried in it as if in a monument."

Moreover, Pindar, speaking of those in the Eleusinian mysteries, adds: "Blessed is he who, having seen those common things beneath the earth, knows the end of life, and knows the God-given beginning." And Plato, consistently in the *Phaedo*, does not hesitate to write in this way: "And those who established these initiations for us were not [trivial...]"

"] And what when he says, "As long as we have the body, and our soul is hampered with such evil, we shall never sufficiently attain what we desire"? Does he not hint that generation is the cause of the greatest evils? And in the *Phaedo* he testifies: "For those who happen to be rightly engaged in philosophy are unaware that they are practicing nothing else than to die and to be dead." And again: "Consequently, even in this life the soul of the philosopher dishonors the body and flees from it; and it seeks to be by itself." ^B Does this not agree with the divine Apostle who says, "Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from the body of this death?" (Rom. VII, 24), unless one says that he speaks metaphorically of the "body of death" as the consensus of those who are dragged into vice?

Plato appears to turn away also from sexual intercourse, which is the beginning of generation, even before Marcion, in the first book of the *Republic*. For when he praises old age, he adds, "Know well, that as much as the other bodily pleasures wither away, to that extent the desires and pleasures for arguments increase." And when mention was made of sexual intercourse: "Speak auspiciously, man; I, however, most gladly fled from it, as if fleeing from some mad and savage master." And again, in the *Phaedo*, blaming generation, he writes: "Indeed, the account which is whispered in secret ^C about these things, that we men are in a certain prison..." And again: "But those who are found to have lived piously above others, these are they who are released and liberated from these places on the earth, as if from prisons, and arrive at the pure dwelling place in higher regions."

^D Yet, even so, someone might perceive that the administration of the world is ordered well, and say that whoever arrives in Hades uninitiated and unfinished will lie in mud, but the one who has been purified and initiated will, upon arriving there, dwell with the gods. For these matters, which those who established our mysteries for us have handed down, ought not to be despised. Indeed, they have long secretly warned us that whoever is not purified and initiated will lie in the mire: but whoever has arrived there purified and initiated shall dwell with the gods.

Concerning those who have rightly philosophized.

^A And, to sum up, he did not provide Marcion with any occasion to think that matter is evil, since he himself spoke piously about the world in this way: "For it has all good things from Him who constructed it; but as for all the inconveniences and injustices that arise within the heaven—things arising from the earlier deformation—these the world itself sustains, and instills into living creatures." ^B Yet he adds even more clearly: "The cause of these things for it is the corporeal constitution, an attendant of its ancient nature; for it was something very deformed and devoid of order before it was decorated with its present embellishment." Nevertheless, in the

Laws

Epinomis

Gorgias

children's generation, which those Greeks who suspect the vanity of the world have observed, has led them to speak many things against the procreation of children; and the followers of Marcion, having received these things impiously, show themselves ungrateful to the Creator. For the tragedy says:

It is better not to be born, than to be born among men. Then, with bitter pains, mothers bear children; And having borne them, if I bear foolish ones, I groan in vain, seeing those who are evil, And losing the good. But if I preserve them as well, My wretched heart melts with fear. What good is this then? Does it not suffice for one To pour out his soul, without being tormented further?

And further, similarly: I have long held the conviction, That it never behooved man to beget children, Seeing the many labors for which we beget them.

^B In what follows, he clearly brings the cause of evils back to the principles, saying thus:

O unhappy one born, and exposed to ills, You were born a human, and you took the misfortune of life From the source whence it began for all: From where the ether began to nourish, Giving breath to mortals. Do not therefore, being mortal, be ignorant of mortal things.

Again, he imparts similar things to these as follows: Of mortals, no one is prosperous, nor happy; For no one yet born has been without pain.

And then again: Alas, alas, for the many misfortunes of human woes, And how many are their forms! And no one could state their end.

And still similarly: For there is no one among mortals who is happy to the end.

^{C D}

^A Thus, they say, even the Pythagoreans abstain from sexual matters. But to me, on the contrary, it seems they do marry for the sake of procreating children, but that they wish to refrain from sexual pleasure after having had children. Hence, they mystically forbid the use of beans, not because the legume is gas-producing, hard to digest, and makes dreams turbulent, nor because the bean is likened to the human head, according to that little poem:

To eat of beans is the same as [to eat] the heads of parents;

but rather because beans, when eaten, make women barren. For Theophrastus, in the fifth book of his *Causes of Plants*, states that bean pods, if placed at the roots of newly planted trees, wither the growing things; and even domestic hens, when they eat these continuously, become sterile.

^B Consequently, they say, even the Pythagoreans abstain from sexual matters. But to me, on the contrary, it seems they do marry for the sake of procreating children, but that they wish to refrain from sexual pleasure after having had children. Hence, they mystically forbid the use of beans, not because the legume is gas-producing, hard to digest, and makes dreams turbulent, nor because the bean is likened to the human head, according to that little poem:

To eat of beans is the same as [to eat] the heads of parents;

but rather because beans, when eaten, make women barren. For Theophrastus, in the fifth book of his *Causes of Plants*, states that bean pods, if placed at the roots of newly planted trees, wither the growing things; and even domestic hens, when they eat these continuously, become sterile. ^{C D}

^A Of those, however, who are led by heresy, we have already made mention of Marcion the Pontian, who, on account of the contest he undertook against the Creator, refuses the use of worldly things. But the cause of his continence—if indeed this is to be called continence—is the Creator Himself; thinking that he, as a giant, is warring against God, this adversary of God is continent against his will, while he inveighs against the creation and the work of God. But if they use the voice of the Lord, who says to Philip (Matt. VIII, 22; Luc. IX, 60): “Leave the dead to bury their own dead; but follow me,” let them consider this: that Philip also bears the same formation of flesh, yet he did not possess a corpse defiled by death. How, then, having flesh, did he not have a corpse? Because he rose from the tomb, the Lord having put to death the passions, and he lived to Christ. ^B We have also made mention of the lawless community of women according to Carpocrates; and in discussing the opinion of Nicolaus, we passed over this fact: they say that this man, having a beautiful wife, after the assumption of the Savior, being reproached by the apostles for jealousy, brought the woman into their midst and permitted whoever wished to marry her. For they say that this action is consistent with that saying, that “one must abuse the flesh.” And thus, having followed his action and his spoken word, ^C they interpret it as, “he permitted whomever wished to have her.” In this way, they interpret it and say that they have followed his example, and they seek out certain pretexts for their own intemperance, like a dog returning to its own vomit, defending their lewdness. ^D And Eusebius also records this in the same way, except that it is suggested that these men concluded that according to this act or saying of Nicolaus, each person should abuse his own flesh in whatever way he takes pleasure. Thus, the interpreters leave it in doubt whose that saying is: "One must abuse the flesh"—whether it belongs to Nicolaus or to the heretics—and what act they intend, whether it is that of Nicolaus, who made his wife public, or that of the Nicolaitans, who had wives in common. Yet he seems to suggest that both belong to him, when he says that the heretics followed his act and his saying rashly and inconsiderately.

^A, for they commit fornication shamelessly. But I, for my part, hear that Nicolaus used no wife other than the one he had married; and as for his children, that the daughters grew old as virgins, and the son remained incorrupt. Since these things are so, the bringing of his wife into the midst of the apostles—who was said to be suffering from jealousy—was a refutation and purging of passion; and his self-restraint from those pleasures which are usually sought after with great eagerness taught how to "abuse" the flesh. For he did not, I think, wish ^B—in accordance with the Lord’s commandment—to serve two masters, pleasure and God [* Matth. vi, 24; Luc. xvi, 13.]. At any rate, they say that Matthias also taught this: "To fight against the flesh and to abuse it, granting it nothing for the sake of wanton pleasure, but to grow the soul through faith and knowledge." There are some ^C who even proclaim public prostitution to be a mystical communion, bringing insult even upon the name; for it is said that doing some evil thing, just as doing some good thing, is called by the same name; and likewise also "communion." But communion is good in the sharing of money, and of food, and of clothing; whereas they have impiously called any sexual coupling whatsoever a "communion." They say, at any rate, that one of them, upon approaching our virgin, who was fair in appearance,

said: "It is written: 'Give to everyone who asks of you.'" But she answered very modestly, not understanding the man’s petulance: "But go and speak to my mother about marriage." O the impiety! These "communicants" of intemperance, these brothers of lust, do not merely falsify the Lord’s sayings but distort and—so far as in them lies—utterly demolish the truth. These thrice-wretched men sanctify carnal ^A communion in acts of intercourse, and they imagine that this leads them to the kingdom of God. Such a "communion" leads, then, to the brothels; and swine and goats might well be participants with them. And occupying the highest place in their hopes are the harlots who stand ready in the brothels and admit all who wish. "But you did not so learn Christ, if indeed you have heard him and were taught in him, as truth is in Christ Jesus, to put off concerning your former way of life the old man, who is corrupted according to the desires of deceit; and to be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and to put on the new man, who was created according to God in righteousness and holiness of truth," ^B in accordance with the likeness of the Divine. "Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children, and walk in love, as Christ also loved you and gave himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma. But sexual immorality and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints, and filthiness and foolish talk." For indeed, the Apostle, teaching us to practice purity even in our speech, writes: "For know this, that every fornicator," and the rest, up to, "But rather rebuke them." Now this dogma ^C flowed out to them from some apocryphal book. And I will indeed produce the text which is the mother and origin of this intemperance of theirs; and whether they themselves are the authors of the book—look at their madness, if they wickedly misrepresent God out of incontinence—or whether they have received this "excellent" dogma from others, having heard it perversely, here is how its words stand: "Everything was one; but since it did not please the One that it should be alone, there went forth from Him

^A aspiration, and He entered into communion with it, and created the beloved." And from this there went forth from Him an aspiration, by communing with which He created powers, which could be neither seen nor heard, even unto that, "each one in its own name." For if these, too, like the Valentinians, had posited spiritual communions, perhaps someone might have accepted their notion; but to introduce a communion of carnal lust into holy prophecy is the mark of one who despairs of salvation. Such things also do the followers of Prodicus, who falsely call themselves Gnostics ^B, assert; claiming that they themselves are by nature the children of the first God. Yet, abusing that nobility and liberty, they live as they wish; and they wish to live intemperately, thinking themselves held by nothing, as if they were "lords of the Sabbath," and being by nature superior to every race, as royal children. For a king, they say, there is no written law. But first, the fact is that they do not do everything they wish; for many things hinder them even when they desire and attempt to do them; and what they do, they do not as kings, but as slaves; for they commit adultery in secret, fearing to be caught, and avoiding condemnation, and fearing to be punished. And how can intemperance and filthy language be a "free" thing? "For every one who sins is a slave," the Apostle says. But how does he who has rendered himself subservient to every desire lead a life according to God, when the Lord has said, "But I say, Do not covet"? ^C And does anyone voluntarily wish to sin, and declare that it is necessary to commit adultery, and to fill oneself with pleasures and delights, and to violate the marriages of others, when we even feel pity for those who sin against their will? And if they have come into a foreign world, if they have not been faithful in that which is another's, they will not have the true thing. Does any stranger insult the citizens, and do them injury, and not rather live as a sojourner, using only what is necessary, without offending the citizens? And how, when they do the same things as those whom the nations hate because they are unwilling to obey the laws—namely, the unjust, the incontinent, the greedy, and the adulterers—do they claim that they alone know God? For they ought to live righteously while they are present in foreign lands, so that they may truly demonstrate ^D their royal nature. Instead, they become hateful to human lawgivers and to the divine law, having determined to live illegally. The one who...

^A “pierced the fornicator” is shown in Numbers to be pious before God. And if we say, as John says in his Epistle, “that we have fellowship with him” (that is, with God), “and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth; but if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with him, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from sin.” How then are those who do such things better than the people of the world, when they are like the worst of the people of the world? For they are, I suppose, similar in nature, since they are similar in their deeds. But if they claim to excel in nobility, they ought also to excel in their morals, so that they may escape being shut up in prison ^B. For truly, as the Lord said, “Unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter into the kingdom of God.” And regarding abstinence from food, it is shown in Daniel; but to speak briefly, about obedience, David says in a psalm: “Wherewith shall a younger man cleanse his way?” And he immediately hears: “In taking heed to his words with all his heart”; and Jeremiah says: “Thus says the Lord: Walk not in the ways of the nations.” From this, some other people, small and worthless, have been moved to say that man was formed by different powers, and that what is above the navel is of a more divine art, but what is below is of an inferior one; for which reason they crave sexual intercourse. But it escapes their notice that even the upper parts crave nourishment and are libidinous in some respects. Moreover, they oppose ^C Christ, who said to the Pharisees that the same God made both the “external” and “internal” man. And desire does not belong to the body, even if it happens through the body. Other people, whom we call Antitacts, say that the God who is the Father of all is by nature our Father, and that all things which he has made are good; but that one of those who were generated by him sowed the tares; and that he it is who involved all of us, as they say, in evils, having set himself in opposition ^D to our most good Father. For this reason, we also oppose him, resisting his laws in vengeance for our Father. And because he himself said, “You shall not commit adultery,” we, they say, should commit adultery to bring about the dissolution of his commandment. One might rightly call these people the inventors of evils, who join blasphemies to their acts of wantonness.

^A They claim that things are good, but that one of those who were created by him sowed the tares, having generated the nature of evils, in which 3 indeed 4 he has wrapped all of us, setting us in opposition to the Father. For this reason, we too rank ourselves against him to take vengeance for the Father, acting against the will of the second. Since, therefore, this one has said, “You shall not commit adultery,” we, they say 7, commit adultery for the dissolution of his commandment. We might say to these people in response, that we have learned that false prophets and those who feign the truth are to be known by their works 8. If your own works are spoken of ill, how can you still claim to be holding to the truth? For either there is no evil, and that one whom you blame as having been set in opposition to God is no longer worthy of rebuke, nor has he become the creator of any evil—for along with the evil, the tree is also destroyed 10—or if evil exists 11, let them tell us what they say the given commandments concerning justice, concerning self-control, concerning patience, concerning forbearance, and things similar to these are: are they base or noble? And if the commandment should be base, in forbidding the performance of most shameful acts, then vice would be legislating against itself for the sake of its own dissolution, which is impossible; but if it is good, by opposing the good commandments, they confess that they are both opposing the Good and practicing ^B evil. Indeed, the Savior himself, whom they deem worthy of being obeyed alone, has forbidden hating and reviling, and says, “Walking with your adversary, try to be reconciled as his friend.” Whether, therefore, they reject even Christ’s exhortation, opposing the adversary, or, if they are friends, they do not wish to undertake a struggle against him. What then? Do you not know, noble men (for I speak as if you were present), that by fighting against the commandments that are well-ordered, you are resisting your own salvation? For you are not destroying the things that were profitably decreed, but yourselves. And the Lord indeed said, “Let your good works shine,” 15 but you make your own acts of wantonness manifest. Furthermore, if you wish to dissolve the commandments of the Lawgiver, why on earth do you choose to dissolve that one, “You shall not commit adultery,” and “You shall not corrupt boys 14,” and all things that contribute to self-control, because of your own incontinence, but you do not dissolve the winter that was created by him, so that you might create summer while it is still the middle of winter; nor do you [seek to make] land navigable or the sea passable 15?

Why then do you not resist all the commandments? For when he said, "Increase and multiply," it was your duty, [you] who oppose him, to have no intercourse at all. And when he said, "I have given you all things for food and enjoyment," it was your duty to enjoy nothing. Nay, also when he said, "Eye for an eye," it was your duty not to return [wrong for wrong]; [but] to resist resistance with resistance; and when he commanded the thief to "render fourfold," it was your duty to give even more to the thief. In like manner also, being opposed to the command, "You shall love the Lord," you ought not to have loved the God of all at all. And again, when he said, "You shall not make a graven image, nor molten [one]," it was to be expected that you would also worship graven images. How then are you not acting impiously, resisting indeed, as you say, the Creator, yet eagerly following after things similar to harlots and adulterers? And how do you not perceive that you are making him greater, whom you consider to be weak? If, indeed, what he wills comes to pass, but not that which ^B the good [God] willed, then on the contrary it is shown by you yourselves that he whom you call your father is weak.

They recount also certain expressions plucked from some prophetic passages and badly patched together, taking those things which were said allegorically as if spoken in a straight line and without figurative meaning. For they say it is written: "They withstood God, and were saved." And they add [to the text], "Against the shameless God"; and they receive this saying as a declared counsel, and they reckon as a salvation for themselves the resisting of the Creator. But it is not written "to the shameless God." But even if it were so, understand, O foolish ones, that the one who is called the devil is "shameless," either as slandering ^C man, or as being an accuser of those who sin, or as an apostate. The people, therefore, concerning whom the passage is spoken, being disciplined for the things in which they had sinned, and bearing it grievously and groaning, were murmuring the aforementioned saying: that other nations, while they behave lawlessly, are not punished, but they alone are constantly being harassed; as even Jeremiah said: "Why does the way of the wicked prosper?" Similar to this is that which was aforementioned in Malachi: "They withstood God, and were saved." For the prophets, being inspired, not only speak of hearing certain things from God, but they are also shown themselves declaring, by way of counter-objection, the things that were being noised about by the people, as ^D if reporting certain questions raised by men; from which the text lying before us also happens to come. And perhaps the Apostle in his epistle to the Romans...

writes toward these men, saying: ^A “And not as we are slandered, and as some say that we say: Let us do evil, that good may come? whose condemnation is just.” These are they who, during the reading, by the tone of their voice distort the Scriptures to their own pleasures, and by the transposition of certain accents and punctuation, drag what has been wisely and usefully prescribed toward their own delights. “You have provoked God with your words,” says Malachi, “and you say: In what have we provoked him? By your saying: Everyone who does evil is good before the Lord, and in them he has taken pleasure; and where is the God of justice?”

CHAPTER V.

Lest, therefore, digging into this passage ^A with any more detail, we should remember a greater number of absurd heresies; and lest, again, while we are under the necessity of speaking against each one individually, we should be affected by shame on their account, or should make these commentaries excessively prolix, come, let us divide all the heresies into two matters, and let us answer them. For they either teach how to live without restraint, or, exceeding the limit, they proclaim continence through impiety and hatred. But first, we must treat of the former part. For if it is permitted to choose any kind of life whatever, then surely it is also allowed to choose that which is continent; and if he who is chosen can safely follow any kind of life, it is manifest that the one which is conducted temperately and according to virtue is by far the most safe. For when, to the “Lord of the Sabbath,” even if one lives intemperately, no account must be rendered, much more will he who has ordered his life moderately and temperately be ^C not liable to any account. “For all things are lawful, but not all things are expedient,” says the Apostle. But if all things are lawful, it is evident that to be moderate and temperate is also lawful. As, therefore, he is to be praised who has used his liberty to live according to virtue, so much more is He who has given us power over ourselves ^D as free, and has granted us to live as we will, to be venerated and adored, because He has not permitted that our choice and avoidance should necessarily serve anyone. But if both are equally secure—both he who has chosen incontinence and he who has chosen continence—it is not, however, equally honorable and decorous. For he who falls into pleasures gratifies the body; but the temperate man frees the soul, the mistress of the body, from perturbations. And if they say that we have been called into liberty, only let us not give our liberty as an occasion to the flesh, according to the Apostle; but if we must gratify desire, and consider an infamous life as indifferent, as they themselves say...

or if desire must be obeyed entirely—and if this is so, then everything most shameful and most nefariously wicked must be done by following those who persuade us—or if some desires are to be avoided, then life is no longer to be lived indifferently. Nor are we to shamelessly serve our most dishonorable parts, the belly and the genitals, by fawning through desire upon our own corpse ^A. For desire is nurtured and quickened when it is ministered to for the sake of pleasure, just as, conversely, it withers when it is checked. How, moreover, is it possible for one who has been mastered by the pleasures of the body to be made like unto the Lord, or to have knowledge of God? For desire is the principle of all pleasure; and desire is a sort of distress and anxiety, reaching out for something on account of want. Therefore, those who adopt this way of life seem to me to be doing nothing else but what is said,

"To feel pains beyond disgrace,"

choosing for themselves an invited evil, both now and in the future. If, therefore, everything were permitted, and there were no fear of failing to obtain our hope because of evil deeds, perhaps they would have some excuse for living evilly and miserably. But since a blessed life has been shown to us through the commandments, which all must follow—not misinterpreting any of the things said, nor slighting anything that is fitting, even if it be the smallest thing—we must follow wherever the Word leads; if we stray from Him, we must necessarily fall into an immortal evil ^B. But by following the divine Scripture, through which those who have believed are instructed, so as to be made like unto the Lord according to our power, we are not to live indifferently, but must purify ourselves as far as possible from pleasures and desires, and must care for the soul, which alone must persevere with the Divine. For the mind, when it is pure and released from all vice, is somehow capable of receiving the power of God, with the divine image rising up within it. ^C "And everyone who has this hope in the Lord," He says, "purifies himself, just as He is pure." But it is impossible for those who are still led by the passions to receive knowledge of God; consequently, it is impossible for them to obtain their hope, having made no knowledge of God for themselves. And the ignorance of God seems to accuse the one who fails of this end; while the character of his life reveals his ignorance of God. For it is altogether impossible to be at once a knower of God and ^D [yet enslaved to the body's...]

not be ashamed of flattery. For it is not ^B possible that the good should ever be in accord with pleasure, or that that alone which is beautiful should be the good, [(30)] or that the Lord alone should be the beautiful, and God alone the good, and the only One to be loved. “In Christ also you have been circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the putting off of the body of the flesh [(31)], in the circumcision of Christ. If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, [(52)] where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on the things that are above, not on the things that are on the earth. For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.” But it is not the fornication which they practice. “Put to death therefore your members [(53)] which are upon the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, desire, because of which the wrath of God comes. Let them also themselves [(54)] put away wrath, anger, malice, slander, and foul talk from their mouths, having put off the old man with his deeds, and having put on the new man, who is being renewed in knowledge after the image of him who created him.” For the way of life clearly convicts those who have known the commandments; for as is the speech, so is the life. [(55)] The tree is known [(56)] from its fruits, not from its blossoms and leaves. Knowledge, therefore, is from the fruit and from the way of life, not from speech and the flower. For we do not say that knowledge is mere speech, but a certain divine science and that light which is born in the soul from obedience to the commandments, which makes all things manifest—both things in generation, and the man himself—and instructs him to know himself, and teaches him how he may become capable of God; [(57)] for as the eye is in the body, so is knowledge in the mind. And let them not call the slavery under pleasure freedom, as those who call gall sweet; for we have learned the freedom wherewith the Lord alone makes us free, releasing us from pleasures and desires and other passions. “He who says, I have known the Lord [(58)], and does not keep his commandments, is a liar, and in him the truth is not,” says John.

CHAPTER VI.

Adversary, moreover, to the other class of heretics, who ^D under the guise of continence conduct themselves impiously both towards creation and towards the holy Creator, the Almighty,

and who teach that one ought not to accept marriage and the procreation of children, nor to introduce others into the world who are destined to be unfortunate, nor to provide nourishment for death, we must offer the following arguments. First, that saying of the Apostle John: ^A “And now many antichrists have arisen; whence we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us.” Next, those things which are brought forward by them must be refuted and dissolved in this way: To Salome, when she asked until what time death will prevail—not as if life were evil and the creation wicked—the Lord said, “As long as you women bear children,” not signifying that life is evil, but teaching the natural consequence: for generation is always followed by decay. ^B For the Law has set out to lead us away from luxury and all disorder. And this is its end: to lead us from injustice to justice, by choosing chaste marriages, and the procreation of children, and right conduct. And the Lord does not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it; to fulfill it, not as if it were deficient, but by the fact that the prophecies according to the law were to be brought to fulfillment at His coming; since the principles of right conduct were proclaimed by the Word even to those who had lived justly before the law. Those, therefore, who are many—not knowing self-restraint—live by the body, and not by the spirit. But the body without the spirit is earth and ashes, and the Lord immediately judges adultery as a matter of thought. ^C For what? Is it not possible to use marriage with self-restraint, and not to seek to dissolve what God has joined together? For such things are taught by those who divide the union, due to whom the very name is blasphemed. But since these men say that sexual intercourse is filthy—they themselves having received their own constitution from sexual intercourse—how could they not be filthy? But for those who have been sanctified, the seed also, I think, is holy. For it is our duty to have not only the spirit sanctified, but also our manner of life, our daily life, and the body. For by what reasoning does the Apostle Paul say that “the wife is sanctified by the husband, or the husband by the wife”? And what is it that the Lord said to those who inquired about divorce, ^D “If it is permitted to dismiss a wife, as Moses allowed?” “Because of the hardness of your hearts,” He says, “Moses wrote these things; but have you not read that to the first-formed, God [made them male and female]?”

^A said: ‘They shall be two into one flesh’? ^B Therefore, let not man separate what God has joined.” And again: “Just as it was in the days of Noah, they were marrying and giving in marriage, building and planting; and as it was in the days of Lot, so shall be the coming of the Son of man.” And that He is not speaking to the Gentiles, He shows by adding: “But when the Son of man comes, will He find faith upon the earth?” And again: “Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who nurse in those days!”

And after ^A the resurrection, he says, they neither marry nor are given in marriage. For it is said concerning the belly and food: “Food for the belly, and the belly for food; but God will destroy both this and these.” He rebukes those who, like boars and goats, believe they must live for the sake of eating and coupling, so that they may not eat and copulate without fear. If, therefore, they ^B have received the resurrection—as they themselves say—and for this reason reject marriage, let them neither eat nor drink; for the Apostle said that the belly and food are to be destroyed in the resurrection. How then do they hunger and thirst and suffer the afflictions of the flesh, and all the other things that he who, having received through Christ the expected resurrection ^C of the flesh, will not suffer? Moreover, even those who worship idols abstain from food and pleasure. “For the kingdom of God,” he says, “is not food and drink.” Certainly, those who worship angels and demons also make it their concern to abstain from wine, from living things, and from sexual acts.

But just as humility is gentleness, and not the affliction of the body, so too is continence a virtue of the soul, which is not in the manifest, ^D but in the hidden. There are also those who openly call marriage fornication and decree that it was handed down by the devil. These boastful braggarts say that they imitate the Lord, who neither married nor acquired anything in the world, priding themselves on having understood the Gospel better than others. But the Scripture says to them: “God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” Do they not know the reason why the Lord did not marry? First, because He had His own bride, the Church; then, because he was not a common man, that he should have need of some helper according to the flesh; nor was it necessary for Him, who remains forever and was born as the only Son of God, to beget children. Now this same Lord says: “What God has joined, let not man separate.”

^A and: “When the Son of man comes, shall He find faith on the earth?” And again: “Woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days.” Yet these things also are spoken allegorically. Therefore, He did not even define the “times, which the Father hath put in His own power,” so that the world might continue throughout the generations. But regarding the phrase, “All men cannot receive this saying; for there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it;” they do not realize that, after the utterance regarding the deserter, when some asked, “If the case of the man be so with his wife, is it not good to marry?” then the Lord said: “All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.” For this is what those who questioned Him wished to learn: whether, if a wife has been judged for fornication and cast out, He permits one to marry another.

^B They say also that not a few athletes abstain from sexual intercourse, practicing self-restraint for the sake of bodily exercise; just like Astylus the Crotoniate, and Criso the Himeræan. And Amœbeus the citharoede, while a newlywed, abstained from his bride; and Aristoteles the Cyrenæan, alone, disregarded Lais who was enamored of him. For having sworn to the courtesan that he would bring her into his homeland if she would assist him in something against his rivals, when he had accomplished it, wittily fulfilling the oath, he had an image of her painted, as similar as possible, and set it up in Cyrene, as Ister relates in his book *On the Peculiarity of Contests*. So then, even eunuchism is not an inherent good, unless it be done for the love of God.

^C Immediately regarding those who abhor marriage, the blessed Paul says: “In the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.” And again he says: “Let no man beguile you in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, and in the neglecting of the body.” And the same man writes also these things: “Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife.” And again: “Every man ^D according to his own gift.”

^A And let each one have his own wife, that he be not tempted. “For because of fornications let each man have his own wife. And again, come together to the same place, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.” What then? Did not even the just men of old partake of the creation with thanksgiving? And they even begat children, living temperately in marriage. And to Elijah ^B indeed the ravens brought food, bread and flesh; and Samuel the prophet, too, whom he had left, gave the leg which he had eaten, brought to Saul, that he might eat. But those who say that they excel them in their manner of life, will not be able to even be compared to their deeds. “He that eateth not, let him not despise him that eateth; and he that eateth, let him not judge him that eateth not; for God hath received him.” But also the Lord says concerning himself, “There came,” he says, “John, neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a demon. The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous ^C and a wine-bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners.” Or do they also reject the apostles? For Peter and Philip both begat children; and Philip also gave his daughters in marriage. And as for Paul, he does not hesitate in one of his epistles to address his own... ^D

^A spouse, whom he did not take about with him, on account of the facility of his ministry. He says, therefore, in a certain epistle: "Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as the rest of the apostles?" They, indeed, by reason of their ministry, being occupied with preaching without distraction, did not go about with women as wives, but as sisters, who would be fellow-ministers to women who guarded the homes: through whom the doctrine of the Lord could also penetrate into the women’s quarters without scandal. For we know what the brave Paul also ordains in the other epistle to Timothy concerning women deacons. But yet this same man cries out: "The kingdom of God is not meat and drink; nor yet abstinence from wine and meats, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." Who of them, having a sheepskin and a leathern girdle, goes about as Elias? ^B Who has put on sackcloth, being naked as to the rest, and barefoot, as Isaias? Or has only a linen girdle, as Jeremias? And who will imitate the gnostic life-discipline of John? But even so living, the blessed prophets gave thanks to the Creator. But the "righteousness" of Carpocrates, and of those who engage in riotous communion equally with him, is refuted in this way; for at the same time as he says: "To him that asketh of thee give," he adds: "And him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away," teaching this as [a command for] communion, and not sensual indulgence. For how can he who asks, and receives, and borrows, [do so] from someone who possesses nothing, and gives, and lends? What then? When the Lord says, "I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me to ^C drink [and ye took me in]—then he adds: "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren."

ye have done it unto me." ^A Does not the Old Testament legislate the very same things? "He that giveth to the poor lendeth to God," (84) and "Do not withhold doing good to the needy," he says. And again, "Let not alms and faith fail thee," he said. And "Poverty," he says, "bringeth a man low, but the hands of men enrich." (86) He adds: (87) "He that hath not given his money upon usury, becomes accepted," and, "The ransom of a man’s soul is his own wealth," (89) he judges. Does he not clearly declare that, just as the world is composed of opposites, as of hot and cold, (90) of dry and moist, so too is it composed of givers and receivers? And again, when he says, "If thou wilt be perfect, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor," he refutes the man who boasted that he had kept all the commandments from his youth; for he had not fulfilled that: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." ^B But then, being brought to perfection by the Lord, he was taught to share and impart through charity. He did not, therefore, honorably forbid being rich, but rather being rich unjustly and insatiably. For "property which is accelerated with iniquity is diminished." (91) For there are those who by sewing increase, and there are those who by gathering up have less. (92) Concerning whom it is written: "He dispersed, he gave to the poor, his righteousness endureth for ever." For he who sows and gathers more—this is he who, through earthly and temporal sharing and distribution, acquires the heavenly and eternal. But there is another who imparts to no one, and "in vain treasures up on earth, where moth and rust destroy," concerning whom it is written: "He that gathers wages, gathers into a bag with holes." ^C The Lord says in the Gospel that this man’s field was fertile; (95) then, when he wished to store up his fruits and was going to build greater barns, he said to himself by way of personification: "Thou hast much good laid up for thee for many years; eat, drink, be merry. Thou fool," he says, "for this night they require thy soul from thee; then which things thou hast prepared, whose shall they be?"

CHAPTER VII.

In what respect the continence of Christians excels that which philosophers claim for themselves.

^A Human continence, therefore—that which is according to the opinion of the Greek philosophers, I mean—professes to struggle against desire and not to serve it in one’s actions; but the continence according to our doctrine is not to desire, not so that anyone, while desiring, may behave manfully, but that one may restrain himself even from desiring. And it is not possible to obtain this continence otherwise than by the grace of God. For this reason He said, "Ask, and it shall be given to you." Moses also received this grace, though he was clothed ^B with a needy body, so that for forty days he neither hungered nor thirsted. But just as it is better to be healthy than, while sick, to discourse about health; so to be light is better than to talk about light; and such is the continence that is according to truth, compared to that which is taught by the philosophers. For where there is light, there is not darkness; but where desire is enthroned alone, even if it is quiet in its operation through the body, it keeps company in memory with that which is not present.

In general, let our discourse proceed regarding marriage, ^C regarding food, and regarding other things, that we should do nothing out of desire, but should will only those things which are necessary. For we are not children of desire, but of will; and it is necessary for him who has married for the sake of procreation to practice continence, so as not even to desire his own wife, whom he ought to love, applying himself to the begetting of children with an honest and sober will. For we have not learned "to make provision for the flesh to satisfy its desires," but "to walk honestly as in the day," in Christ, and in the bright training of the Lord’s life, ^D "not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying."

But indeed it is not right to consider continence in one single species only, namely, in sexual matters, but also in other things which our soul desires in a luxurious way, not being content with necessities but being over-curious about dainties. Continence is to despise money; to look down upon pleasure, possession, and sight with a great and lofty soul; to restrain the mouth; and to master evil things with reason. Indeed, even some angels, having become incontinent and overcome by desire, have fallen from heaven to here. And Valentinus, in the Epistle to Agathopus, says: "Having endured all things, Jesus was continent, working out divinity; he ate and drank in his own way, not rendering back the food." Such was the power of his continence, that even the food was not corrupted within him.

^A. We, therefore, for the love of the Lord, and for the sake of what is honorable itself, embrace continence, sanctifying the temple of the Spirit. For it is honorable "to castrate oneself for the sake of the kingdom of heaven" from all desire, and "to cleanse the conscience from dead works to serve the living God." But those who, on account of a hatred for the flesh, desire to be set free from conjugal union and from the participation in the food that is appropriate, are unlearned and impious, and continent without reason, like most other nations. The Brahmins, indeed, neither eat anything animate nor drink wine; but some of them take food daily, as we do, while others do so every third day, as Alexander Polyhistor says in his *Indics*; they despise death and hold life to be worth nothing; for they believe in regeneration. Some of them worship Hercules and Pan. But those among the Indians who are called Σεμνοί, that is to say, "the venerable," live naked their ^B whole life; they practice truth, foretell future events, and worship a certain pyramid, under which they think the bones of some god are stored. Neither the Gymnosophists nor those called Σεμνοί have intercourse with women; for they consider this to be against nature and wicked; on which account they keep themselves chaste. Those women who are called Σεμναί, that is "the venerable," are also virgins. They appear to observe heavenly things and, through their signs, to foretell some future events.

CHAPTER VIII

Since those who introduce moral indifference, twisting a few passages of Scripture, think that they support their own titillating pleasure; and then especially that one: "For sin will not have dominion over you; for you are not under law, but under grace"; and some others of this kind, which it is not consistent ^C with reason to mention hereafter (for I am not equipping a pirate ship), come let us briefly shatter their argument. For the noble Apostle himself, in the words which he subjoins to the aforementioned expression, brings a solution to the crime brought against him: "What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace? By no means." Thus divinely and prophetically he dissolves on the spot the sophistic art of pleasure. They do not understand, therefore, as it seems, that "We must all appear before ^D the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive according to what he has done through the body."

^A For if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature, and is no longer sinful. "The old things have passed away," we have put off the old life. "Behold," for "they have become new," purity from fornication, and temperance from incontinence, justice from injustice. "For what participation has justice with lawlessness? Or what communion has light with darkness? And what agreement has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? And what coincidence has the temple of God with idols?" Having these promises, therefore, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. ^B

CHAPTER IX.

He explains the saying of Christ to Salome, which heretics alleged as if it were spoken in disparagement of marriages.

But those who resist the creation of God through that specious temperance also cite those things said to Salome, which we mentioned earlier; they are contained, I believe, in the Gospel according to the Egyptians. For they say that the Savior himself said: "I came to undo the works of the female"—of the female, that is, of desire, and the works, meaning birth and destruction. ^C What then would they say? Has this administration ceased? They would not say so; for the world remains in the same economy. But the Lord did not speak falsely; for in truth he destroyed the works of desire—avarice, contention, love of glory, insane love of women, pederasty, gluttony, luxury, and debauchery, and things similar to these. The birth of things such as these is the destruction of the soul: for "we are made dead" by trespasses. And this "female" was intemperance. But it is necessary that birth and destruction should take place in the creation primarily until the complete distinction and restoration of the elect, through whom also the ^D substances that are mingled and confused in the world are restored to their proper nature. Whence, with good reason, when the Word had spoken about the consummation, Salome said: "Until when will men die?" Scripture calls man by two names: both the one who appears, and the soul; and again, in turn, the one who is saved and the one who is not. And sin is called the death of the soul. Wherefore also the Lord answers with circumspection: "Until women bring forth," that is, until desire operates.

^A And therefore, just as "by one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death passed through to all men, in whom all have sinned; and death reigned from Adam until Moses," says the Apostle; so, by the natural necessity of the divine economy, death follows generation, and the dissolution of soul and body follows their conjunction. But if generation is for the sake of learning and knowledge, then dissolution will be for the sake of restitution. And just as a woman is considered the cause of death because she gives birth, in the same way she will also be called the leader of life for the same cause. Thus, she who began the transgression was called "Life," ^B for the sake of the cause of succession; and she is the mother of those who are born and those who sin, both of the just and of the unjust, with each of us justifying himself or, conversely, setting himself up as disobedient.

Whence I do not believe that the Apostle abhors life in the flesh, when he says: "But with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether by life or by death. For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if to live in the flesh, this also will be the fruit of my work: what I shall choose, I know not. I am constrained by two, having the desire to dissolve and to be with Christ; for it is far better; but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for you." ^C For by these words, I think, he clearly shows that departure from the body is a perfection in the love of God, but presence in the flesh is an endurance born of a grateful spirit for the sake of those who need salvation.

What then? Do they not also add the things that follow to those said to Salome, those who follow any rule rather than the one that is according to the truth of the Gospel? For when she had said: "I did well, therefore, not to have brought forth," ^D as if birth were not something to be accepted as it ought, the Lord replies, saying: "Eat every herb, but do not eat that which has bitterness." For by these words He also signifies that it is in our power, and not a matter of necessity by the prohibition of a commandment, to choose either self-control or marriage; and He further clarifies that marriage contributes something to creation. Let no one, therefore, consider marriage to be a sin if it is according to the Word, unless one assumes child-rearing to be bitter—for to many, on the contrary, childlessness is most grievous—nor, if to anyone the bearing of children appears "bitter," as it distracts people from divine things.

For there is one who, not being able to bear a solitary life easily, desires marriage; for it is a pleasant thing, which one enjoys temperately and inoffensively, and each of us is so far master of himself that he may choose whether he wishes to beget children. I understand, however, that some, who on the pretext of the difficulties of marriage have abstained from it, have not appropriately to holy knowledge fallen into inhumanity and hatred of men, and charity perishes among them; others, however, bound by marriage and given over to luxury and pleasures, having the law in a manner accompanying them, have been, as the Prophet says, "assimilated to the beasts." ^B

CHAPTER X.

He expounds the words of Christ, Matt. xviii, 20, mystically.

Who, then, are those "two and three who are gathered in the name of the Lord," in whose "midst is the Lord"? Does he not speak of husband and wife and child as the three, since woman is joined to man through God? But even if one wishes to be "unencumbered," not choosing procreation because of the occupation involved in it, "Let him remain," says the Apostle, "unmarried," "as I also." For they seek to explain the Lord’s saying by asserting that, where there are many, the Creator is the God who produces generation, but with the one, the elect, is the Saviour, who is clearly the Son of another, good God. But this is not so; for God through the Son is with those also who have married and procreated children temperately; and the same God is likewise with him who has exercised restraint rationally. But the "three" might also be, in another way, anger and desire and reason; and flesh and soul and spirit by another account. And perhaps the aforementioned triad alludes also to the calling and the second election, and thirdly to the class that is arranged in the first rank; with whom is the all-surveying power of God, descending indivisibly into division. He, therefore, who makes use of the natural energies of the soul in their proper measure desires the things that are harmonious, and hates those that are harmful, just as the commandments enjoin; for "You shall give blessings," ^C inasmuch as—^D

[alt-version omitted]

^A he says, "the one who blesses, and curse the one who curses." But when he has risen above even these, and has overcome anger and desire, and with his work loves the creation for the sake of God, the maker of all, he will live gnostically, having acquired an effortless state of self-control in accordance with his assimilation to the Savior, having united knowledge, faith, and love, being one from this point forward in his judgment, and being truly spiritual, entirely and thoroughly incapable of the thoughts that proceed from anger and desire; the man who is perfected by the Artisan Himself according to the image of the Lord, is already worthy to be called a brother ^B by the Lord; he is at once friend and son. Thus, therefore, "the two and the three are gathered" in the same place, that is, in the gnostic man. The concord of many, accounted ^C as from three, with whom the Lord is, may also signify one Church, one man, one genus. Was the Lord not with the one Jew alone when He gave the law? But in prophesying already, and sending Jeremiah to Babylon, and furthermore calling those who were from the nations through prophecy, He gathered the two peoples; but the third was one, being the one created out of the two into a new man, in whom He walks and dwells in the Church itself. Law and prophets together, along with the Gospel, are gathered in the name of Christ into one knowledge. Therefore, those who do not marry because of hatred, or who use their flesh indiscriminately because of desire, are not in the number of those who are being saved, with whom the Lord is.

CHAPTER XI.

He explains the commandment of the Law and of Christ regarding not coveting.

on: "You heard the law commanding: 'You shall not commit adultery,' but I say to you: 'You shall not covet.'" For indeed, since He wished for men to use their wives moderately, and ^A only for the sake of begetting children, it is clear from the fact that it forbids the man who has no wife from having immediate intercourse with a captive. But if he has once desired her, it allows him to mourn for thirty days, after she has shorn her hair; and if even then his desire does not fade, then to beget children, once the impulse that dominates has been tested through the prescribed interval of time and proven to be an appetite consistent with reason. Hence, even among the elders, one could not show, according to Scripture, that they approached their wives immediately; but you would find that they were known by their husbands again only after the pregnancy and after the nursing of the child was finished. You will find that the father of Moses observed this same aim and order, for he waited three years after the birth of Aaron before he begot Moses. And again, the Levitical tribe, observing this law of nature delivered by God, entered into the Promised Land smaller in number than the ^B others. For the race does not easily multiply into a multitude when the men, though joined in lawful marriage, wait not only for the pregnancy but also for the weaning. Wherefore Moses also, rightly advancing the Jews little by little toward self-control, commanded them to listen to the divine words when they had abstained from sexual pleasure for three consecutive days. "For we are temples of God, as the prophet said ^C (54), that 'I will dwell in them and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people,' if we live according to the commandments, whether each one of us individually, or the whole Church together. 'Therefore come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord; and touch no unclean thing; and I will receive you, and I will be a father to you, and you shall be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.'" He does not command us prophetically to separate ourselves from those who are married, as some say, but from the nations who are still living in fornication, and furthermore from the aforementioned heresies as being unclean and impious. Wherefore Paul also, directing his words to those who are like those mentioned, says, "Having these promises therefore, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I have betrothed you to one husband, to present a chaste virgin to Christ." The Church does not marry another, for she possesses her Groom; but each one of us has the authority, whichever he wishes, to marry a lawful wife, I speak of the first marriage ^D (57). "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve (58) through his craftiness,

^A your thoughts should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ," ^B the Apostle has said, with great reverence and as a teacher. Wherefore also the admirable Peter says: "Beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul, having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation" (59). And again: "For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: as free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God." Similarly also Paul writes in the Epistle to the Romans: "How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed," ^C down to that: "Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin." And indeed, having arrived at this point, I think I should not omit to note that the Apostle proclaims the same God through the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel; for that which is written in the Gospel, "Thou shalt not covet," he attributes to the Law in the Epistle to the Romans, knowing that it is one and the same who proclaimed through the Law and the Prophets, and the Father who is announced through Him. For he says: "What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." But if those who are of a different opinion, being contentious, imagine that Paul, directing his words against the Creator, said these things which follow: "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing," let them read the things that were said before, and those that follow. For he said before: "But sin that dwelleth in me"; on account of which it was consistent to say that: "In my flesh dwelleth no good thing." Consequently he subjoined: "For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me"—which, he says, "bringing me into captivity to the law of God and of my mind, ^D it brings me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" And again, on the other hand (for he never wearies of helping in any way), he does not hesitate to conclude: "For the law of the Spirit hath made me free from the law of sin and death," since "through the Son, God condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." In addition to these things, further clarifying the

^A things previously stated, he exclaims: "The body indeed is dead because of sin," signifying that it is not a temple, but a sepulchre of the soul. For when it has been sanctified to God, "His Spirit," he infers, "that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you: who shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwells in you." Again, therefore, reproving the pleasure-seekers, he adds those things: "For the minding of the flesh is death. For they that are after the flesh mind the things of the flesh; and the minding of the flesh is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God. But they that are in the flesh," not as some decree, "cannot please God," but as we have previously stated. Then, in counter-distinction to these things, he says to the Church: "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." And against the nobility and against the liberty which is execrably introduced by those of a different opinion, who boast in licentiousness, he adds, saying: "For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father"; that is to say, we have received this so that we might know Him whom we pray to, the One who is truly Father, the only Father of all things that exist, who instructs for salvation as a father, and threatens with fear.

CHAPTER XII.

"But that which by consent for a time gives place to prayer" is a doctrine of continence. For he added the words, "by consent," so that no one might dissolve the marriage; "and for a time," so that he who has taken a wife, by practicing continence out of necessity, might not slip at some point into sin, and while sparing his own marriage, fall into coveting another's. For this reason, he rightly says that he who thinks it is unbecoming of him to nourish his virgin daughter should give her in marriage. And the purpose of each, both of him who has made himself a eunuch and of him who has joined himself in marriage for the sake of procreation, remains unyielding in its ^D turn toward what is lesser.

^A For if he is able to intensify his life, he will acquire for himself a greater worth before God, having practiced continence purely and at the same time thoughtfully; but if, having transgressed the standard which he had chosen for the sake of greater glory, he then falls away toward the hope—for even as is the case with eunuchism, so also marriage has its own duties and ministries that are distinct for the Lord, I mean the concern for children and wife; for the pretext for the one truly perfect in marriage becomes, it seems, the domesticity of the union, he having been appointed to the providence of all things in the common household. Right away, he says, ^B "Bishops must be appointed, who have practiced presiding over their own house and the entire Church." "Let each one," therefore, "in that state wherein he was called, perform the ministry," so that he may become free in Christ, receiving the proper reward for his ministry. Again, further, discoursing concerning the Law, [and] using allegory: "For the woman under a husband," he says, "is bound by law to the living husband," and the rest; and again: "The woman is bound for as long a time as her husband lives; but if he should die, she is free to marry, only in the Lord. But she is blessed if she remains thus, in my opinion." But on the former passage, he says, ^C "You have been put to death to the law," not to marriage, "that you might become another's, to him who was raised from the dead," as a bride and the Church; which it is necessary to be pure from the thoughts within that are contrary to the truth, and from those who tempt from without—that is, those who pursue heresies and persuade [you] to commit fornication away from the one husband, namely, the almighty God: "Lest," ^D as the serpent deceived Eve, "the so-called life," and we, by the gluttonous craftiness regarding the heresies, be led astray.

(52) *But if he has exceeded.* What is the meaning of the interpreter here? It seems to me that something of this kind has been omitted after "the hope," so that the sense may be: "But if, having transgressed the standard which he had resolved to pursue toward glory, he has fallen from such a great hope, let him not, however, despond in his spirit; for just as for continence, so also for marriage there are duties and ministries very pleasing to the Lord, to wit, the care of children and wife. For to him who lives perfectly in marriage, the very necessity of the union seems to be an occasion for ministering, while he shows that he is managing the care of all things that pertain to the common family." The most learned Oxonian editor believes that something of this kind has been omitted, "but let him not despond in his spirit," so that he who falls after having undertaken the promise of continence, by returning to that which he had left behind, might be able to console his own fall in this way: that just as continence, so also marriage has its own virtues. But what is said here concerning the virtues of marriage does not look to the end that it might be permitted to repeat the [full] use of it to those who have embraced a more perfect state. For St. Clement calls this course of action a fall, and as he promises a richer reward to those who persist in the undertaken continence, so he threatens very grave punishments to those who fall. Therefore, the wound of this passage will be healed if we read it in this way; [that phrase] could easily have slipped out because of the similar word which follows next. Thus, therefore, I interpret this whole passage: "But if he is able to strive toward a more perfect life, he will procure for himself a greater merit before God on account of maintaining continence purely and conformably to reason. But if, after he has transcended, for the sake of greater glory, [his] chosen kind of life, he has fallen, how will he have hope? For it has, as does continence, so also marriage, its own functions and ministries which are approved by the Lord." He takes away hope from those who have fallen, for as long, that is, as they do not return to the promised continence; but what he adds concerning the praiseworthy functions of marriage clearly looks to this, that those who have chosen this state should not rashly pass over to a more perfect one. These things D. Marens in his notes to Athenagoras' *Legation*, no. 33. See Patr. Graeca vol. VI, col. 965. Edit.

(53) *Having been appointed.* Or perhaps "having been accepted," from *anadechomai*. *Thus below p. 552, for... to be written. There were not women appointed, and... there were not women appointed, and... in that wherein he was called, brethren, in that let him remain with God, if...: For he who is called in the Lord, being a servant, is a free man of the Lord. He is bound by law for as long as he lives. But if her husband should sleep, she is free to marry whom she wishes.*

(54) *Bishops.* He refers to 1 Tim. iii, 4, 5. He says similar things below, page 472.

(55) *Each...* Refers to 1 Cor. vii, 24: "Each one in that state wherein he was called, brethren, in that let him remain with God," and v. 22: "For he who is called in the Lord, being a servant, is a freeman of the Lord." *He is bound by law for as long as he lives. But if her husband should sleep, she is free to marry whom she wishes.*

(56) *The woman is bound... for as long a time as he lives.* 1 Cor. vii, where we have: *If her husband should sleep, she is free to marry whom she wishes.*

(57) *Blessed... thus.* More blessed... thus, ibid.

(58) *Lest.* Refers to 2 Cor. xi, 3: "But I fear lest, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your thoughts should be corrupted from the simplicity that is toward Christ."

(59) *Life.* Conf. above page 453 Edit. Paris.

The second section establishes monogamy; for we must not suppose, as some have interpreted it, that the binding of woman to man signifies a union of flesh with corruption. For it accuses those impious men who attribute the invention of marriage to the devil, and the legislator is in danger of being blasphemed. I think it is Tatian the Syrian who dares to dogmatize such things. At any rate, he writes verbatim in his book *On Perfection according to the Savior*: "Agreement, indeed, he joins to prayer; but the communion of corruption dissolves the intercession." (62) Very persuasively, ^B he deters them by means of the concession; for the one who again "consents to be together" for the sake of Satan and incontinence, he declared "is about to serve two masters,"—through concord, indeed, to God; but through discord, to incontinence, and fornication, and the devil. These things he says, interpreting the Apostle. But he sophistically eludes the truth, establishing falsehood through the true; for we also confess that incontinence and fornication are diabolical vices and affections. But the consent of temperate marriage intervenes, which both leads one temperately to prayer and unites one with dignity for the procreation of children. ^C"Knowledge" [cognitio], indeed, is surely said by Scripture to be the time of the procreation of children, when it says: "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived and bore a son; and she named his name Seth: For God has raised up for me another seed instead of Abel." (d) You see whom they incessantly curse—those who attack the temperate sowing—and who attribute generation to the devil. For he did not say "God" simply, for with the prefixing of the article [ὁ Θεός], he signified the One who is Almighty. But the addition of the Apostle: "And ^D again convene *for the sake of Satan*," (e) is said to that end, that he might cut off the occasion for declining into other desires; for he does not utterly rebuff (by putting to shame the appetites of nature) that temporary agreement; for which reason he introduces again the union of marriage, not for incontinence and fornication and the work of the devil, but so that one may not fall into incontinence and fornication and the devil. He also separates the old man and the new. "Do not deprive one another, unless it be by consent for a time, so that you may have leisure for fasting and prayer; and again convene for the same, so that Satan may not tempt you through your incontinence." But the communion of corruption dissolves the intercession. For he considers marriage to be fornication and corruption, asserting that marriage differs in no way from fornication, but that it is the very same thing. Whence Clement said a little before: "For it must not be supposed, as some have explained, that a binding of woman to man signifies a union of flesh with corruption." For thus these things ought to have been translated.

^A Tatian, however, does not [explain it] as we do. We agree with him when we say that the Law is an "old man" and the Gospel a "new" one, but not, as he intends, by dissolving the Law as if it belonged to another God. Rather, it is the same man and Lord, who, while renewing the old, no longer permits polygamy (for God sought this at the time when it was necessary for men to increase and multiply), but introduces monogamy for the sake of the procreation of children and the care of the household, for which the woman was given as a helper. And if the Apostle grants to anyone, because of incontinence and burning, the permission for a second marriage—for even this man does not sin according to the Testament (as he is not prohibited by the Law)—he does not, however, fulfill that highest perfection of life which is lived according to the Gospel. But he acquires for himself heavenly glory who has remained with himself, keeping undefiled the union which has been dissolved by death, and who obeys with a grateful and willing mind the economy, by which it has been brought about that he cannot be torn away from the service of the Lord. ^B Nor, furthermore, does divine Providence through the Lord command him who rises from the marriage bed to be baptized now, in the same manner as of old; for the Lord does not necessarily alienate from the procreation of children those who believe, [but rather] cleanses them entirely through the one baptism, even though he included the many baptisms of Moses within the one baptism. The Law, therefore, prophesying from above regarding our regeneration through carnal generation, applied baptism of old to the generative faculty of the seed, not because it abhorred the generation of man—for what manifests as a generated man, that is what the emission of seed is able to achieve. Therefore, there are not many genital acts, but the reception of the womb acknowledges generation, since in the workshop of nature the seed is fashioned into a fetus. But how can matrimony be merely something old and an invention of the Law, while the marriage according to the Lord is something different, when it is the same God who is being served by us? "For what God has joined together," ^C reasonably, "let no man put asunder." And how much more, what the Father has commanded, will the Son also keep? And if the same [Being] is both Lawgiver and Evangelist, He is never in conflict with Himself. For the Law lives, being spiritual and understood in a gnostic sense.

On the Law and the Gospel

Clement says: He distinguishes the "old man" from the "new," Tatian does, but not in the same sense as we do. For we agree with him in this, that we call the Law the "old man," and the Gospel the "new," although not in the same way as he wishes, who completely abrogates the Law as if it were made by another God. ^D For He did not forbid the ancients to have many wives, so that the human race might be increased; and for this reason even religious men, since they desired to be fathers of many children, were joined to two, and three, and more wives. And this He permits, "for the sake of what is becoming and for serving the Lord without distraction," keeping [the word] in a gnostic sense; for "I know that the Law is spiritual."

^A But we have been put to death to the Law through the body of Christ, so that we might belong to another, to Him who has been raised from the dead—v who was prophesied by the Law—in order that we might bear fruit to God. "Therefore the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good." We have been put to death, therefore, to the Law, that is, to the sin manifested by the Law; which [the Law] ^B points out—it does not beget it—through the command of things to be done and the prohibition of things not to be done, refuting the underlying sin, "in order that sin might be shown to be sin." But if marriage according to the Law is a sin, I do not know how anyone will say he has known God, when he calls the commandment of God a sin; but since the Law is "holy," marriage also is holy. The Apostle, therefore, leads this mystery to Christ and the Church; just as "that which is born ^C of the flesh is flesh, so that which is [born] of the Spirit is spirit," not only by generation, but also by instruction. For instance, "the children are holy," the fulfillments of the Lord's words that are pleasing to God, which have betrothed the soul. Fornication and marriage are, therefore, separated; since the devil is far removed from God. "And you, therefore, have been put to death to the Law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to Him who has been raised from the dead." For it is implicitly understood that we have immediately become obedient; since, in accordance with the truth of the Law, we ^D obey the same Lord, who commands from afar. And is it not rightly said of such people that "the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will depart from the faith, paying attention to spirits of error and doctrines of demons, by the hypocrisy of liars, whose conscience has been seared, and who forbid marriage, [bidding them] abstain from foods which God created for participation with thanksgiving for the faithful—and those who have known the truth; because every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer." Therefore, one must not be compelled to marry, nor indeed to eat meat, or drink wine; for it is written: "It is good not to eat meat, nor to drink wine, if [one does so] through offense"; and "It is good to remain as I am"; but both he who partakes with thanksgiving, and he who, in turn, does not partake, and he himself [does so] with thanksgiving.

and lives with a moderate and temperate perception, according to the Word or reason. And, to sum up, all the Epistles of the Apostle, which teach moderation and continence, while containing ^A countless precepts regarding marriage, the procreation of children, and the administration of a house, have nowhere rejected honorable and moderate marriage, or abrogated it; but, preserving the agreement of the Law with the Gospel, they admit both: him who, giving thanks to God, uses marriage moderately, and him who, as the Lord wills, lives in chastity, choosing without offense and perfectly as "each one has been called." ^B "And the land of Jacob was praised above all the earth," says the prophet, glorifying the vessel of the Spirit. But someone attacks generation, saying that corruption and destruction fall upon it; and someone strains to force the statement of the Savior to apply to the procreation of children: "Do not lay up treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy"; and he is not ashamed to add to these things what the prophet says: "All of you will grow old like a garment, and the moth will eat you." But neither do we contradict Scripture, nor do we deny that corruption falls upon our bodies, and that they are by nature transitory. Perhaps, however, the prophet predicts destruction for those whom he there addresses as sinners. The Savior, however, said nothing about the procreation of children, but exhorts those who merely abounded in riches, yet were unwilling to bring aid to the needy, to share and communicate. Therefore he says: "Work not for the food which perishes; but for that which remains unto eternal life." Similarly, they also bring forward that saying concerning the resurrection of the dead: "The children of this age neither marry nor are given in marriage." But as to this question, and those who ask it, one will find that the Lord does not reject marriage, but addresses the expectation of ^C fleshly desire at the resurrection. And the phrase, "The children of this age," was not said in contrast to the children of some other age, but is equal to: "They who are born into this age, being children through generation, are born and give birth"; since no one will pass through life without generation; but this generation, which admits of a similar corruption, no longer awaits the one who has once departed from this life. "For one is our Father, who is in the heavens"; but He is also the Father of all things by creation. "Do not call [others] ^D your father upon the earth," he says: as if to say, Do not consider the one who begat you to be the cause of any...

essence, but rather a co-cause of generation, or ^A indeed a minister of generation. Thus, he desires that we, having turned back again, should become like children, recognizing the one who is truly Father, having been regenerated through water, this being a different sowing in creation.

"Yes," he says, "the unmarried man 91 is anxious for the things of the Lord; but the married man, how he may please his wife." But what then? Is it not allowed for those who are pleasing to God to also give thanks to God? And is it not permitted even for the one who has married, together with his marriage, to be anxious for the things of the Lord? But just as "the unmarried woman 92 is anxious for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit," so too let the married woman be anxious for the things of her husband and the things of the Lord in the Lord, so that she may be holy both in body and in spirit; for both are holy in the Lord, the one as a wife, the other as a virgin.

^B To put to shame and restrain those who are prone to second marriages, the Apostle appropriately speaks in a high-pitched tone, and he immediately says: "Every sin is outside the body; but he who commits fornication sins against his own body." And if anyone dares to call marriage fornication, he is again attacking the Law and the Lord, and assailing them with curses; for just as covetousness is called fornication, being opposed to self-sufficiency, and as idolatry is a distribution of God from one into many, so fornication is a falling away from the one marriage into many; for, as we have said, fornication and adultery are taken in three ways by the Apostle. Regarding these, the prophet says: "You were sold for your sins." And again: "You were defiled ^C in a strange land," considering that communion to be filthy which is entangled with a strange body, and not with the one given by marriage for the procreation of children. Whence also the Apostle says: "I desire, therefore, that the younger women should marry, bear children, manage the house, giving no occasion to the adversary for the sake of reproach. For some have already turned back after Satan." Yes, indeed 93, he also greatly approves the husband of one wife 94, whether he be a presbyter, or a deacon, or a layman, provided he uses marriage irreproachably; "but she shall be saved through the bearing of children." Once again, the Savior 95, having spoken to the Jews concerning the generation—"Unless you turn and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven,"—does he not thereby declare the kingdom to be holy? ^D And what do those who are against the law say to these things, and those who loathe procreation and generation as if they were contrary to the New Covenant? What do they have to say in response to these things, who hold the sowing and generation in abomination? Since he even appoints a bishop to lead the Church—one who presides well over his own house—and establishes the Lord's house as the marriage union of one woman?

^A For, as I said, fornication and adultery are taken in three ways by the Apostle. Of these the prophet says: "By your sins you have been sold." And again: "You have been defiled in a strange land," ^A considering as a wicked union that which is done with the body of another, and not with that which is given in marriage for the procreation of children. Hence the Apostle also says: "I wish," he says, "that the younger women marry, bear children, rule the house, and give no occasion to the adversary for the sake of blasphemy. For already some have turned aside after Satan." ^B Indeed, he admits the husband of one wife, whether he be a presbyter, a deacon, or a layman, using the marriage bond without reproach: "She shall be saved through the procreation of children." And again the Savior, calling the Jews "a wicked and adulterous generation," teaches that they did not know the law as the law wills, but, "following the traditions of the elders and the commandments of men," they adulterated the law, just as if it were not given by the man and Lord of their virginity. Perhaps he also hints that they were enslaved to strange desires, on account of which they were also constantly serving sins and being sold to foreigners; for among the Jews, common women were not permitted, but rather adultery was prohibited. ^C But he who says, "I have married a wife, and I cannot come to the divine supper," is indeed an example for refuting those who, on account of pleasures, withdraw from the divine command; otherwise, neither those who were just before the advent, nor those who have married after the advent, even if they be apostles, will be saved. And if they advance that which the prophet also says: "I have grown old among all mine enemies," let them understand "enemies" as "sins." For there is one particular sin: not marriage, but fornication; otherwise let them say that generation is a sin, and the creator of generation.

CHAPTER XIII.

^C He gives a response to the words of Julius Cassianus the heretic; and also to the passage which the same man had cited from an apocryphal gospel.

Julius Cassianus, who was the leader of the sect of the Docetae, uses such arguments as these. In his work, *On Continence* or *On Chastity*, he speaks in these very words: "And let no one say that, because we have such parts—as the female is fashioned in one way, and the male in another, the former for receiving, the latter for sowing—the custom ^D of intercourse has been granted by God. For if such an arrangement were from God, toward whom we are hastening, He would not have called eunuchs blessed; nor would the prophet have said that they should not be 'a barren tree,' transferring [the term] from the tree to the person who, by his own choice and intent, makes himself a eunuch by such a thought." And still contending for this impious opinion, he adds: "How would one not justly reproach the Savior, if He transformed us and freed us from error, and from the union of members and appendages and private parts?" In this he is making the same determinations as Tatian; and he himself came out of the school of Valentine. For this reason Cassianus says: "When Salome asked when that which he was asked about would be known, the Lord said, 'When you have trampled upon the garment of shame, and when...'

the things about which she was inquiring, the Lord said: “When you shall trample upon the garment of shame, and when the two shall become one, and the male with the female, neither male nor female.” First of all, in the four Gospels handed down to us, we do not have this statement, but in the one according to the Egyptians. ^B Next, it seems to me he is ignorant that he signifies wrath as a masculine impulse, and desire as a feminine one, whose operations are followed by repentance and shame. When, therefore, one has yielded to neither wrath nor desire—things which, having grown from habit and bad upbringing, overshadow and cover the reasoning faculty—but having stripped off the darkness arising from these, and having become ashamed through repentance, has united spirit and soul in obedience to the Logos or reason; then, as Paul says, “There is in us neither male nor female.” For the soul, departing ^C from this shape by which male and female are distinguished, is translated into unity, being neither the one nor the other. This noble man, however, thinks—in a more Platonic fashion—that the soul, being divine from above, has been effeminated by desire and has come down here into generation and corruption.

CHAPTER XIV.

II Cor. XI, 3, et Eph. IV, 24, exponit.

Now, indeed, he forces Paul, even against his will, to derive generation from deception, when he says: “I fear lest, as the serpent deceived Eve, your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.” But it is certain that the Lord also “came” to those items which had gone astray. Those, however, had gone straying, not by descending from an ^D origin on high into the generation which is here (for generation is a creature of the Almighty, who would never lead a soul from better to worse); but the Savior came to those who had gone astray in their senses or thoughts—to us, I say; we who were indeed corrupted by our disobedience to the commandments, as we became too eagerly addicted to pleasure...

having desired the grace of marriage and gone astray before the proper time: for “whoever looks at a woman to desire her” ^A has already committed adultery with her, as he did not await the time of the will. He himself, therefore, was the Lord who even then condemned the desire that anticipates marriage. When, therefore, the Apostle says, “Put on the new man, which is created according to God,” ^B he speaks to us who have been fashioned by the will of the Almighty, just as we have been fashioned. He says “the old,” not referring to generation and regeneration, but to a life lived in disobedience and in obedience. Cassianus considers the “garments of skin” to be the bodies; in this, we shall later show that both he and those who think as he does have gone astray, when we treat the explanation regarding the birth of man, following what is necessary to be said first. “For,” he says, “those who are ruled by earthly things both beget and are begotten; but our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we await the Savior.” We know, therefore, that these things have also been well said, since we ought to live as strangers and pilgrims; those having a wife, as not having one; those possessing, as not possessing; those who beget children, as begetting mortals, as those who are to leave behind their possessions, and as those who would live without a wife if there were need; not using possession with excessive affection, but with all thanksgiving and with a noble mind.

CHAPTER XV

And again, when he says: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman; but because of immoralities, let each man have his own wife,” ^C as if interpreting this, he says again: “Lest Satan tempt you.” For he does not say “because of intemperance” to those who use marriage with self-restraint for the sole purpose of the procreation of children; but to those who desire to go beyond the limit of procreation, so that our adversary, when he has consented too much, may not excite the appetite towards strange pleasures. Perhaps, moreover, he opposes those who live justly, because of emulation, and strives against them, wishing to lead them to his own ranks, and wishes to provide them with ^D occasions through troublesome continence.

^A Well, therefore, he says: "It is better to marry than to burn," so that the husband may render the debt to the wife, and the wife to the husband, and they may not defraud one another of the help given for generation through the divine 21 assistance. "Whoever," they say, "does not hate father, or mother, or wife, or children, cannot be my disciple." He does not command us to hate our own kin; "Honor," he says, "your father and mother, that it may be well with you," but, he says, do not be led away by irrational impulses, nor cling to civic customs; for a household 23 is composed of kin, and cities of households; just as Paul also said that those who are concerned with marriage "please the world" 24. Again the Lord says: "He who has married, let him not put away; and he who has not married, let him not marry 25" — he who has confessed based on a purpose of eunuchism not to marry, let him remain unmarried. In any case, the same Lord gives through the prophet Isaiah [the] corresponding promises to both, speaking somewhat like this: "Let the eunuch not say, I am a dry tree 26. Thus says the Lord to the eunuchs: If you keep my Sabbaths, and do all that I command, I will give you a place better than sons and daughters." For neither does eunuchism alone justify, nor the Sabbath of the eunuch, unless he performs the commandments. But to those who have married, he adds and says: "My elect 27 will not labor in vain, nor shall they procreate children for a curse, because it is seed blessed by the Lord 28." For to him who has procreated according to the Word, and has nourished, and has instructed in the Lord—just as to him who has begotten through a true catechism—there is laid up a certain reward, just as there is for the elect seed. ^B Others, however, understand "a curse" to be the procreation of children itself, and do not understand the Scripture speaking against those very people. For those who are in truth the Lord’s elect do not dogmatize, nor do they procreate... ^{C D}

^A children, as the heresies do. A eunuch, therefore, is not called one who has had his parts excised by force, nor yet one who is unmarried, but one who is barren of truth. This man was formerly a dry piece of wood; but having obeyed the Word, and having kept the Sabbaths by abstaining from sins, and having done the commandments, he shall be more honorable than those who are educated only by speech without a correct mode of life. "Little children," says the Master, "yet a little while I am with you." Therefore also Paul, writing to the Galatians, says: "My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ is formed in you." And again, writing to the Corinthians, he says: "For if you have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet you do not have many fathers; for in Christ ^B through the Gospel I have begotten you." For this reason "a eunuch shall not enter into the Church of God," he who is barren and unfruitful both in life and in word. But "if those who have made themselves eunuchs" from all sin "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven," these are blessed, those who fast from the world.

CHAPTER XVI.

"But cursed is the day in which I was born, and let it not be desirable," says Jeremiah: not calling generation absolutely cursed, but being indignant at the sins and the disobedience of the people. Therefore he continues: "For why was I born to see labors and sorrows, and my days have been in perpetual reproach?" Moreover, all who preached the truth, because of the disobedience of those who heard them, were both persecuted and ^C in danger. "For why," says the prophet Esdras, "did not my mother's womb become my tomb, that I might not see the affliction of Jacob and the labor of the race of Israel?" "No one is pure from filth," says Job, "not even if his life be but one day." Let them tell us, where has the day in which I was born sinned?

"And let the day in which my mother bore me not be desirable." "For who will be pure from filth? But there is no one, even if his life be one day upon the earth." This human birth is not without filth and sin, which is why infants are baptized, being washed clean from the filth of the transgression of Adam. He says this because nature has become weak from the transgression in Adam and has become prone to sin, and *also* because of birth from lust, yet not as though sin is co-sown with us—God forbid! Job was just and blameless, truthful, ^D and one who feared God, and avoided every evil; but he was not without filth, nor if his life upon earth be one day, are his months many, says Scripture. St. Augustine in [his commentary on] Psalm L: "The Prophet says also in another place: 'No one is clean in your sight, not even an infant whose life is but one day upon the earth.'" St. Bernard, in his *Sermon on the Canticle*: "Nor is an infant truly one day old without filth upon the earth." See book V of the *Stromateis*. Some in the margin note chapter xv of Job, others xxv. But they are absent from the Latin Vulgate: these are found in the LXX in chapter xiv of Job: "Who will be clean from filth? But there is no one, even if his life be one day upon the earth." The Latin Vulgate: "Who can make clean from an unclean, conceived seed? Is it not Thou, who alone art?" From the Hebrew literally: "Who will give an unclean from an unclean? Not even one." Olympiodorus, in the *Exposition* woven together by Nicetas, which we used in manuscript, thus explains this passage: [Collection of] Clemens Romanus, *First Epistle to the Corinthians*, chapter XVII: Job was just and blameless, truthful...

a worshiper of God, abstaining from every evil; but he, accusing himself, says: "No one is free from filth, not even if his life be but one day."

^A infant born? Or how has he fallen under the curse of Adam, who has performed no action? It remains for them, as it seems, to say consistently that generation is evil, not only that of the body, but also that of the soul, through which the body exists. And when David ^B says, "In sins was I conceived, and in iniquities did my mother bring me forth," he speaks prophetically indeed of Eve as mother; but Eve became the "mother of all living." And if he was "conceived in sins," yet it was not he who was in sin, nor was he himself sin. But if everyone who turns from sin to the faith turns from the habit of sinning as from a mother unto life, one of the twelve ^C prophets will bear me witness, saying: [“If I have given..."]

^D regarding the Hebrew term: Adam signifies "man." And in what Moses wrote concerning Adam, he describes the nature of man. For in Adam, as the Word says, all die, and were condemned in the likeness of the transgression of Adam—not as if the Divine Word were speaking these things about one individual, but about the whole race; for in the sequence of what is said as if of one, the curse of Adam is common to all; and the things said against the woman are not said against her alone.

It is implied that sin, having mastered our ancestors, carved out a kind of road and path through the [whole] race. Yet we are taught through all this, not that the energy of sin is natural (for otherwise we would be free from punishment), but that nature inclines toward stumbling, being troubled by the passions; yet the *gnome* (the judgment of the soul) triumphs ^A by means of whatever helpers it employs. It is not, therefore, as some have foolishly supposed, that he accuses marriage, having interpreted "In iniquities was I conceived" in that way; rather, he brings forward the lawlessness daringly committed of old by our ancestors, and says that that has become the source of these streams. ^{B C D}

^A “for the sin of my soul.” He does not condemn him who said: “Be fruitful and multiply”; but he calls the first impulses from birth, during which we do not know God, impieties. But if anyone calls generation evil on this account, let him also call it good in that we come to know the truth in it. ^B “Wash yourselves, be righteous, and do not sin”; for some have an ignorance of God, namely those who sin. “Since the struggle for us is not against blood and flesh, but against spiritual things.” ^C The rulers of the darkness are powerful to tempt; and for this reason, there is forgiveness. For this reason also Paul says: “I pommel my body and bring it into servitude,” ^D saying that “everyone who competes is temperate in all things.”

^A And some [(50)] also prefer the widow to the virgin, as one who has with great spirit spurned the pleasure of which she has made trial, whilst receiving [(49)] the crown, yet not without dust in the wrestling.

CHAPTER XVII.

If procreation is an evil, then let those blasphemers who say this declare that the Lord, who participated in procreation, was in evil, and that the Virgin who bore Him was in evil. Woe to these evils! They blaspheme against the will of God and the mystery of creation, while slandering procreation. For this reason the “Docetism” of Cassian [(51)]; for this reason also, with Marcion, and indeed with Valentinus, the “animal” body; because, they say, man was “assimilated to the beasts,” ^B coming into union. But whenever he begins to enter another’s bed, having truly flared up with desire, then such a one truly becomes beastly: “Horses made fierce for females, each neighed for his neighbor’s wife.” [(52)] And if the serpent, having received the suggestion of his counsel from the irrational animals, and having persuaded Adam to agree to communion with Eve, says that the protoplasts—not having used this by nature, as some claim—were to have used it, the creation is again blasphemed, as having made men weaker than the nature of the irrational animals, whom the protoplasts of God followed. But if nature indeed led them, as it does the irrational animals, to the procreation of children, but they were moved more quickly than was fitting, being still young and having been led astray by deception—the judgment of God is just upon those who did not await His will. Yet the generation is holy, through which the world has come into existence, through which are the essences, through which are the natures, through which are the angels, ^C through which the powers, through which souls, through which precepts, through which the law, through which the Gospel, through which the knowledge of God. “For all flesh is grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass; and the grass indeed withers [(53)], and the flower falls; but the word of the Lord abides forever.” But he who has desired and then controlled himself is like the widow, who through temperance becomes a virgin again. “Everyone is temperate in all things, not abstaining from all.” For it is a very great thing for one who has been in experience to then abstain. For what is great if one who has not known them should be temperate? “For he who has desired and restrained himself, just as the widow…” ^D

…” ^A but the word of the Lord abides, which has anointed the soul and united it to the Spirit. For how, without the body, could the economy, which is after the manner of the Church in our case, have reached its end, especially since He Himself, who is the Head of the Church, passed through life in the flesh, though without form and void of beauty, teaching us to look toward the formless and incorporeal nature of the divine Cause? “For the tree of life,” says the prophet, “becomes a matter of good desire,” teaching us those desires which are noble and pure in Him who lives in the Lord. Now there are those who wish the intercourse of a man with a woman in marriage, which is called “knowledge,” to be sin; for they suppose this to be indicated by the eating “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” since the meaning of the word “knew” denotes the transgression of a commandment. But if this is so, then the knowledge of the truth is also the eating of the tree of life. It is possible, therefore, for the temperate marriage to share in that tree as well. But it has been said to us before that it is possible to use marriage both well and ill; and this is the “tree of knowledge,” if we do not transgress against the laws of marriage. What then? Did not our Savior heal the soul, and in the same way the body as well, from its passions? He would not have reinforced the flesh against the soul, by healing it, if the flesh were the enemy of the soul. “But this I say, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither does corruption inherit incorruption.” For sin, being “corruption,” cannot have fellowship with “incorruption,” which is justice. “Are you so foolish,” He says, “that having begun in the Spirit, you are now being made perfect by the flesh?”

CHAPTER XVIII

Therefore, the justice and harmony of salvation, which is venerable and firm, others, as we have shown, have strained too excessively, accepting continence in a blasphemous and reviling manner, with every form of impiety; whereas it would have been pious to choose chastity, which is instituted according to the sound rule, giving thanks for the grace granted to them, but not holding the creature in hatred, nor despising those who are united in marriage; for the world is created, and marriage ^C is created—and both have been created as a state of giving thanks for the conditions in which they were placed. The flower has withered, but the word of our God abides forever.

^A Others, however, breaking loose, have acted wantonly, having truly become "horses lusting after females," and neighing after the wives of their neighbors. Being themselves held fast uncontrollably, they also persuade their neighbors to be lovers of pleasure—miserably misinterpreting those Scriptures: "Cast in thy lot with us, and let us all have one common purse, and let there be one money-bag for us all." ^B For the sake of these, the same prophet, counseling us, says: "Walk not in the way with them; keep thy foot back from their paths. For not without cause are nets spread for the winged; for they, being partakers of blood, treasure up for themselves evils"—that is, by being zealous for impurity and teaching their neighbors similar things, "warriors," "strikers with their tails," as the prophet says—which tails the Greeks call *kerkoi*. Now those whom the prophecy hints at would be the wanton, the intemperate, who are warriors with their tails, "children of darkness and wrath," murderous, committers of violence against themselves, and slayers of their neighbors. "Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump," the Apostle cries out to us. ^C And again, vexed at such as these, he commands: "Not to associate, if any man who is named a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one not even to eat." "For I through the law died to the law," he says, "that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I that live," as I used to live according to the desires; "but Christ lives in me," through the obedience to the commandments, chastely and blessedly. "So that then indeed I lived in the flesh carnally; but as I now live in the flesh, I live in the faith of the Son of God." ^D "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and enter not into any city of the Samaritans"—the Lord says, turning us away from the contrary manner of life; since "the destruction of lawless men is evil; and these are the ways of all who deal in iniquity." "Woe," says the Lord, "to that man; it were good for him if he had not been born, rather than to cause one of my elect to stumble; it were better for him that a millstone were hung about his neck, and he be drowned in the sea, than that he should cause one of my elect to stumble." For the name of God is blasphemed because of them.

Whence the Apostle clearly says: "I wrote unto you," he says, "in my epistle, not to keep company with fornicators," down to the text: "But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body." And that he does not call marriage fornication, he shows by what he subjoins: "Know ye not that he who is joined to a harlot is one body?" Would anyone call a virgin a harlot before she is married? "And defraud ye not," he says, "one another, except it be by consent for a time," showing by the word "defraud" that the debt of marriage is the procreation of children; which indeed he shows in what precedes, saying: "Let the husband render unto the wife her due; and likewise also the wife unto the husband"; after which discharge she is a helper in keeping the house and in the faith which is in Christ. And further, saying yet more clearly: "To those who are married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, that the wife depart not from her husband; but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband; and that the husband put not away his wife. But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother," down to the text: "But now are they holy." ^B What then do those say to these things who inveigh against the Law and against marriage, as if it were only permitted by the Law, and not also under the New Testament? What can those who abhor copulation and generation say to these given laws? Since he also ordains that the "bishop" who "rules his own house well" should lead the Church; and he constitutes the "Lord’s house" to be the marriage of one wife. "All things therefore," he says, "are pure to the pure; but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled." And concerning that pleasure which is against the rule: "Be not deceived," he says; "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor covetous, nor thieves, nor drunkards," ^C "nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God; and such were some of you, but ye are washed." But those who immerse themselves in this intemperance, baptizing from temperance into fornication, teaching that one should succumb to pleasures and passions, instructing that one should be incontinent rather than temperate, and anchoring their own hope in the shamelessness of the members—they prepare their disciples not for the kingdom of God, but to be outcasts—preparing them with the profession of a "knowledge falsely so called," and having set out upon a journey into the outer darkness. "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, ^D whatsoever things are honorable, whatsoever things are just,"

[CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA, STROMATA, BOOK IV]

^A ...baptism, deciding that one should give indulgence to pleasures and passions, teaching that men should become incontinent from those who are moderate, and fixed in the impudence of their own members in their hope; that they might be cast out from the kingdom of God, and not inscribed—those who frequent them—they effect this; walking in the way that leads to the outer darkness, under the title of falsely-named knowledge. "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you" [Phil. iv, 8, 9]. And Peter says similar things in his Epistle: "That your faith and hope might be in God, having purified your souls in obeying the truth; as obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: but as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; because it is written, Ye shall be holy; for I am holy" [I Petr. i, 21, 22, 14, 15, 16]. ^B But indeed, the refutation necessarily undertaken by us against those who simulate knowledge under a false name has carried us further than is fitting, and has made our discourse too prolix. Whence let the third book of the Stromata of the true philosophy also have this conclusion.

OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA

STROMATA: BOOK FOUR.

CHAPTER I.

The order of the things to be discussed.

^C It is consistent, I think, to discuss next the subject of martyrdom, and who is the perfect man; and together with these will be included whatever the nature of the subjects requires: as for instance, that one must philosophize equally, whether slave or free, and whether the person happens to be man or woman; and what follows regarding...

faith ^A and concerning inquiry, having fulfilled these, we shall introduce the symbolic form; so that, having concluded the moral discourse in a cursory manner, we may summarily point out what great benefit has been spread among the Greeks from the barbarian philosophy. After this outline, both the exposition addressed to the Greeks and that addressed to the Jews, by way of a summary of the Scriptures, shall be delivered, and whatever things, in the preceding Stromata, we had proposed in the introduction to complete in one treatise, but which, on account of the multitude of matters—to which it was necessary to attend—we could not comprise. After these things, once the declaration of the proposed subjects has been fulfilled as far as possible, it behooves us to recount the opinions regarding natural principles that have been handed down both by the Greeks and by other barbarians, in so far as they have reached us, and to argue against the principal points of what has been devised by the philosophers. To which it will follow, that after we have run through theology in a cursory manner, we should treat of the things handed down ^B concerning prophecy; so that, having demonstrated that the Scriptures in which we have believed are valid and ratified by the authority of the Almighty, we may be able to proceed through them in order, and from this basis demonstrate to all heresies one God and Lord Almighty, who was sincerely preached through the Law and the prophets, and furthermore through the blessed Gospel. Many contentions await us against those who are of a different opinion, as we attempt to refute in writing the things brought forward by them, and to persuade them, even against their will, by convicting them through the Scriptures themselves. When, therefore, our entire purpose has been accomplished, in whatever treatises the Spirit may wish to supply for the pressing need (for there is a great necessity for the things ^C that ought to be stated before the truth), then indeed we shall approach true gnostic natural science, having been initiated into small mysteries before great ones, so that there may be no obstacle to the truly divine sacred exposition, with those things which ought to be known and handed down beforehand having first been purged and fashioned. For natural science—or rather, contemplation—according to the rule of the truth, which is acquired through gnostic tradition, has its basis from an account of the cosmogony, thence ascending to the theological form. Whence, reasonably, we shall make the beginning of the tradition from the creation that has been prophesied, in part setting forth also the things which those of different opinion say, and attempting, as far as it is possible for us, to refute them. But indeed, that will be written, if God wills and as He may inspire; for the present, however, we must pass on to the subject ^D proposed, and complete the discourse which pertains to morals.

STROMATUM BOOK IV. CHAPTER II.

Why these books are called Stromateis.

Let our commentaries, as we have often said, be ^A varied in material and of diverse kind, as the very name implies, on behalf of those who are to approach the reading of them rashly and unskillfully. They pass continuously from one thing to another, and in the series of discourse they indicate one thing while exhibiting another. "For those who seek for gold," says Heraclitus, "dig much earth and find little"; but they who have a kinship with the true golden kind, searching for what is akin to them, will find much in little; for the Scripture will find the one who is to understand it. The Strands of our commentaries, then, are of assistance both in calling to mind and in clearly declaring the truth to him who is able to seek it with reason. It is necessary for you also to labor and to discover other things for yourselves. For as regards those who travel a road they do not know, it is sufficient merely to indicate the path that leads them; after that, they must walk, and find the rest of the way for themselves. As they say, when a certain slave once asked how he might act to please his master, the Pythia answered: "You will find it, if you seek." ^B It is, therefore, truly difficult, as it seems, to find a hidden good, since "before virtue sweat is placed."

... For long and steep is the path to it, And rough at first; but when you have reached the summit, It becomes easy, though it was difficult before.

For the way of the Lord is in very truth "narrow and straitened," and "the kingdom of God belongs to the violent." Whence He says, "Seek and you shall find," provided one holds to the truly royal road and does not turn aside. Rightly, then, there is much fruitfulness in the small space of the seeds of the dogmas contained in this work, just as in the "all-herb-bearing field," as the Scripture says. Hence the Strands of the commentaries have their own proper inscription, clearly like that ^C ancient offering gathered from all sides, about which Sophocles writes:

And the sheep's fleece, and there was also of the vine-shoots. ^D

^A

A libation, and a grape well treasured, And there was mixed in, all-fruitful, The richness of oil, and the most variegated Handiwork of the tawny bee, molded of wax.

Straightway our Stromateis, according to the husbandman of the comic poet Timocles, produce figs, oil, dried figs, and honey, as if from an all-fruitful field; ^B and on account of this fruitfulness he adds:

Thou indeed reportest an *eiresione*, not a cultivated field; For the Athenians were accustomed to proclaim: The *eiresione* brings figs and fat loaves, And honey in a bowl, and oil with which thou mayest Anoint thyself.

Often, therefore, it is necessary, just as with woven baskets, by shaking and throwing up the great mixture of seeds, to gather the wheat.

CHAPTER III.

Many, however, are affected just like winter storms, being unstable and reckless. "Much disbelief has done good things, faith bad things," and Epicharmus says: "Remember to be incredulous; these are the nerves of the mind." ^C Now, not to believe the truth brings death; just as believing it, life. Conversely, to believe a lie, and not to believe the truth, drags one into destruction. The same line of reasoning applies to self-restraint and lack of self-restraint; for to restrain oneself from doing good is the work of malice; but to abstain from injustice is the beginning of salvation. And to me, indeed, the Sabbath seems to signify, through the abstinence from evils, self-restraint. And what is it, in which man differs from beasts, and by which the angels of God are wiser? "Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels;" ^D for they do not interpret the Scripture concerning the Lord, for...

although He also bore flesh; but concerning every perfect and gnostic man, who is made lower than the angels both in time and in raiment. By wisdom, therefore, I mean nothing else than knowledge; since life does not differ from life. For it is common to mortal nature, that is, to man, with that which has been deemed worthy of immortality, to live; according to the habit of contemplation and continence, though the one is more excellent. In which respect it seems to me certainly that Pythagoras says God alone is wise (since ^B the Apostle also writes in the Epistle to the Romans: "To the obedience of faith among all nations, made known to the only wise God through Jesus Christ"), but he called himself a philosopher because of the friendship which subsisted between him and God. "For God," says he, "spake with Moses, as a friend with a friend." The truth, therefore, which is manifest to God, immediately generates truth; but the gnostic loves the truth. "Go," says he, "to the ant, O sluggard, and become a disciple of the bee," Solomon says; for if the work of each one's own nature is one, and that of the ox similarly, and of the horse, and of the dog, what shall we say is the proper work of man? ^C He seems to me, indeed, to be like to a centaur, a Thessalian figment, composed of a rational and an irrational part, of soul and body. But the body indeed works upon the earth, and hastens to the earth; the soul, however, is stretched out toward God; and if it be trained through true philosophy, it hastens to its kinsmen on high, having turned away from the desires of the body, and in addition to these, from toil and fear; although it [is disposed] toward goodness, and patience, and the ^D word of God, [and] the contemplation of things that are. For the body also...

^A versatur, and tends toward the earth; but the soul is exalted to God; which indeed, being educated by true philosophy, strives toward its own kin who are above, being liberated from the cravings of the body, and besides these from toil and fear; although we show that both tolerance and fear pertain to the good. For if “by the law is the knowledge of sin,” as those who attack the law say, and “until the law sin was in the world,” but “without the law sin is dead,” we sing in opposition to them: For if you take away the cause of fear, which is sin, you have taken away the fear; but still more so when that which is accustomed to covet is absent. “For the law is not laid down for the just,” the Scripture says. Well, therefore, does Heraclitus say: “They would not have known the name of Justice, if these things were not.” And Socrates says: “The law would not have been made for the sake of the good.” But neither did the accusers know this, which the Apostle says, that “He who loves his neighbor does no evil.” For that, “You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, and if there be any other commandment, it is recapitulated in this one word, ^B ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’” By this, perhaps, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself.” If, therefore, “he who loves his neighbor does no evil,” and “every commandment is recapitulated in this, to love one’s neighbor,” the commandments that impose fear do not produce love, but hatred; therefore the law is not a producer of the passion of fear. “So the law is holy,” and in truth “is spiritual,” according to the Apostle. We must, as is reasonable, after having diligently examined the nature of the body and the essence of the soul, grasp the end of each, and not deem death to be an evil. “For when you were slaves of sin,” says the Apostle, “you were free in regard to righteousness. What fruit, then, did you have then in those things for which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now, ^C having been liberated from sin, and having been enslaved to God, you have your fruit unto sanctification, and the end, eternal life. For the wages of sin is death; but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” The matter, therefore, seems to have been brought to this, that it is shown that death is indeed that conjunction of the soul with the body which is given over to sin; but life is the separation from sin. And many are the ramparts and ditches of passion in our path, and the chasms of anger and wrath, across which it is necessary to leap, and to avoid all the destruction of the plots, [seeing Him] who no longer through a mirror ^D [sees] the knowledge of God, but will see it face to face. We have shown that fear [is a path to perfection]. For if through the law comes the knowledge of sin, as those who rail against the law say, and “until the law sin was in the world”—but “without the law sin is dead”—we respond to them: for when you remove the cause of fear, which is sin, you have removed the fear; and much more when that which is naturally disposed to desire [that which is not permitted] is absent. “For the law is not laid down for the righteous,” says the Scripture. Well therefore does Heraclitus say: “They would not have known the name of Justice, if these things did not exist.” And Socrates says: “The law would not have been made for the sake of the good.” But neither did the accusers know this, as the Apostle says, that “He who loves his neighbor does no evil.” For the [commandment], “You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, and if there be any other commandment, it is recapitulated in this word, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’” ^D

^A Altitonans viro virtutis Jupiter aufert / Dimidium, quem alii misere servire necesse est.

The Scripture is accustomed to call those “servants” who are under sin and “sold under sin,” those who are given over to pleasure and who are lovers of the body, and it calls them beasts rather than men; those who are “assimilated to the beasts,” like horses maddened by desire, neighing after the wives of their neighbors. An “arrogant ass” is the licentious man; a “savage wolf” is the covetous man; and a “serpent” is the deceiver. Therefore, the separation of the body from the soul, which the philosopher meditates upon throughout his whole life, produces for the Gnostic a certain alacrity of soul, so that he is able to bear easily the death of nature, which is the dissolution of the soul’s bonds to the body. “For to me the world is crucified, and I to the world,” he says; “I live now, since I am in the flesh, as one who participates in the citizenship of heaven.”

^B

CHAPTER IV. The Praises of Martyrdom.

Whence, he who is justly called a Gnostic obeys readily, and to him who asks for some bodily thing, he grants it by offering it; and stripping off first the affections of this flesh, he does not insult the tempter, but, as I think, trains and reproves him.

“From what wealth, and from what magnitude of bliss,” as Empedocles says, “having departed from here, he converses among mortals.” He truly provides a witness, for himself, that he is sincerely faithful to God; but to the tempter, ^C that he has in vain been moved to emulation against one who through love... ^D

^A for his teaching possesses a persuasion from which he will not depart for fear of death; nay more, he confirms the truth of the preaching by his deed, showing that there is power in the God toward whom he hastens. You would admire his love, which he clearly teaches as he thankfully becomes one with his kindred, and not only this, but also as he puts the unbelievers to shame by his precious blood. This man, then, avoids denying Christ ^B out of fear, on account of the commandment, so that he may indeed become a witness through fear; nor, moreover, does he sell his faith for the hope of prepared gifts, but out of love for the Lord he will most gladly be released from this life; having even gratitude both to him who provided the cause for departing hence, and to him who plotted the intrigues against him; because from them he received an honorable opportunity, which he himself did not provide, to show himself as he is—toward them indeed through tolerance, but toward the Lord through charity: ^C through which, even before he was born, he was manifest to the Lord, who then knew his purpose, and that he was going to suffer martyrdom. With good courage, therefore, he comes to his friend the Lord, for whom he has willingly surrendered his body, and indeed his soul—as the judges expected—he reaches Him, "O brother beloved," to speak poetically, being addressed by our Savior on account of the likeness of his life. We immediately call martyrdom a "completion," not because the man received an "end" ^D of life, as the rest speak, but because he showed a "perfect" work of charity. And even the ancient Greeks praise the end of those who have died in war, not indeed recommending a violent death, but because he who ends his life in war has departed without fear of dying, being severed from his body, and not worn out in his soul beforehand, nor having become softened, as is wont to happen to men in diseases; for they [the sick] depart effeminate and desiring to live; and on that account they do not release a pure soul, but one that carries with it desires, like leaden weights, unless some of them have become famous for their virtue. But there are also those in war who die with desires, these being nothing different, even if they were being wasted away by disease. If, then, the confession before God is martyrdom, every soul that has lived purely with the knowledge of God, and has obeyed the commandments, is a martyr both in life and word, in whatever way it is released from the body; for it sheds faith, as it were its own blood, throughout its whole life and even at its departure. Immediately the Lord says in the Gospel: "Whoever shall leave father, or mother, or brothers," and the rest, "for the sake of the Gospel and my name," he is blessed; he...

means not any ^A kind of martyrdom, but the Gnostic one, namely, that of the man who, having lived his life according to the rule of the Gospel, for the sake of the love of the Lord (for knowledge signifies the understanding of the name and the meaning of the Gospel, not the bare appellation), leaves behind his worldly kin, as well as all his substance and possessions, because he lives without excessive attachment to them. Thus, "mother" is allegorically the fatherland and the nurturing earth; "fathers" are the civil laws, which the just man, who is of a great and noble spirit, ought most willingly to despise in order to become a friend to God and to attain the right side of the sanctuary, just as the apostles also have done. ^B Next, Heraclitus says: "Gods and men honor those slain in war," and Plato writes in the fifth book of the *Republic*: "Concerning those who have died on campaign, whoever has finished his course with distinction, shall we not say that he is of the golden race? Most certainly." Now the golden race is with the gods—those who dwell in heaven and in the fixed sphere, who chiefly possess the headship of human providence.

But certain of the heretics, having disobeyed the Lord, while at the same time impiously and cowardly clinging to life, say that the true martyrdom is the knowledge of the truly existing God (which we also acknowledge), but that he is a murderer of himself and a suicide ^C who has made confession through death; and they bring forward other such sophistries of cowardice. To these, a reply shall be made when the time requires, for they differ from us regarding first principles. We also say that those who rush upon death (for there are some who are not ours, but are merely partakers of the Name, who, delivering themselves up, hasten to their end, the wretched men dying in hostility to the Creator), we say that these depart without martyrdom ^D even if they are punished publicly. For they do not preserve the character of the martyrdom of the faithful.

^A since they have not known the true God; but they give themselves over to a vain death, just as the Gymnosophists of the Indians do to a useless fire. Since, however, these men who have falsely assumed the name for themselves inveigh against the body, let them learn that the proper state of the body contributes also to the good disposition of the mind. Wherefore in the third book of the *Republic*, Plato—whom they cite most especially as a witness in disparaging generation—said that one must take care of the body for the sake of the harmony of the soul, through which it is possible both to live and to live well, for one who announces the proclamation of the truth. For through life and health we learn the knowledge. But if it is not permitted for one to advance to the heights at all unless he is engaged in providing for his needs, and by their help he necessarily performs all things that tend toward knowledge, is not living well to be chosen by him? For it is by living that one comes to live well; and he who has exercised himself through the body to live well is transmitted to the state of immortality.

CHAPTER V.

On the contempt of pain, poverty, and other external things.

Admiration is also due to the Stoics, who say that the soul is not affected by the body, neither toward vice by sickness, nor toward virtue by health, but say that both these things are indifferent. ^C But indeed Job also, by reason of his extraordinary steadfastness and preeminent faith—having become poor from rich, lowly from illustrious, deformed from beautiful, and sickly from healthy—is set before us as an excellent example, while he puts to shame him who had tempted him, and blesses Him who had formed him; enduring the latter things just as he endured the former, and teaching very well that the Gnostic is able to make right use of all circumstances. ^D For neither do those things which are on the right and which are eagerly sought by the many possess a standing and stable quality, nor are the circumstances of affairs and the [orig. Greek script column: see facsimile]... established with firmness. [The blessed man] stood more securely even when attacked from every side, and receiving a thousand arrows, he did not yield; but he emptied the quiver of the devil, while he himself did not fall, nor was he overwhelmed; but like an excellent pilot, he was neither submerged when the sea was raging and the waves were rising, nor did he become sluggish when there was a calm, but in both the diversity of the times he kept his own skill equal, and neither...

^A did wealth puff him up, nor did poverty humble him.

And that the ancient achievements are indeed set forth as images for our own corrections, the Apostle shows, saying, "So that my bonds in Christ were made manifest in all the praetorium and to all the rest, and most of the brethren in the Lord, being confident in my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word of God without fear" (41)—since the testimonies of conversion are also examples, gloriously sanctified. "For whatever things the Scripture says, were written for our learning, that through the patience and consolation of the Scriptures we might have hope of consolation." ^B Yet it seems that, when pain is present, the soul in a certain way tends to recoil from it, and to consider the liberation from the present distress to be the highest good. Certainly, at such a time, it is sluggish even concerning disciplines, when other virtues also are neglected. But we do not, of course, say that virtue itself suffers; for virtue does not fall ill. But he who partakes of both, of virtue and of disease, is oppressed by the urgency of the pain; and if he happens not to be of a great and lofty spirit, having not yet acquired the habit of self-control, he is displaced, and is found to be in the same state as one who flees because he has not endured.

The same reasoning applies also to poverty. For it too, as regards the things that are necessary—I mean contemplation, and pure freedom from sin—compels the soul to cease from them, forcing it to spend time on the means of subsistence, for one who has not dedicated his whole self to God through love; just as, conversely, health and an abundance of necessities keep the soul free and unhindered, and knowing how to make good use of the things present. ^C "For such shall have tribulation of the flesh," says the Apostle, "but I spare you; for I wish you to be without anxiety, that you may attend upon the Lord with decorum and without distraction." These things, therefore, are to be embraced, not for their own sake, but for the sake of the body; and the care of the body is for the sake of the soul, to which reference is made. For this reason, it is necessary for him who institutes the gnostic life to learn what is fitting: for that pleasure is not the good is evident from the fact that some pleasures are evil; otherwise, by this reasoning, the good would appear to be evil, and the evil good.

Furthermore, if we choose some pleasures and flee others, then not every pleasure is the good. Similarly also, the same reasoning holds in the case of pains, some of which we endure and others we flee. But this choice and avoidance occurs according to knowledge; so that knowledge is the good, not pleasure, for the sake of which we may sometimes choose a certain pleasure. ^D Immediately the martyr chooses that pleasure which is gained through hope by means of the present pain.

But if in thirst pain is considered, and in drinking pleasure, the pain which preceded will be the producer of the pleasure; but evil cannot be the producer of good; therefore, neither ^A is evil.

Simonides, then, even as Aristotle writes, says: "To a man, to be healthy is best; Second, by nature to be well-formed and beautiful; Third, to be wealthy without guile and fraud."

And the Megarian Theognis: "Fleeing from poverty, O Cyrnus, cast yourself Into the deep sea and from the airy crags."

On the other hand, Antiphanes the comic poet says: "Plutus," he says, "when he receives those who see more than others, makes them blind." ^B And it is already proclaimed by the poets that he is blind from birth: "He begat for him a son who never sees the sun."

^C ...Aristotle said that happiness is completed by a triple generation: from things pertaining to the soul, from things pertaining to the body, and from external things. For he said that the happy man must not only be adorned with virtue, but also possess strength, shine with beauty, and be surrounded by wealth; and he who is deprived of any of these is least of all to be called happy.

^D "Wealth toward us, like a bad physician, Taking hold of those who see, makes everyone blind."

^A And Euphorion the Chalcidian says: "Evil, then, was the training for manliness, Wealth among men, and excessive luxuries," as Euripides has written in his *Alexander*. It has been said, "Poverty has obtained wisdom, by reason of its kinship." And "Avarice ^B would capture not only Sparta, but every city." — "There is not, therefore, only this currency, white silver or gold, but virtue also is current for mortals," as Sophocles says.

CHAPTER VI

Our holy Savior has applied poverty ^B and riches, and things similar to these, both to spiritual and to sensible matters; for having said, "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake," he clearly teaches us in every circumstance to seek the martyr; who, if he be poor for righteousness' sake, "testifies" that righteousness, which he has loved, is good; ^C and if he hungers and thirsts for righteousness, he testifies that righteousness is the highest good. Similarly, he who weeps and mourns for righteousness testifies that the best law is good. As therefore he calls "those who are persecuted," so also "those who hunger and thirst for righteousness" blessed, he who accepts the sincere desire, ^D which not even famine could break. And if they hunger for righteousness itself, they are blessed. Blessed also are "the poor," whether in spirit or in possessions, clearly on account of righteousness. What then?

[alt-version omitted]

^B He does not bless the poor simply, but those who have willed to become poor for the sake of justice. He blesses those who have despised the honors of this world for the acquisition of the good. Likewise, he also blesses those who have become noble in character and body through chastity, as well as those who are well-born and glorious, those who have advanced to the adoption of sons for the sake of justice, and who have for this reason [(57)] received the power to become children of God, and to walk upon serpents and scorpions, and to obtain dominion over demons and the army of the Adversary. And, in a word, the Lord’s exercise ^C gratefully and willingly draws the soul away from the body, if indeed it also tears itself away by a change of state. "For he who loves his own soul will lose it; and he who has lost it will find it" [(58)], if only we apply our own frailty to the incorruption of God. But the will of God is the knowledge of God, which is a participation in incorruption. He therefore who recognizes his soul as sinful according to the principle of repentance, shall lose it from the sin from which it has been severed; and having lost it, he shall find it through obedience, so that it having lived again in faith, may be dead to sin. This, then, is to find the soul: to know oneself. ^D As for the conversion which takes place toward divine things, the Stoics say that it comes about through a certain change, as the soul is changed into wisdom; but Plato [(60)] says it is "a turning of the soul toward better things, and a conversion from a certain nocturnal day." Moreover, philosophers allow even a good man a reasonable departure, if one is so far removed from acting that there is no longer any hope left to him of action. But the judge, who forces [one] by violence to deny what is dear, seems to distinguish who is a friend to God [(61)] and who is not. Here, not even a comparison is left as to what one might prefer: human threats or the love of God. And in some way, abstinence from evil actions is found to be a certain diminution and extinction of evils, as their operation is removed through the cessation of acting. And this is: "Sell what you have, and give to the poor; and come, follow me" [(62)]; that is, follow what is said by the Lord. They say that "possessions" spoken of here are the things that are alien to the soul; and how these are distributed to the poor, they cannot say, unless it be the things that are alien to the soul.

But God distributes everything to everyone according to merit, his dispensation being just. Having therefore despised, he says, the possessions which God distributes through your magnificence, follow the things which are spoken by me; strive toward the ascent of the spirit; not only justified by abstinence from evils, but also made perfect by the Lord’s beneficence. Immediately he refuted him who boasted that he had perfectly fulfilled the precepts of the Law, because he had not loved his neighbor; and charity is promised as beneficence, which rules over the Sabbath by a gnostic superiority. I think, however, that one ought to approach the saving Word, not because of fear of punishment, nor because of any promise of a gift, but because of the good itself. Such as these stand at the right hand ^B of the sanctuary; but those who think that they are to receive incorruption in exchange for the giving of corruptible things, are called "mercenaries" in the parable of the "two brothers." And does not that which is said, "according to likeness and image," become clear here as well? So that those in the one case may regulate their life according to the likeness of the Savior, while those who stand on the left, being after the image of these. There are, therefore, three things from the truth, with one root underlying both, but the choice is not equal; or rather, the difference according to the choice is not equal. It differs, I think, for one who chooses out of imitation from one who chooses out of knowledge, just as that which is ignited differs from that which is illuminated. The light of the likeness according to the Scripture, therefore, is Israel; but the other is an image. What, moreover, does the Lord mean by the parable of Lazarus, ^C which displays the image of the rich man and the poor man? And what of, "No one can serve two masters, God and mammon," the Lord thus naming the love of money? Immediately, those who are lovers of their possessions, being invited to the call of the supper, do not attend; not because they were called, but because they possessed them with attachment. "The foxes, therefore, have holes," the Lord called those who dwell around wealth that is being mined and dug from the earth, depraved men and earth-born, "foxes." Likewise also concerning Herod: "Go, tell that fox: Behold, I cast out demons, and I perform healings today and tomorrow, and on the third day I am perfected. — For the birds of the air, ^D those who are separated from other birds in heaven, truly pure, those who [are] into the...

ready to fly up to the knowledge of the heavenly Word, he called. For it is not only wealth, glory, and marriage, but also poverty that brings countless cares to him who is unable to bear it. And these cares he indicated in the parable of the fourfold seed, where he says that the seed of the Word which ‹fell into thorns› and hedges was ‹choked› by them and could not ^B produce fruit. It is necessary, therefore, to learn how one must use each of the things that happen, so that through a life lived well and gnostically, we may be exercised for the habit of eternal life. ‹I saw,› he says, ‹the ungodly man being high and lifted up like the cedars of Lebanon; and I passed by,› the Scripture says, ‹and behold he was not, and I sought him, and his place was not found. Keep innocence and see uprightness; for there is a remnant for the peaceable man.› Such, however, will be the one who believes without hypocrisy from his whole heart and is tranquil with his whole soul. ‹For the other people,› it says, ‹honors me with their lips, but their heart is far removed from the Lord.› With their mouth they bless, but in their heart they curse. ‹They loved him with their mouth, and with their tongue they lied to him; but their heart was not upright with him, neither were they faithful in his covenant.› Therefore ‹let all deceitful lips be made mute, and let the Lord destroy all deceitful lips, the great-speaking tongue, those who have said, Our tongue we will magnify, our lips are with us; who is our Lord? Because of the affliction of the needy and the groaning of the poor, ^C now will I arise, says the Lord; I will set them in safety, I will speak boldly concerning him.› For Christ belongs to the humble, not to those who exalt themselves over his flock. ‹Do not lay up,› therefore ^D

^A for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume, and thieves [(80)] dig through and steal,› perhaps indeed rebuking the covetous, says the Lord; but perhaps also those who are simply anxious and full of cares; and already, too, those who are lovers of their bodies. For desires, and diseases, and base thoughts ‹dig through› the reasoning power and the whole man; ‹but where [(81)] our treasure is,› there is the kinship of the mind; since it delivers over the social character of justice, indicating that one ought to give back to the habit of the old way of life [(82)] what had been acquired for us by it, and to run back to God, asking for mercy. This is in truth a ‹purse [(83)] which does not grow old,› a provision for eternal life, ‹a treasure [(84)] that does not fail in heaven,› because ‹I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,› says the Lord. They say these things also to those who wish to be poor for the sake of justice; for they have heard through the commandment that ‹a broad [(85)] and wide way leads to destruction, and many are those who pass through it.› He speaks not of anything else, but of wantonness, the love of women, the love of glory, the love of power, and similar passions. ‹For fool,› thus he said, ‹on this night [(86)] they require your soul; and what you have prepared for it, to whom will it be?› And the words of the commandment stand thus in the text: ‹Beware [(87)], therefore, of all covetousness: because not in the ‹abounding [(88)] of a man is his life in his possessions. For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world, but lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Therefore I say: Do not be anxious for your soul, what you shall eat; nor for the body, what you shall put on [(89)]: for the soul is more than food, and the body than clothing.› And again: ‹For your Father knows [(90)] that you have need of all these things. But seek [(91)] first the kingdom of heaven and righteousness; for these are ‹great [(92)],› but the small, ‹that is, those concerning this life, these shall be added unto you.› Does he not explicitly urge us to follow the Gnostic life, seeking the truth in deed and in word? ^{B C D}

^A Christ, who disciplines the soul, considers the rich man not by his donation, but by his intention. Accordingly, when they heard that the Lord had deigned to stay with Zacchaeus—or, according to others, Matthias—the chief of the publicans, they report that he said: ‹Lord, I give half of my possessions as alms; and if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold.› Upon which the Saviour also replied: ‹The Son of man, having come today, has found what was lost.›

^B Again, having observed the rich man putting into the treasury in proportion to his wealth, and the widow putting in two mites, he said that the widow had put in more than all; for he contributed from his abundance, but she from her poverty. Since he related all things to the discipline of the soul, he says: ‹Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.› The meek are those who have quieted the restless battle within the soul of anger and desire, and of the species subject to these. He praises those who are meek by choice, and not by necessity. For there are ‹with the Lord many› rewards and ‹mansions› according to the ratio of men’s lives. ‹For he who receives a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet’s reward; and he who receives a righteous man in the name of a righteous man, shall receive a righteous man’s reward; and whoever receives one of these little ^C ones among his disciples, he shall not lose his reward.›

And again, he signifies the differences in virtue according to merit and the noble rewards through the hours, which are not equal in number; moreover, by the equal reward given to each of the laborers—that is, salvation, which the denarius signifies—he has indicated an equal justice through those who worked for unequal hours. They shall work, then, according to the respective mansions of which they were deemed worthy, as fellow-workers of the ineffable economy and service. ^D ‹And those,› says Plato, ‹who are deemed to have lived exceptionally holily, these are they who are liberated and released from these places on earth, as from prisons, and arriving on high into a pure dwelling.›

› ^B And again, the same author speaks clearly about this, saying thus: «And of these same, those who have been sufficiently purified by philosophy live altogether without bodies for the all-encompassing time;» though he does clothe them in certain forms, giving to some of them ones that are aerial, and to others even fiery. He further adds: «And they arrive at dwellings even more beautiful than these, which it is neither easy to describe, nor would the present time suffice to tell.» Whence, with good reason, «Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted;» ^C for those who have repented for the things they have ill-lived, shall be present at the calling; for this is what it means «to be comforted.» There are two ways of repenting: the more common is fear for what has been done, and the more specific is the shame felt by the soul within itself from conscience.

Whether, therefore, here or elsewhere (since no place is void of the mercy of God), he says again: «Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.» But mercy is not, as some of the philosophers have supposed, grief for the calamities of others, but rather it is an excellent thing, as the prophets say: «For I want mercy,» he says, «and not sacrifice.» ^D And he wishes those to be merciful not only who perform works of mercy, but also those who desire to show mercy, even if they cannot; to whom, in accordance with their purpose, the ability to act is present. For sometimes we wish, whether by the giving of money or by bodily labor, to perform an act of mercy—to lend aid to one in need, or to serve the sick, or to stand by one who has fallen into distress—and we are not able, whether on account of poverty, or sickness, or old age (for this, too, is a natural sickness), to serve our intention, and though we strive, we cannot bring to completion what we have willed. Those who have intended to perform the work share in the same honor as those who have been able, provided their purpose is equal, even if the others have the advantage in their resources. Since, moreover, there are found two paths leading to the perfection of salvation, works and knowledge, he called «the pure in heart» blessed, «for they shall see God.» And if we consider the truth as it really is, knowledge is the purification of the ruling faculty of the soul.

^A And its activity is good. Goods, indeed, are some things in themselves, and others are those that participate in goods, as we call good acts. Without the intermediate things, which take the place of matter, neither good nor bad acts can exist; I mean, for example, life, health, and other things that are necessary or circumstantial. Therefore, he wishes those who come to the knowledge of God to be clear of bodily desires and holy in their thoughts, so that nothing adulterated may adhere to the ruling faculty of the soul, which would dull its power. When, therefore, he has spent time in contemplation, converse with the Divine in purity, the one who possesses the holy quality in a gnostic manner becomes, more closely, in a state of impassable identity ^B (16), so that he no longer merely possesses knowledge and possesses understanding, but is himself both knowledge and understanding.

Blessed, therefore, are the peacemakers: those who, having tamed and quieted (18) the law that wars against the mind (17), the threats of anger, the lures of desire, and the other passions that fight against the reason, and having lived their lives with the knowledge of good works and true reason, shall be restored to a more friendly and pleasing adoption as sons. And perfect peacemaking would be that which preserves «the peaceful» unchanged in every event, judging management to be holy and good, ^C existing in the knowledge of divine and human things, through which he sees the contradictions in the world as the most beautiful harmony of creation. «Peacemakers» are also those who instruct those still struggling here against the stratagems of sin to pass over to faith and peace.

Chapter 4, I think, of all virtue, the Lord teaching us that one ought, more gnostically, to despise death for the sake of the love of God: «Blessed,» he says, «are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for they shall be called sons of God» (19); or, as some of those who transpose the Gospels (20), ^D

have it: «Blessed are those whom righteousness persecutes, for they shall be perfect»; and: «Blessed are those who are persecuted for my sake, for they shall have a place where persecution will not reach them»; and: «Blessed are you when men hate you» (22), «when they exclude you, when they cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake»—if, clearly, we do not loathe those who persecute us, and we endure the punishments from them, not hating them, and we think of it as having been tested later than we expected, but rather knowing also this, that every trial is an occasion for martyrdom.

CAPUT VII. Blessed are those who shed their blood for the sake of God.

^BThen, the one who has lied, and shown himself to be faithless, and has deserted to the army of the devil—in what evil, do we think, is he? He lies, therefore, to the Lord, or rather, he has belied his own hope, he who does not believe in God. Now he does not believe who does not do what he commanded. What then? Does he not deny himself, he who denies the Lord? For he does not take away the Lord's dominion, but he does deprive him of the intimacy he has with him. He, therefore, who denies the Savior, denies life; for «the life was the light.» He does not call these men of «little faith,» but faithless and hypocrites: who indeed bear the inscription of the name, but deny that they are faithful. The faithful man, however, is called both servant and friend. Therefore, if anyone loves himself, he loves the Lord, and confesses the salvation, that he may save his soul. ^C And yet, even if you should die for your neighbor out of love—and you take the Savior to be our neighbor («For God, who draws near,» it says, «the Savior, was spoken of toward the one being saved»), choosing death for the sake of life, and suffering rather for your own sake than for his—is it for this that he is called a brother? He who has suffered for the sake of the love toward God, has suffered for his own salvation; and he who, in turn, dies for his own salvation, endures it for the sake of love.

For He Himself, being Life, wished to suffer so that we might live by His suffering. "Why do you call Me, Lord, Lord," He says, "and do not do what I say?" For the people who love with their lips, but keep their heart far from the Lord, are one thing, and the one who is persuaded by another—and to ^A whom he has willingly sold himself—is quite another. But as many as fulfill the commandments of the Savior, in every action they are witnesses, and while doing what He wills, they consistently call Him Lord, and by their work they bear witness to Him in whom they believe, they who have "crucified their flesh with its passions and desires." "If we live in the Spirit," he says, "let us also walk in the Spirit. He who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption; but he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life."

To the wretched among men, the most violent death, the martyrdom by blood for the Lord, appears to be a death, because they do not know that such a gateway of death is the beginning of the true life. Nor are they willing to understand either the honors after death for those who have lived holy lives, or the punishments for those who have behaved unjustly and wantonly—and I speak not only of our own Scriptures (for almost all the commandments indicate these things), but they are not ^B even willing to listen to the words of their own people. For the Pythagorean Theano writes: "For if life were indeed a banquet for the wicked, and then they died, had the soul not been immortal, death would be a windfall." And Plato 31 in the *Phaedo*: "For if death were the liberation from everything," and the rest. Therefore, according to Aeschylus's *Telephus* 32, one cannot conceive of a simple path to Hades, but rather that there are many paths, and many sins that lead away.

The nature of men is like inflated skins; men are skins filled with empty conceit.

Moreover, the journey is not, as Aeschylus's *Telephus* says, one that leads to Hades by a single path; nor does it appear to me to be either simple or one. ^{C D}

^A There are many paths, and many sins that lead astray. Aristophanes, it seems, mocks these unbelievers, saying: "Come, ye men, [(33)] creatures of a day, similar to the generation of leaves, powerless, moldings of wax, shade-like tribes, strengthless, wingless, ephemeral." ^B And Epicharmus [(34)] says: "This is the nature of men, inflated skins." But to us the Savior has said: "The spirit [(35)] is willing, but the flesh is weak," because, as the Apostle explains, "the mind of the flesh is enmity toward God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can it be. And those who are in the flesh cannot please God." And continuing his explanation, he adds this, ^C so that no one, like Marcion, may ungratefully conclude that the creation is evil: "But if Christ is in you, the body indeed is dead because of sin, but the spirit is life because of righteousness." And again: "For if you live according to the flesh, you will die. For I consider that the sufferings of the present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed in us; if indeed we suffer together, that we may also be glorified together, as joint-heirs with Christ [(36)]. And we know that all things work together for good [(57)] to those who love God, to those who are the called according to his purpose; for those whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers; and whom he predestined, these he also called; and whom he called, these he also justified; and whom he justified, these he also glorified." You see how martyrdom is taught through love. And if you should wish to be a martyr in return for good things, listen again: "For we were saved by hope; but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one hope for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience. But even if we suffer [(38)] for righteousness' sake, we are blessed," says Peter. "And do not fear their fear, neither be troubled."

^D Regarding each individual, and according to their age, the Word will provide many opportunities for consolation: if one should die suddenly and painlessly, consider that the end happened to him happily; or if he is away from home, that it makes no difference, for there is one and the same path, according to Aeschylus, leading to Hades.

On the nature of man

Concerning the verse of Aristophanes

And perhaps to men who are in such a state, Epicharmus the comic poet adapted that iambic: The nature of men, inflated skins. This is the nature of men: they are skins swollen with winds.

^A For if you act as a martyr for the sake of the reward of good things, you will hear further: "For by hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is not hope. For what one sees, why does he hope for it? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience." But even if we suffer for justice’s sake, "beati," says Peter, "fear not their fear, neither be troubled; but sanctify the Lord Christ in your hearts. And be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks you a reason of the hope that is in you; but with meekness and fear, having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ. For it is better, if the will of God be so, that you suffer for well-doing than for evil-doing." ^B And if anyone, with a mocking spirit, asks: "And how is it possible for weak flesh to resist the powers and spirits of the principalities?" let him know this: that, relying on God Almighty and the Lord, and having confidence in Him, we stand against the principalities of darkness and death. "While you are yet speaking," He says, "He will say: Behold, I am here." See the invincible helper who defends us. "Do not think it strange," says Peter, "concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: but inasmuch as you are partakers of Christ’s sufferings, rejoice; that, when His glory shall be revealed, you may be glad also with exceeding joy, if you be reproached for the name of Christ; happy are you, for the spirit of glory and of God rests upon you." As it is written: "For Your sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter." But in all these things we more than conquer through Him that loved us. ^C *But if you wish to learn from my mind,* *You will not hear it, not even if you burn me, nor with harsh saws* *If you draw from the top of the head to the lowest feet,* *Would you learn, not even if you cast all chains upon me;* as the woman in the tragedy says, behaving manfully. Antigone, despising the edict of Creon, says boldly: *For these were not the things that Zeus heralded to me;* But God heralds to us, and Him we must obey: "For with the heart man believes unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession

^A is made unto salvation." The Scripture therefore says: "Whosoever believes in Him shall not be put to shame." ^B With good reason then Simonides writes: "There is a saying that Virtue dwells on difficult, inaccessible rocks; but now she is fleet and frequents a pure place; nor can she be seen by the eyes of all mortals, unless a biting sweat should come from within, and one should reach the summit of manliness." And Pindar: "Youthful cares, which revolve with labors, find glory; but in time deeds shine forth, illuminated in the ether." Following this thought, Aeschylus also says:

To him who laboureth, from the gods ^C The fruit of labor, glory, is owed.

"For greater fates obtain greater portions," according to Heraclitus. Who is a servant, I pray, who is free from the fear of death? "For God has not given us the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind; be not therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner," he writes to Timothy. The man who is such would be ^D "he who cleaves to what is good," according to the Apostle, "abhorring that which is evil, having love unfeigned; for he that loves another has fulfilled the law." If, however, God is the God of hope—as indeed He is—we who are His martyrs, confessing our hope, hasten toward that hope. And he says that those who are "great" are "filled with all knowledge" of goodness. The philosophers of the Indians say to Alexander the Macedonian: "You will move bodies from place to place, but you cannot force souls to do what they do not wish, any more than you can make bricks and wood emit a voice. Fire causes the greatest pains and destruction to living bodies; over this we become superior, as we are consumed while living."

^A Hence Heraclitus placed one glory above all others; he confesses, however, that he gives way to the vulgar, so that they may gorge themselves like beasts.

For the sake of the body, the many toil: For this, we find a covered house, To dig white silver, and to sow the soil, And other things which we know by name.

To the many, this vain labor is chosen; but to us the Apostle says: "We know that our old man has been crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, so that we should no longer serve sin." ^B Does not the Apostle also clearly add those things, showing what reproach faith suffers among the many? "For I think," he says, "that God has displayed us the apostles last, as men appointed to death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, and to angels, and to men. Even to this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwelling place; and we labor, working with our own hands. Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we endure; being defamed, we entreat; we have become as the filth of the world." ^C Such also are the things that Plato says in the *Republic*: "Even if the just man is tortured, and even if his eyes are gouged out, he will be blessed." The Gnostic, therefore, will never have his end placed in the soul, but in this: that he is always happy and blessed, and a royal friend of God. And even if someone should brand him with ignominy, and afflict him with exile, and confiscation of property, and lastly with death, he will never be torn away from liberty and from the most excellent love toward God: "Love bears all things, believes all things," for he is persuaded that divine providence administers all things rightly. "I beseech you, therefore," he says, "be imitators of me." ^D The first degree, then, of the body is instruction with fear, through which we refrain from injustice; the second is hope, according to...

through which we desire what is best; but charity perfects, as is fitting, teaching us already in a gnostic way. For the Gentiles, I know not how, by attributing the things that happen to a blind necessity, confess that they obey against their will. Euripides, at any rate, says: ^A

What I say, woman, I wish you to understand: There is no mortal who does not labor; To bury children, to sow others in their stead, Soon to die oneself—this is the sorrow of mortals.

Then he adds: ^B

One must suffer these things, which nature wills: Whatever is necessary is not a burden to mortals.

To those who are pressing on toward perfection, there is proposed rational knowledge, the foundation of which is that holy triad: faith, hope, charity; but the greatest of these is charity. Indeed, "All things are lawful, but not all things are expedient; all things are lawful, but not all things edify," says the Apostle; and: "Let no one seek his own only, but also that of... the other," so that one can both do and teach, building and super-building. For that "the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof" is certain and beyond controversy; but it is supported by the conscience of the weak. ^C By conscience, however, I mean not his own, but the other's. For why is my freedom judged by another's conscience? If I partake with grace, why am I blamed for that for which I give thanks? Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. For walking in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh; for the weapons ^D of our warfare…

^A are not carnal, but powerful in God for cutting down strongholds, destroying reasonings, and every height lifting itself up against the knowledge of the Lord. ^B Armed with these weapons, the Gnostic says: "O Lord, give the occasion, and accept the proof; let this grave and formidable trial come; I despise perils because of my love for thee."

For virtue alone, among those who are mortal, Never receives its reward from sources outside; For it possesses within itself the prize for its labors.

^C "Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercy, kindness, humility, gentleness, longsuffering; and above all these things, charity, which is the bond of perfection; and let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, into which also you are called in one body; and be thankful," who are still in the body, like the just men of old, reaping tranquility of soul and immunity from passions.

CHAPTER VIII.

In the Church, women no less than men, and servants equally with the free, are candidates for martyrdom.

For not only were the Aesopians, and Macedonians, and Laconians ^D known to endure when tortured, as Eratosthenes says in his book *On Good and Evil*; but Zeno the Eleatic also, when he was compelled to disclose some secret, resisted the torments, confessing nothing; for—as Eratosthenes says in his *On Good and Evil*—fearing that, overcome by the intensity of his suffering, he might blurt out some of the things they had agreed upon and betray his fellow conspirators, he bit off his tongue with his teeth and spat it into the tyrant's face. They say that the Pythagorean Theodotus, and Paul, the pupil of Lacydes, did the same thing, as Timotheus of Pergamon has written in his book *On the Fortitude of Philosophers*; and Achaicus also confirms this in his *Ethics*.

^A Posthumus the Roman, too, having been captured by the Peucetians, not only did not reveal anything of those things which were hidden, but even placed his hand upon the fire, as if he had laid it upon brass, with a face altogether unmoved. For Anaxarchus, when he was being pounded by the tyrant with iron pestles, cried out, "Pound, pound the pouch of Anaxarchus, for you are not pounding Anaxarchus." ^B Neither therefore does the hope of happiness, nor the love for God, fret at the things that befall; but it remains free, and even if it falls among the wildest beasts, or if it falls into an all-consuming fire, or if it is being killed by tyrannical tortures, clinging to the divine friendship, ^C it roams above, unenslaved, having surrendered the body to those who can only hold that. It is said, moreover, that a barbarian nation, not untasted in philosophy, chooses an ambassador by lot every year for the hero Zamolxis. Now Zamolxis was one of the companions of Pythagoras. Therefore he who is judged the most approved is sacrificed, while those who have philosophized indeed, but have not been chosen, are grieved, as ones rejected from a blessed service. ^D Thus the whole Church is full of those who through their whole life have meditated on death.

^A just as of temperate men, so also of temperate women. It is permitted to one who lives according to our customs to philosophize even without letters, whether he be a barbarian, or a Greek, or a slave, or an old man, or a youth, or a woman; for temperance is common to all men who have chosen it. Moreover, it is beyond controversy among us that in every species the nature is the same, and that it has the same virtue. Therefore, the woman does not have one nature so far as concerns humanity, and the man another; they appear to have the same, and therefore also the same virtue. But if the virtue of a man is assuredly temperance and justice and all that are considered to follow upon these, it would be fitting only for a man to be endowed with virtue, and for a woman to be intemperate and unjust. Yet it is shameful even to say this; therefore, both man and woman, both free and slave, must devote themselves to temperance and justice and ^B to all other virtue alike, since they are capable of the same virtue, as they are of the same nature. However, we do not say that the nature of the female is the same as that of the male, insofar as it is female; for it is altogether fitting that there should be some difference between each of them, by which the one is called female and the other male. We say, therefore, that the bearing and the giving birth belong to the woman insofar as she happens to be female, not insofar as she is a human being. But if there were no difference between man and woman, then each of them would do and suffer the same things. Insofar, then, as it is the same, in that it has the same soul, it will arrive at the same virtue; but insofar as it is different, according to the property of the body, it is for the bearing of ^C fetuses and the keeping of the house. "For I wish," says the Apostle, "you to know that the head of every man is Christ, but the head of the woman is the man; for the man is not from the woman, but the woman from the man. Yet neither is the woman separate from the man, nor the man separate from the woman in the Lord." For just as we say that a man must be temperate and superior to pleasures, so also we deem that a woman must be temperate, and trained to struggle against pleasures. "But I say, walk in the Spirit, and do not fulfill the desire of the flesh," the apostolic command counsels; "for the flesh desires against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. These, therefore, are opposed," ^D not as evil to good, but as things that struggle profitably. He adds, therefore: "So that you may not do the things that you wish. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, licentiousness, idol-

- ^A atry, witchcraft, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, brawls, dissensions, sects, envies, drunkenness, revellings, and the like; concerning which I tell you beforehand, as I have also said before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, goodness, self-control, kindness, faith, meekness." By "flesh," I think, he meant the sinners, just as by "Spirit" he meant the righteous. Indeed, we must also accept the quality of courage for the sake of boldness and endurance, just as ^B towards the one "striking the cheek" we should offer the other, and to the one taking away the cloak, we should yield the tunic as well, firmly mastering our wrath. For we are not training women in martial courage as if they were some Amazons; seeing that we wish even the men to be peaceful. I hear, for instance, that Sauromatid women engage in war no less than men, and other Sacians, who shoot backwards, pretending to flee, just like the men. I also know that the women near Iberia practice work and labor in a masculine way; and even when they are about to give birth ^C they do not cease from any of their duties. The Lactophagi (Milk-eaters), and the women are not less warlike than the men; and they fight alongside them whenever necessary. They do not allow a maiden to be wedded to a husband among the Sauromatae before she has killed an enemy man. She battles the child; and having gained the upper hand, she carries him off as a captive, and masters him, and rules him; but if she is conquered, she is ruled. Even if the basest man marries the one who is held in high esteem, or if the best man marries, he looks down upon his bedfellow, or if he excels. ^D These things are common to the Celtic tribes, and the Thracian and Scythian; common also to the courage of both men and women; for the latter cultivate the fields, and having given birth they serve the men, having laid those down in their own place. And often in their labors they wash and swaddle them, having inclined toward some stream. Posidonius says that his own host, Charmolaus the Massalian, narrated to him that he had hired men and women together for digging; and one of the women, having been seized with labor pains, went off a little way from the work, and having given birth, she returned at once to the work, so as not to lose her wages; and he, seeing her working with difficulty, and not knowing the cause at first, learned it later, and let her go, having given her the wage. She, having carried the child to a fountain, washed him, and swaddled him in what she had, and brought him home safe.

^A Indeed, women perform just as much as men: they keep house, they hunt, and they tend the flocks. *Even the Cretan hound has followed the tracks of the stag.* Philosophy, therefore, is to be practiced by women equally with men, even if the males happen to carry off the first prizes in all things, unless they prove themselves soft and effeminate. Instruction and virtue, therefore, are necessary for the whole human race, if indeed they are to strive for happiness. And how is it that Euripides does not write inconsistently when he says at one time: *“Any wife is inferior to her husband, even if the best of men marries the most highly esteemed,”* and at another time: ^B *“Every chaste woman is the servant of her husband, but she who is not chaste surpasses in folly the one who lives with her.”* *...For there is nothing better or more excellent anywhere, than when man and wife dwell in the same house with one mind...* The "head," therefore, is that which holds the chief place. If, then, *“the Lord is the head of the man, and the man is the head of the woman,”* then the man is the lord of the wife, as he is *“the image and glory of God.”* On account of this, he writes also in the Epistle to the Ephesians: *“Submitting yourselves to one another in the fear of God. Let wives be subject to their own husbands, as to the Lord; for the man is the head of the woman, as also Christ is the head of the Church; he is the savior of the body. But as the Church is subject to Christ, so also let wives be to their husbands in all things. Husbands, love your wives, ^C as Christ also loved the Church; so also ought husbands to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife, loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh.”* And now, in the Epistle to the Colossians, he says: *“Wives, be subject to your husbands, as it is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and do not be...”*

embittered toward them. Children, obey your parents in everything; for this is well-pleasing to the Lord. Fathers, do not irritate your children, so that they may not lose heart. Slaves, obey in everything those who are your masters according to the flesh, not with eye-service as men-pleasers, but in simplicity of heart, fearing the Lord. And whatever you do, ^A work from the soul, as serving the Lord and not men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance; for you serve the Lord Christ. For the one who does wrong will be paid back for the wrong he has done; and there is no respect of persons. Masters, grant to your slaves what is just and fair, knowing that you also have a master in heaven, where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free, but Christ is all and in all.”* And the earthly Church is an image of the heavenly one; which, indeed, ^B we pray to happen: *“On earth as it is in heaven.”* Having put on bowels of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, patience; bearing with one another, and forgiving ^C each other, if anyone has a complaint against anyone; just as Christ forgave us, so also must we. And above all these things exists love, which is the bond of perfection; and let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, into which you were also called in one body; and be thankful. For nothing prevents the same Scripture from being cited often for the shame of Marcion, if by any means he might be changed, having been persuaded; learning that the believer ought to be thankful to the creator God, who called us and preached the Gospel in the body. From these things the unity that is of faith is clear to us; and it has been shown who the perfect man is. So that even if some people are unwilling and resist with all their might, ^D and even if punishments threaten from a husband or a master, both the servant and the woman will practice philosophy. Furthermore, even a free man, even if a tyrant threatens him with death, and even if he is led to court and dragged to ultimate punishments, and comes into danger regarding all his possessions and fortunes, will in no way abstain from the true worship of God. Nor will they ever give up—neither the woman who lives with a bad husband, nor the son if he has a bad father, nor the slave if he has a wicked master—courageously pursuing virtue with a strong and noble soul. But as it is beautiful and honorable for a man both for the sake of virtue, and for

^A his own liberty, and for himself, so it is also for a woman; for this is not a property of the male nature, but of the good. Therefore, the old man, and the young man, and the slave, faithfully obeying the commandments, shall live, and if need be, shall die—which would be to be brought to life through death. We know, indeed, that children, and women, and slaves have often, even against the wishes of fathers, and masters, and husbands, become the best of people. Therefore, those who intend to live piously ought to be no less ready when some appear to hinder them; but I think it is all the more fitting for them to hasten and to contend even more fervently, so that, not being defeated, they may not fall away from the best and most necessary ^B resolutions. For I do not think that any comparison can be made as to whether it is better to be enrolled in the fellowship of the Almighty, or to choose the darkness of the demons. For those things which are done by us for the sake of others, we would do at any time, looking to them, and reckoning this as the measure—namely, that which is pleasing to them—for whose sake the things seem to be done. But those things which are done rather for our own sake than for the sake of others ought to be done by us with equal zeal, whether they seem to please some people or do not so seem. And if some of those things which are indifferent have attained such honor that they seem to be desirable and to be chosen even against the wishes of some, much more must it be considered that one should contend for virtue, looking to nothing else than that which can be rightly and honorably done, whether it seems so to others or not.

Beautifully, therefore, does Epicurus also write to Menoeceus: ^C “Let no one, while young, delay the study of philosophy, nor when he is old, let him grow weary of philosophizing; for no one is either too young or too old for the health of the soul. But he who says that the time for philosophizing has not yet arrived, or has already passed, is like one who says that the time for happiness has not yet arrived, or has already passed. Therefore, both the young and the old must philosophize: the one, so that as he grows old he may grow young in good things through the favor of what has been done; the other, so that he may be at once young and old, through the absence of fear concerning the future.”

CHAPTER IX.

He collects into one and illustrates what Christ has said regarding the benefits of martyrdom.

^A *I say to you: Everyone who shall confess in me before men, the Son of man shall also confess in him before the angels of God. But he who has denied me before men shall be denied before the angels of God. For whoever shall be ashamed of me, or of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of man also shall be ashamed of him, when he comes into the glory of his Father with his angels. Everyone therefore who shall confess in me before men, I also will confess in him before my Father who is in heaven. And when they bring you into the synagogues, and to the magistrates and powers, be not anxious how you shall answer, or what you shall say; for the Holy Spirit shall teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.*

^B Heracleon, the most esteemed of the school of Valentinus, explaining this passage, says word for word: "Confession, indeed, is one thing by faith and the establishment of life, and another by voice. And the confession which is made by voice is also made before the powers, which alone, he says, many do not rightly consider to be confession. But even hypocrites can use this confession. But neither is this thing, when taken universally, found to be so. For not all who are saved have used that confession which is made by voice, and departed. Among whom are Matthew, Philip, Thomas, Levi, and many others."

And the confession through the voice is not universal, but partial. But the universal is that which he now speaks of, which takes place in works and deeds corresponding to the faith in Him. And this confession is followed by the partial one, which is made before the powers, if there be need, and if reason compels. For he will also confess rightly by voice, having first confessed rightly by his disposition. And he spoke well concerning those who ^C confess, "in me," but concerning those who deny, he added only "me." For these, even if they confess him with their voice, deny him, in that they do not confess him by their action. But those alone are they who confess in him who live in the confession and action which is according to him, in whom he himself also confesses, ^D having enveloped them and being possessed by them. Therefore

^A “he can never deny himself.” But they deny him who are not in him. For he did not say, “Whoever shall deny in me,” but, “me.” For no one who is in him ever denies him. And that phrase “before men” applies both to those who are being saved and likewise to the Gentiles, among some by their manner of life, and among others by their voice; wherefore they can never deny him; but they deny him who are not in him. Such is the account of Heracleon; and in other respects he seems to agree with us regarding this passage, but he failed to note this: that even if some have not confessed Christ “before men” by their action and life, yet in that they confessed him by voice in the courts and, being tortured even to death, did not deny him, they are seen to have believed from a settled disposition of mind. ^B And a disposition which is confessed, especially one that is not turned even by death, performs, as it were, a cutting off of all the passions which were generated through the desire of the body; for it is, so to speak, at the end of life, a complete repentance all at once in accordance with their action, and a true confession toward Christ, with the voice bearing witness. But if the “Spirit of the Father” bears witness in us, how are we still hypocrites, those whom he said witness by voice alone? Yet it will be granted to some, if it be expedient, to declare the reason of their religion, so that by the martyrdom, or testimony and confession, all may be helped—those in the Church being confirmed, while those from the Gentiles who have curiously sought for salvation are led to wonder and to the faith; and the rest are seized with amazement. Therefore one must confess in every case, for this lies within our power; but to declare the reason of one’s religion—this is not always to be done, for this is not also within our power. “He that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved,” ^C for who among sound-thinking men would not choose to reign in God, rather than serve? “Some therefore confess that they know God,” as the Apostle says, “but by their works they deny him: being abominable, and incredulous, and to every good work reprobate.” But they, even if they have confessed nothing else, have at least performed one good work at the end of life. Martyrdom, therefore, seems to be a purging of sins with glory. Furthermore, the Shepherd says, “You shall escape the operation of the wild beast, if your heart shall be pure and blameless.” Moreover, the Lord himself says, “Satan has demanded you,” he says, “to sift you; but I have prayed.” Therefore, the Lord alone, for the sake of the purging of the men who were plotting against him and of the unbelievers, ^D “drank the cup.” Following his example, the apostles, as those who are in truth Gnostics and perfect, suffered for the Churches just as they established them. Thus, therefore, and those who follow in the steps of the Lord.

^A Gnostics ought to conduct themselves so that no sin may fall upon them, and that, because of their love for the Lord, they may love their neighbor also: so that if any contingency should call them forth, they may, for the sake of the Church, endure afflictions without causing scandal, and "drink the cup." Whoever, however, bears witness by their deeds in life, and by their words in a court of law, whether they await hope or dread fear, these are better than those who confess salvation only with their mouth. But if one should also advance further to love, this person is truly blessed and a genuine martyr, having confessed perfectly, both to the commandments and to God through the Lord; having loved whom, he acknowledged his brother, having given up his whole self for the sake of God, returning the man who is demanded as if ^B a deposit, gratefully and lovingly.

CAPUT X.

He severely rebukes those who offered themselves as judges.

When, on the other hand, He says: "When they persecute you in this city, flee to the other," He does not exhort us to flee because being persecuted is in itself an evil, nor does He command us to avoid death through flight as though we were afraid of it; rather, He wishes us to be the cause or accomplice of no evil to anyone—not to ourselves, nor to him who persecutes, nor to him who kills. For in a certain way He announces to us that we should be on our guard. But he who does not obey is rash and recklessly exposes himself to danger. If, however, he who kills "the man of God" sins against God, then he who presents himself to the tribunal is also held guilty of his death; such a man would be one who does not avoid ^C persecution, but offers himself to be captured through audacity. This is the one who, as far as it is in his power, assists the wickedness of him who persecutes. And if he even provokes him, he is fully the cause, having stirred up the wild beast. Likewise, if he should provide some occasion for a fight, [or] punishment, or a lawsuit, or enmity, [he] has been the source of persecution. For this reason, let no one...

(48) "Announces": The text means "gives notice," but it can also be taken to mean "defers": which he says shortly after, "delivers himself to the magistrate."

(49) "Man of God": The phrase is used by the Apostle Paul, 1 Tim. vi, 11; and II Tim. iii, 17: "That the man of God may be perfect." He uses it both for a bishop who, of course, by God's command, presides over the people in those things which are of God, and calls him "man of God." In the Old Testament, "men of God" or "men of God" are called prophets, as if they were families of God; as "Moses, Samuel, David, Elijah, and others." Clement used the phrase in a broader sense for any man who has addicted himself to God, or any faithful Christian.

(50) "Delivering himself": Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, lib. IV, cap. 15: "After a great uproar had arisen at the shouts, a certain Phrygian by race, Quintus by name, who had recently arrived from Phrygia, having seen the wild beasts and the threats made on their account, weakened and faltered in his soul, and in the end gave up on salvation." The account of the aforementioned writing showed that this man, with excessive hastiness and not out of piety, leaped to the tribunal with others; but having been brought in, he gave a clear example to all not to be so recklessly and irreverently audacious in such matters. "But he who is truly brave, having a manifest danger because of his zeal for the many, cheerfully accepts everything that comes; in this way, he is separated from others who are called martyrs, whether those who provided pretexts for themselves, throwing themselves—I know not how—into dangers (for it is just to speak well); or those who avoid them according to the right reason, and then, [the Lord] truly having called them, eagerly give themselves, etc."

^D

hold on to nothing of the things in this life, but even to give the tunic to him who takes away the mantle ^A (52); not only that we may remain free from undue affection, but that we may not by defending them render those who contend against us in judgment savage, and through ourselves provoke them to blaspheme the Name.

CHAPTER XI.

He replies to the objection: If God cares for you, why do you suffer?

If they themselves also had known the truth, all would have leaped upon the way ^A, but there would have been no election. But in fact our faith, being "the light of the world" [a], convicts unbelief. "For Anytus and Melitus may kill me, but they cannot harm me in any way; for I do not think it is permitted that the better should be harmed by the worse." So that each one of us may say with confidence: "The Lord is my helper; I will not fear what man shall do unto me" [b]. "For the souls of the just are in the hand of God, and no torment shall touch them" [c].

CHAPTER XII.

He refutes the opinion of Basilides, who considers martyrdom a kind of punishment.

Basilides, in the twenty-third book of his *Exegetica*, concerning those who are punished for martyrdom, says in these very words: "For I say ^B, as many as fall into those things which..."

^A ...from one age to another? But if we are wise, we shall offer thanks to those who have provided for us the occasion of a swift migration, if we become martyrs for the sake of love. If not, we would have appeared to many to be evil men. But if they themselves also had known the truth, all indeed would have rushed into the way; but there would have been no election. But in fact our faith, as it is ^A "the light of the world" [a], reproves infidelity. "For Anytus and Melitus will indeed kill me, but they will in no way harm me. For I do not deem it right that that which is better should be harmed by that which is worse." Therefore each one of us says securely and confidently: "The Lord is my helper, I will not fear what man shall do to me" [b]. "For the souls of the just are in the hand of God, and no torment shall touch them" [c].

CHAPTER XII.

He refutes the opinion of Basilides, who considers martyrdom a kind of punishment.

Basilides however, in the twenty-third book of his *Exegetica*, concerning those who are punished in martyrdom, says these things in his own words: "For I say ^B, whoever fall into these, which..."

[a] Matt. V, 14. [b] Ps. CXVII, 6. [c] Sap. III, 1.

The word "condemned" (κατάδικοι), which is not expressed in the version, by which are signified those who are "damned in judgment," as opposed to those who are only "subjected to reproaches": the word was poorly neglected, and simply placed, where it should have been ^C translated, "because they are Christians by nature." This was indeed the hypothesis of Basilides, about which Irenaeus said nothing, but Clement testifies in several other places. Thus, toward the end of this book IV of the *Stromata*, page 540, Basilides says that the "elect," that is, Christians, are by nature supramundane. And toward the beginning of book V of the *Stromata*, p. 556: "By nature someone knows God, as Basilides opines." And presently: "Nature and substance... and he calls faith not the rational consent of a soul using free will." Concerning the followers of Basilides also, he reports the same in *Strom.* book IV, p. 563, and in book II, p. 427. But I add yet another thing for the emendation of the recited fragment: namely, instead of "who in act indeed committed nothing sinful in himself, but has within him that which sinned," read, "who in act indeed committed nothing, but has within him the capacity to sin (in himself, that is, the faculty of sinning): for even a little later in the apodosis, which corresponds to this protasis, he says in the same way: etc., 'having in himself the faculty of sinning.'" ^D Moreover, the words recited thus far are certainly to be referred to those whom Origen, in his *Commentary on Matthew*, brushes over lightly: "The discourses of Basilides, 'detracting from those who struggle unto death for the truth, so that they might confess Jesus before men.'" For he teaches to them that every martyrdom is a punishment for sins committed before, if not in act, then at least in will. Which Clemens rightly refutes as absurd, writing on page 507, among other things: "But if martyrdom is retribution through punishment, and faith also, and the teaching for which martyrdom is undergone: these are therefore collaborators of punishment—than which what else could be more absurd?" See more in the same place. But as for sins committed beforehand and to be punished by martyrdom...

^A they are brought to this good result by the kindness of Him who leads them, being truly accused of other things, that they may not suffer as condemned criminals for known evils, nor be reviled as an adulterer or a murderer, but because they are Christians; which fact will console them, so that they may not even seem to be suffering [for their own sins]. Even if someone who has not sinned at all happens to be subjected to suffering, rare as this is, yet even he will not suffer anything through the designs prepared by the power [of the world], but he will suffer just as the infant suffers who seemed to have committed no sin." He subjoins a little further down: "As therefore the infant, who has not sinned before, or at least in act has committed no sin in himself, but possesses in himself that which has sinned, after it has been thrown into suffering, is benefited by gaining many difficult things: so also, if even a perfect person who has committed no sin in act suffers, and has suffered, he has suffered similarly to the infant; having in himself the will to sin, and yet, not having received an occasion to sin, he did not commit sin: wherefore it is not to be imputed to him that he did not sin. For just as he who wishes to commit adultery is an adulterer, even if he does not achieve the effect; and he who wishes to commit murder is a murderer, even if he cannot kill: so also even him whom I call one who has not sinned, if I see him suffering, even if he has done no evil, I will call the wishing to sin evil. ^B For I will call everything else [that happens to him] rather than call the providence [of God] evil." He then subjoins, speaking even of the Lord openly as if of a man: "If, however, leaving aside all these arguments, you come to press me by adducing examples, for instance: 'This man therefore sinned; for this man suffered': if you allow me, I shall say: 'He did not sin, but was similar to the infant who was suffering.' But if you press the argument more vehemently, I will say: 'Whatever man you name, he is a man, but God is just. For there is no one who is pure,' as someone said, 'from filth [Job xiv, 4].'" But the hypothesis of Basilides says that the soul, which had sinned before in another life, suffers punishment here, the elect [soul] being punished honorably through martyrdom, the other being cleansed ^C by its own proper punishment. And how is this true, when it lies with us to confess and be punished, or not? But the hypothesis of Basilides says that the soul, which had sinned before in another life, suffers punishment here. This noble man [Basilides] thinks more after the manner of Plato, that the soul, being divine from above, was rendered effeminate by desire and came hither into generation and decay.

On the Hypothesis of Basilides

Basilides understood sins as having been perpetrated not only in the same body, but in another; since, ^D as Clement noted in the same place, he defends this in these words: "But the hypothesis of Basilides declares that the soul, which had previously sinned in another life, suffers punishment here." I return now to the words cited previously, from which Clement concludes that Basilides dared to call Christ the Lord a man subject to sin, as he noted on page 507. Now these words do not state this clearly, nor indeed do they make any explicit mention of the Savior; but perhaps from the entire context it was evident to Clement that Christ the Lord was pointed to by Basilides. This locus is corrupt, and the conjecture of the illustrious Grabe does not please me entirely. I would prefer, "that it has not committed [sin] in act, but has in itself that which sinned," namely the soul. For according to the opinion of Basilides, souls which had previously sinned in another life suffer punishments here. Whence Clement says a little later: "But according to the hypothesis of Basilides, the soul which had previously sinned in another life suffers punishment here." Similarly, he said above concerning Julius Cassianus the Valentinian, *Stromata* III, page 535: "However, this illustrious man thinks [about the soul] more than is fitting in a Platonic way, that the soul, although divine at the beginning, was made effeminate by desire, and comes hither to generation and decay."

more than is fitting in a Platonic way, that the soul, although divine at the beginning, was made effeminate by desire, and comes hither to generation and decay. ^A For the providence according to Basilides is dissolved in the case of one who is about to deny. I will ask him, therefore, concerning the confessor who has been seized: will he suffer martyrdom and be punished according to providence, or not? For if he denies, he will not be punished; but if he [Basilides] shall say that both the outcome and the fact that such a person ought not to be punished are the destruction of those who will deny by providence, he will inadvertently offer testimony. But how, then, is the most glorious reward in heaven still laid up for him who has suffered martyrdom because he suffered it? And if providence did not allow the sinful man to come to the point of sinning, it becomes unjust on both counts: it neither rescues the one dragged to punishment for the sake of justice, nor does it rescue the one who wished to do wrong—the former while he is acting according to what he desired, the latter while it [providence] obstructs the work, and does not justly treat the sinful man. Furthermore, how is he not impious, deifying the devil, yet daring to call a man subject to sin the Lord? For the devil tests us, knowing indeed what we are, but not knowing whether we will endure; rather, he tests us because he wishes to shake us from the faith and bring us under his own power. This is the only thing permitted to him—partly because we must be saved by ourselves, having received opportunities from the commandments, partly for the shaming of the one who tested and failed, partly for the strengthening of those in the Church, and partly for the conscience of those who have admired the steadfastness of the martyrs. ^B If, however, martyrdom is a retribution by means of punishment, then faith and doctrine also—through which comes martyrdom—are likewise contributors to punishment. What could be more absurd than this? But as to those doctrines—whether the soul migrates from bodies into bodies, and about the devil—these shall be discussed at the proper time. But for now, let us add this to what has been said: Where then is faith, if martyrdom is undergone as retribution for sins previously committed? Where is the love for God, which suffers and endures persecution for the sake of the truth? Where is the praise for one who has confessed, or the blame for one who has denied? To what purpose is a right conduct of life still useful, to mortify the desires, and to hate none of the creatures? If, however, as Basilides himself says, we have supposed one part of what is called the will of God to be "to love all things," because they all conserve reason and proportion toward the universe; and ^C another part "to desire nothing," and a third "to hate nothing," then there will be punishments by the will of God; which is impious to conceive. For neither did the Lord suffer by the will of the Father, nor are those who are persecuted persecuted by the will of God; since it must be one of two things: either persecution is something good—on account of the will of God—or those who inflict it and cause affliction are innocent. But indeed, nothing happens without the will of the Lord of all. It remains, then, to say briefly that such things happen because God has not prevented them; for this alone preserves both the providence and the goodness of God. Not that ^D

we should think He produces afflictions by His own working (far be it from us even to think such a thing), but that we should be persuaded He does not prevent those who do produce them, and that He uses the deeds of adversaries to elicit good from them. "I will tear down," He says, "the wall, and it shall be for a trampling." ^B For providence is accustomed to educate us by this art: in some cases indeed for the sake of the sins of each individual; but in the case of the Lord and the apostles, for ours. Immediately the divine Apostle says: "For this is the will of God, your sanctification, that you abstain from fornication, and that each of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in the passion of desire, like the nations who do not know the Lord; and that no one overreach and defraud his brother in the matter, because the Lord is the avenger for all these things; as we also forewarned you and testified. For God did not call us for Uncleanness, but in sanctification. Therefore, he who rejects does not reject man, but God, who also gave His holy Spirit to you." On account of this our sanctification, then, the Lord was not prevented from suffering.

If, therefore, one of them, in defense of these views, says that the martyr is punished for the sins committed before this migration into the body, but that he will receive the fruit of the life lived here hereafter, as the administration has been so ordained, we shall ask him whether the retribution ^C comes from providence. For if it is not of the divine administration, the counsel and dispensation of expiation perish, and their hypothesis falls to the ground. But if the expiations are from providence, the punishments also are from providence. Now providence, even if it begins to be moved by the prince, as they say, is nevertheless intermixed and implanted in substances together with the generation of the substances themselves, by the God of the universe. Since these things are so, it is necessary that they themselves confess either that punishment is not unjust—and then those who condemn and persecute the martyrs act rightly and justly—or that persecutions are carried out by the will of God. Therefore, trouble and fear do not befall things, as they say, like rust to iron, but they come upon the soul from its own will. But much remains to be said concerning these matters, which will be dealt with in due time hereafter.

CHAPTER XIII

He refutes Valentinus's trifles concerning the abolition of death

Valentinus, moreover, in a certain homily, writes word for word:

^A "From the beginning you are immortal, and children of eternal life, and you wished to distribute death among yourselves, that you might spend and consume it, and that death might die in you and through you. For when you dissolve the world, but are not yourselves dissolved, you are lords of creation and of all corruption." He posits a genus that is saved by nature, similarly to Basilides; but he says that this distinct genus has come down to us from above, for the abolition of death; and that the generation of death is the work of him who created the world. Wherefore he thus interprets that Scripture: "No man shall see the face of God, and live," as if He were the cause of death. He hints at this God, writing in these terms: "As much as the image is inferior to the living face, so much is the world inferior to the living Aeon." What then is the cause of the image? The majesty of the face, which provided the likeness for the painter, that it might be honored by His name. For the form was not found authentically, but they filled out the name which was lacking in the creation. The invisible nature of God also contributes to the belief in what was fashioned; ^B for he called the Creator, as being invoked as God and Father, the image of the true God, and a "prophet"; but he called Wisdom the "painter," whose creation is the image, to the glory of Him who is invisible. For whatsoever proceeds from a conjugation is a *pleroma*; but whatsoever proceeds from one is an image. And since that which is his manifest form does not exist, the soul comes from the midway point, that which is distinct; and this is the breathing of the distinct spirit, and, in general, it is breathed into the soul, in the image, of the spirit. And, to state the matter in sum, they say that what is spoken of the Creator, who was made according to the image, was prophesied in the case of the generation of man, in the order of a sensible image; and indeed they transfer the likeness to themselves, handing down that the insertion of the distinct spirit was unknown to the Creator. When, therefore, we treat of the fact that there is one God, who is preached through the Law and the Prophets and the Gospel, we shall discuss this; for the discourse is an authoritative one; but we must meet that which is pressing. If the distinct genus ^C arrives for the purpose of abolishing death, not Christ [abolished] death. ^D

unless he himself also be said to be of the same essence with them; but if he abolished it in this respect, so that it might not touch the distinct genus, do not these, the mimics of the Creator, who breathe the life from above into their own image—[the image] of the soul which is from the intermediate [state]—according to the choice of their dogma, abolish death? Even if they say this happens through the mother, or if they say they wage war against death together with Christ, they openly confess that hidden dogma, inasmuch as they do not fear to attack the divine power of the Creator, and as if they were better, they attempt to correct his creation, striving to save the animal image which He was unable to deliver from destruction. But the Lord ^B would also be better and more excellent than God the Creator: for the Son would never contend with the Father, and that among gods. But that He is the Father of the Son, the Creator of all things, the Almighty Lord, we have deferred the consideration of that—by which we promised to discourse against the heresies—to the point of showing that He alone is the one proclaimed by Him. But the Apostle, writing to us concerning the endurance of afflictions, says: "For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake; having the same conflict which ye saw in me, and now hear to be in me. If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the spirit, if any bowels and mercies, fulfill ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind." ^C But if he is offered upon the sacrifice and service of the faith, rejoicing and congratulating those to whom the Apostle speaks, calling the Philippians "partakers of grace," how does he call them "of one accord" and "animal"? Similarly, also writing concerning Timothy and himself: "For I have no man likeminded, who will naturally care for your state. For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's." Let not, therefore, the aforementioned men or even the Phrygians call us "animal" by way of reproach: for now even they call those who do not attend to the "new prophecy" "animal," against whom we shall discourse when we deal with prophecy. Therefore, it behooves the perfect man to exercise love, and from hence to reach out to the friendship of God, fulfilling His ^D commandments through love. But when He commands us to love our enemies, we are not commanded to love evil, nor impiety, or adultery, or theft, but the thief, and the impious man, and the adulterer, not in that he sins and defiles the appellation of human by his active operation, but in that he is human, and a work of God. Indeed, sin exists in operation, not in essence; wherefore it is not the work of God. And [our] enemies are they who sin...

are called sinners, who are enemies of the commandments which they have not even obeyed, having become just as friends are those who have obeyed—the former designated by their alienation [from God], the latter by their reconciliation [with Him], originating from their own free choice. For neither is enmity nor sin [anything] without an enemy and a sinner. And the command not to covet anything does not teach us to have no desire—as though the objects of desire were things alien—as those have supposed who dogmatize that there is another Creator besides the first God; nor [does it teach this] as if generation itself were something loathsome and evil (for these are impious opinions). But we say that the things of the world are ^B alien, not as being absurd nor as not belonging to God, the Lord of all, but because we do not remain in them for all time. In respect to possession, they are things alien, and are to be handed down to our successors; but in respect to use, they are our own, for whose sake also they were made. Yet we use them only insofar as it is necessary for us to be with them. Therefore, one must use the things that are allowed according to natural appetite, well, avoiding any excess and over-attachment to the things being used.

CHAPTER XIV.

On the love of all, even of enemies.

How great, too, is his kindness? "Love your enemies," he says; "bless those who curse you" ^C and pray for those who despitefully use you, and the like. To which he adds: "That you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven," hinting at that assimilation which refers to God. Again he says: "Be well-disposed to your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him." The "adversary" is not the body, as some wish, but the devil and those who are likened to him, who travels along with us in this earthly life through those men who emulate his works. It is not possible, then, that those who confess themselves to be Christ's, but who are occupied with the works of the devil, should not suffer the most hostile things. For it is written: "Lest by chance he delivers you to the judge,"—and the judge is the minister of the devil's authority—"and the judge to the minister." "For I am persuaded that neither death," which is brought ^D by those who persecute, "nor life," which is passed in this present time, "nor angels," that is, the apostates, "nor principalities"—now the principality of Satan is the life he chooses; for such are the authorities and...

^A powers of darkness—"nor things present," in which we are for the time of this life, just as the hope of the soldier is, and the gain of the merchant; "nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature," regarding the operation upon man, resists the operation of his faith, who acts by his own free will. The name of "creature" is, however, equivocally attributed to operations, as being our work: such an operation, therefore, "shall not be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." You have the summary of the Gnostic martyr.

CHAPTER XV.

Of avoiding scandal.

^A For those who wish to practice self-control, let us become a pattern, not building ourselves up in a way that gives offense by eating the things placed before us, or by keeping company with a woman in an untoward manner; and above all, those to whom such a dispensation has been entrusted ought to stand forth as a blameless pattern for those who are learning. “For although I was free from all men, I made myself a servant to all,” he says, “that I might gain the more. And everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things.” But “the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.” Therefore, for the sake of conscience, one must abstain from those things from which one ought to abstain. I do not mean one’s own conscience—for it is possessed of knowledge—but the conscience of the other, lest he be built up in an evil way, being a man of little knowledge who imitates what he does not understand, ^B becoming a scorner instead of a magnanimous man. “For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience? If I by grace partake, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? Whether therefore you eat, or drink, or whatsoever you do, do all to the glory of God”; that is, do that which is permitted by the rule of faith.

CHAPTER XVI.

That certain places of Scripture illustrate the constancy, patience, and charity of the martyrs.

“For with the heart man believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” Therefore, the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in him shall not be ashamed.” That is, the word of faith which we preach: that if you confess the word with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. ^C He points directly to a perfect righteousness, complete in both deed and contemplation. “Bless those who persecute you. Bless, and curse not; for our boasting is this: the testimony of our conscience, that in holiness and sincerity we have known God,” through this slight occasion manifesting the work of charity, that “not in fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world.” These things the Apostle says concerning knowledge. But the common doctrine of the faith he has called “the savor of knowledge” in his second epistle to the Corinthians. “For until this day the same veil remains upon many in the reading of the Old Testament,”

^A a veil which is not removed except by conversion to the Lord. For this reason he also showed the resurrection to those who are able to discern it, even while the life that creeps upon its belly is still in the flesh. 12 Whence he also called such persons “offspring of vipers,” those who are given to pleasures and lusts, those who serve their belly and their genitals, and who cut off one another's heads on account of worldly desires. 13 “My little children, let us not love in word, nor in tongue,” says John, 14 teaching that we should be perfect, “but in deed and in truth. In this we shall know that we are of the truth.” But if “God is love,” love is also piety toward God; and “there is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” And again, it is written for the one who desires to become a Gnostic: ^B “But be an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in love, 15 in faith, in purity.” For the perfection of faith, I think, is distinguished from common faith. And indeed, the divine Apostle provides the rule of the Gnostic through these words, writing thus: “For I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, to be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know 17 how to abound. I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need: I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.” 18 ^C And speaking this also to others in order to instill shame in them, 19 he does not fear to say: “But call to remembrance the former days, in which, after ye were illuminated, ye endured a great fight of afflictions; partly, whilst ye were made a gazingstock both by reproaches and afflictions; and partly, whilst ye became companions of them that were so used. For ye had compassion of my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your goods, knowing in yourselves that ye have in heaven a better and an enduring substance. 20 Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward. For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise. For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” ^D Then he provides for you a swarm of exam-

things divine. “For, through faith,” he says, “did they not ^A accomplish through patience (22) those who experienced mockery and scourging (23), and furthermore bonds and imprisonment? They were stoned, they were tempted (24), they died by the slaughter of the sword; they wandered about in sheepskins, in goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented; of whom the world was not worthy; wandering in deserts, and in mountains, and in caves, and in the holes of the earth. And all these (25), having been testified to through faith, did not receive the promise of God;” it remains to understand what is said by omission, “alone.” He adds, therefore: “God having foreseen something better concerning us, (for he was good (26)) that they should not be made perfect without us.” Therefore, let us also, “having so great a cloud ^B surrounding us, holy and transparent (27) of witnesses, laying aside every weight, and the sin which so easily besets us, let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith.” That he speaks of one salvation in Christ for both the just and for us (28), he has clearly stated before; yet no less, when speaking about Moses, he adds: “Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt (29); for he looked to the reward. By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king; for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.” Divine Wisdom says concerning the martyrs: “They seemed in the eyes of the foolish to die, and their departure was counted as an affliction, and their journey from us as a destruction; but they are in peace. For if in the sight of men they were punished, their hope is full of immortality.” Then he adds, teaching ^C that martyrdom is a glorious purification: “And having been chastened a little, they shall be greatly benefited; for God tested them;” that is, for the proof and to the shame of the tempter, he allowed them to be tempted; “and he found them worthy of himself, to be called sons—that is to say. As gold in the furnace he proved them, and as a whole burnt offering of sacrifice he accepted them; and in the time of their visitation they shall shine, and as sparks they shall run to and fro among the stubble; they shall judge the nations, and have dominion over the people, and the Lord shall be king over them for ever.” ^D

CHAPTER XVII.

Furthermore, Clement the Apostle also, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, while himself describing for us a certain image of the Gnostic, says: ^A “For who that has sojourned among you has not tested your perfect and firm faith in every virtue? Who has not admired your modest and seemly piety in Christ? And who has not proclaimed the magnificence of your hospitality? And who has not counted blessed your perfect and stable knowledge? For you did all things without respect of persons, and you walked in the ordinances of God,” and so forth. Then more clearly: ^B “Let us therefore fix our eyes on those who have perfectly served his magnificent glory.”

^A Let us take Enoch, who, having been found righteous in obedience, was translated; and Noah, who was saved because he believed; and Abraham, who was called the “friend of God” on account of his faith and hospitality, and was addressed as the father of Isaac. Because of hospitality and piety, Lot was saved from Sodom; because of faith and hospitality, Rahab the harlot was saved. Because of patience and faith, they walked about in sheepskins and goatskins and in garments woven of camel’s hair, preaching the kingdom of Christ. We speak of Elijah and Elisha, Ezekiel and ^B John, the prophets. For Abraham, who was called the “friend of God” on account of his free faith, was not puffed up by glory, but in modesty said, “But I am earth and ashes.” And regarding Job, it is written thus: “Job was righteous and blameless, truly fearing God, refraining from every evil.” He is the one who through patience overcame the tempter, and at once served as a witness and was witnessed to by God; who, embracing humility, says: “No one is clean from filth, not even if his life be but one day.” Moses, “the faithful servant in all his house,” said ^C to Him who gave responses from the bush: “Who am I, that you send me? For I am weak of voice and slow of tongue, to minister the voice of the Lord through human speech.” And again: “But I am a vapor from a pot. For God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” Now, likewise, David, of whom the Lord bears witness, saying: “I found a man according to my heart, David the son of Jesse; I anointed him with holy oil,” but he himself also says to God: “Have mercy on me, O God, according to your great mercy; and according to the multitude of your mercies blot out my transgression. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin; for I know my iniquity, and my sin is before me always.” ^D Then, hinting at the sin that does not fall under the Law, showing his modesty in a gnostic manner, he adds: “Against you only have I sinned, and the...

evil before you I have done.” For Scripture says somewhere: ^A “The Spirit of the Lord is a lamp, searching the inner chambers of the belly.” And to the extent that one, by doing what is just, becomes more gnostic, the illuminating Spirit draws closer to him. Thus the Lord draws near to the just, and nothing of the thoughts and reasonings which we form escapes Him; I speak of the Lord Jesus, who by the almighty will is the overseer of our hearts, whose blood was sanctified for us. Let us, therefore, respect those who preside over us, and let us reverence the elders; let us honor the young; let us teach them the discipline of God. For blessed is he who shall have taught and done the things of the Lord as is fitting; but this is the mark of a noble and magnificent soul, and of one who is devoted to the contemplation of the truth. Let us correct our wives toward that which is good; let them show the lovable character of chastity, let them demonstrate the simple will of their own meekness; let them make the moderation of their tongue manifest ^B through silence; let them offer their love not according to partialities, but equally to all those who fear God in holiness. Let our children participate in the discipline of the Lord; let them learn what humility avails with God, what pure love can do with God, how the fear of the Lord is good and great, saving all who conduct themselves in Him with holiness in a pure heart. For He is the searcher of thoughts and of the deliberations of the mind; whose spirit is in us, and when He wills, He takes it away. All these things the faith which is in Christ confirms. “Come, children,” the Lord says, “listen to me, I will teach you the fear of the Lord. Who is the man that desires life, loving to see good days?” Then…

^A he brings in the Gnostic mystery of the seven and the eight: “Restrain your tongue from evil, and your lips from speaking guile; turn away from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it.” For by these things he hints at *Gnosis*, teaching that it is brought to perfection by both the abstaining from evils and the performance of good deeds, in both word and work. “The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and his ears unto their prayer; but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil, to destroy their memory from the earth.” The Lord cried out and heard, ^B and delivered him from all his afflictions. “For the scourges of the sinners are many; but mercy shall encompass those who hope in the Lord.” He says that one who hopes genuinely and sincerely is encompassed by a multitude of mercy, because it is written in the Epistle to the Corinthians: “Through Jesus Christ our senseless and darkened mind blossoms into the light. Through him the Lord willed that we should taste of immortal *Gnosis*.” ^C Wherefore, also showing more distinctly the property of *Gnosis*, he added: “Since, therefore, these things are manifest, and we have peered into the depths of divine *Gnosis*, we ought to do all things in order, and at the appointed times, which the Lord has commanded us to perform.” Let the wise man, therefore, show his wisdom, not by words only, but in good works. ^D For he himself also calls us through the Holy Spirit thus: “Come, children.”

^A Let the humble man receive testimony, not from himself, but from the fact that it is borne to him by another. Let him who is chaste in the flesh not become arrogant, knowing that it is another who supplies him with continence. See, brethren, by how much the greater knowledge we have been deemed worthy, by so much the more do we lie under danger.

CHAPTER XVIII.

On charity and the curbing of desires.

“Our seemly and chaste conduct, according to Clement, seeks that which is commonly useful, whether one suffers martyrdom, or teaches by act and word; and this in a two-fold way, both unwritten and written. This is charity: to love God and one’s neighbor. This raises one to a height which cannot be explained. ‘Charity covers a multitude of sins;’ charity endures all things, is patient in all things; charity unites us to God, it makes all things to be in harmony. In charity all the elect of God have been perfected; without charity nothing is pleasing to God. Its perfection, he says, cannot be explained. Who is capable of being found in it, unless those whom God Himself has deemed worthy?” ^B Now, the apostle Paul says: “If I should deliver my body,” he says, “but have not charity, I am sounding brass or a clanging cymbal.” If I should have suffered martyrdom, not out of an elect disposition through gnostic charity, but perhaps through fear and the hope of an expected reward, while merely moving my lips to bear testimony and confess the Lord, I am but a common man, resounding the Lord but not knowing Him. For there is also a people who love with their lips; there is also another who delivers his body to be burned. “And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor,” he says, not according to the principle of ^C sharing which proceeds from charity, but according to the principle of remuneration which is expected either from the man himself who is benefited or from the Lord who has promised— “and if I have all faith, so as to move mountains,” and to cast away the passions which darken the mind; if it be not for charity…

I am nothing ^A, as someone who, if compared to him who bears witness gnostically to the multitude, would count for nothing, and as something that makes no difference. All the ^B generations from Adam down to this day have passed away; but they who have been perfected in charity have, through the grace of God, a place among the righteous, who shall be manifested in the visitation of the kingdom of Christ. Charity does not allow one to sin; but if even involuntarily one should fall into some such misfortune through the incursions of the Adversary, imitating David, he will sing: “I will confess to the Lord, and it shall please him more than a young calf that has horns and hoofs. Let the poor see and be glad.” For it says: “Sacrifice to God a sacrifice of praise, and pay to the Lord your vows; and call upon me in the day of your affliction, and I will deliver you, and you shall glorify me; for a sacrifice to God is a broken spirit.” Charity ^C is therefore called even “God,” being good; whose charity does no evil to a neighbor, neither acting unjustly, nor ever retaliating, but doing good to all, without exception, according to the image of God. Therefore, charity is the fulfilling of the law, just as Christ is—that is, the presence of the Lord who loves us, and our teaching and manner of life according to Christ. By charity, then, the commandment not to commit adultery, and not to covet what belongs to one’s neighbor, is perfected ^D, having previously been restrained by fear. The same act, then, has a difference, whether it is done through fear or accomplished through charity, and whether it is performed through faith or gnostically. Deservedly, therefore, the rewards for these are different; for those things are prepared for him who is a gnostic, which “eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have they ascended into the heart of man,” but to him who has merely believed, he bears witness.

^A And finding myself here, I was reminded of a certain man who alleged himself to be a gnostic. For in explaining that text, “But I say to you, whoever looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery,” he did not think that bare lust should be judged, but rather if, through lust, the act that arises from it proceeds further and is carried out in oneself; for in dreams one uses fantasy as well as the body. ^B Therefore, they who have compiled the histories of Bocchoris the just relate the following judgment. A young man, captivated by the love of a harlot, persuades the girl for a certain fixed fee to come to him on the following day. But lust having anticipated the girl in the young man's dream, his desire being fulfilled beyond his expectation, when she whom he loved came to him as had been agreed, he prevents her from entering. She, however, having learned what had happened, demanded the fee, saying that by that means she had satisfied the lover's desire. They went, therefore, to the judge. He, having ordered the young man to shake the purse containing the money in the sun, commanded the harlot to seize the shadow; cleverly ordering that the image of the payment be returned for the image of the ^C intercourse. Now, anyone may dream while the soul assents to the fantasy; but he who looks toward lust dreams in reality—not only, as that alleged gnostic said, if at the same time he conceives the intercourse in his mind as he looks at the woman—for this indeed is already the work of lust as lust—but if one looks at the beauty of a body, the Word says, and the flesh appears beautiful to him for the sake of lust, he is judged as having looked carnally and sinfully, by means of that through which he has marveled. For, on the contrary, he who out of love for the beloved looks at [the soul, does not consider the flesh, but considers the soul beautiful (15),] ^D and because of that [love, he is not judged].

On the Judgment of Bocchoris

(9) Here it has happened that the understanding of humans is meant. (10) Having reached this point, I was reminded of one who claimed to be a gnostic. Explaining the text, “But I say to you: whoever looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery,” he did not deign to judge mere lust, but [only] if the act corresponding to it, proceeding further than the lust itself, is carried out within oneself; for when dreaming, one makes use of the fantasy as well as the body. Hence those who have compiled the histories of Bocchoris the just tell the following judgment (15). A young man, being in love with a harlot, persuades the girl by a certain fee to come to him on the following day. Lust having anticipated the girl in a dream, he, having been satisfied beyond expectation, heard his beloved arrive at the appointed time, yet bars her from entering. She, having learned what occurred, demanded the fee, saying that in this way she had satisfied the lust of the lover for him. They went therefore to the judge. He, having ordered the young man to offer the purse of the payment, and in the sun, ordered the harlot to take hold of the shadow; wittily giving the order to return an image of payment for an image of union (14). A person, indeed, dreams when the soul assents to the fantasy; but he who looks with intent to lust dreams while awake, and not only, as that pseudo-gnostic said, if he accompanies the sight of the woman with a mental intention of intercourse—for that is already the work of lust as lust—but if one looks at the beauty of a body, the Word says, and the flesh appears fair to him for the sake of lust, he is judged as having seen carnally and sinfully, by that which he has marveled at. For, on the contrary, he who loves because of love...

(15) *The judgment being such*: Plutarch in *Demetrius*, p. 901: “The judgment of the Egyptian woman known as Lamia is recounted in opposition to the so-called judgment of Bocchoris. For since a certain man, being in love with an Egyptian harlot named Thonis, asked for a large sum of money, then in his dreams seemed to lie with her and ceased from his lust, Thonis brought a suit against him for the fee; but Bocchoris, having heard the case, ordered the man to carry the money, in the amount requested, in a purse here and there in his hand, and the harlot to take hold of the shadow; as though the shadow were the image of the truth. Lamia did not think this judgment of Bocchoris to be just; for the shadow of the lust did not release the harlot from [the need for] the money, nor did the dream release the young man from loving.” [original-script column: see facsimile]

^A But if anyone should look upon beauty, he does not deem the flesh to be beautiful, but the soul, in my opinion, having admired the body as a statue, through the beauty of which he is himself led on to the Artificer and to that which is truly beautiful. He shows the clear, luminous character of righteousness as a holy sign to the angels who preside over the ascent, ^B I mean the unction of well-pleasingness, the quality of the disposition being placed upon the soul, made lustrous by the permission of the Holy Spirit. This glory that shone upon the face of Moses the people were not able to look upon; and therefore he took a veil for the glory, for the sake of those who looked carnally. For those who bring in some of the things of the world are detained by those who demand the final payment, being weighed down by their own passions; but the man who is naked of those things that fall under the tax, and full of knowledge and of the righteousness that comes from works, they send on their way, praying with him, having blessed the man along with his work: ^C “And his leaf,” it says, “shall not fall,” of the tree of life, which is “nourished by the runnels of waters.” The righteous man is likened to fruit-bearing trees, and not only to those concerning the sacrifice of things on high. ^D There were also, according to the Law, those who were inspectors of blemishes in the sacrifices of the priests. Appetition,

On Appetition and Pleasure

CHAPTER XIX. That both women and men are capable of attaining perfection, a fact which is confirmed by the examples of heroines among others.

Of this perfection, both man and woman may equally partake. Indeed, it was not only Moses who, having heard from God: ^A “I have spoken to you once and twice, saying: I have seen this people, and behold, it is stiff-necked; let me destroy them, and I will blot out their name from under heaven, and I will make you into a great and marvelous nation, and far greater than this,” responded by disregarding his own personal interest and pouring out prayers for the common salvation: “By no means, O Lord; forgive the sin of this people, or blot me also out of the book of the living.” How great was his perfection, that he should prefer to die with the people rather than remain safe alone! ^B But also Judith, who was perfected among women, when the city was besieged, having entreated the elders, entered into the camp of the aliens, despising all danger for the sake of the fatherland, and surrendered herself to the enemies in faith in God. The woman, however, quickly received the rewards of her faith, since she had acted magnificently against the enemy of the faith and had become master of the head of Holofernes. And again, that woman perfected in faith, Esther, delivering Israel from tyrannical power and the cruelty of the ^C satrap, a lone woman clad in fastings, resisted. ^D

against myriad armed right hands, dissolving the tyrannical mandate through faith. And indeed, she tamed him and held back Aman, and preserved Israel unharmed through her perfect prayer to God. For I pass over Susanna and the sister of Moses, as the latter campaigned with the prophet, acting as leader of all the women renowned among the Hebrews for their wisdom; the former, by the superabundance of her modesty and moving even to the point of death, being condemned by lecherous lovers, remained an unflinching martyr of purity. Indeed, the philosopher ^B Dion records a certain woman, Lysidice, who, because of her eminent modesty, would bathe with her tunic on; and Philotera, whenever she was about to enter the bathtub, would quietly draw back the tunic, as much as to cover her nakedness with the water; then, while gradually climbing out again, she would clothe herself. For did not Leana the Attic woman also bear tortures bravely, she who was privy to the plot against Hipparchus set in motion by those around Harmodius and Aristogiton? She uttered not a word, though she was very sorely racked. They say also that the Argolic women, under the leadership of the poetess Telesilla, put to flight Spartans, who were mighty in battle, appearing to them only, and for those women as well procured a fearlessness regarding death. The author of the *Danais* says similar things about the daughters of Danaus in this way: ^C

And then the daughters of Danaus armed themselves swiftly Before the fair-flowing river of lordly Nile.

And the rest. The other poets sing of the fleetness of Atalanta in the hunt, and the affectionate love of Anticlea, and the devotion of Alcestis to her husband, and she who ^D was deemed worthy by the Artificer and Master, the God of the ages; who, seeing the humility of her soul, rescued the people, for whose sake she had put herself in danger.

^A And the fortitude of Macaria and the Hyacinthides. What then?

On the Pythagorean Theano

Did not Theano the Pythagorean reach such a height of philosophy that, when someone looked at her inquisitively and said, "A beautiful arm," she replied, "But not public"? The same gravity is attributed to this other utterance of hers: for when asked, "How soon can a woman enter into the Thesmophorium after intercourse with her husband?" she replied, "With one's own, immediately, but with a stranger, never."

Further, Themisto also, the daughter of Zoilus the Lampsacenian and wife of Leonteus the Lampsacenian, applied herself to Epicurean philosophy; just as Myia, the daughter of Theano, did to the Pythagorean; and Arignote, who wrote of the deeds of Dionysius. ^B All the daughters of Diodorus, who was surnamed Cronus, were dialecticians, as Philo the dialectician says in his *Menexenus*, and whose names he presents as follows: Menexene, Argia, Theognis, Artemisia, Pantaclea. I also remember a certain Cynic; she was called Hipparchia the Maronite, the wife of Crates, on account of whom these "dog-marriages" also became celebrated in the *Poecile*.

On the names of Ulysses and others

His shade reports that he died for the longing of Ulysses, *Odyssey* 11, 202:

But longing for you, and your counsels, radiant Ulysses, and your gentleness, took the honey-sweet life from my spirit.

The names of Atalanta and Alcestis are celebrated everywhere by the poets. Now, Macaria was the daughter of Hercules and Deianira, who, on the advice of an oracle, sacrificed her own life so that she might give the Athenians victory over their enemies. Consult Pausanias in his *Attica*, p. 61. ^C

Comments and observations

(42) Macaria. One should write Macaria.

(43) Theano. Iamblichus in his *Life of Pythagoras*, ch. 27, commemorates two Theanos: one known as the daughter of Brontinus, though others call him Brotinus; the other the wife of Pythagoras; each of whom applied herself to Pythagorean philosophy, so that it is not sufficiently certain to which of them these sayings should be attributed. Theodoret translated this passage of Clement in his sermon *on the Greeks*.

(44) "A beautiful arm." This saying is attributed to the author by Clement, *Paed.* lib. II, cap. 10, p. 258, where see the notes.

(45) "How soon..." Diogenes Laertius, lib. VIII, seg. 43: "But they say that she (Theano), when asked, 'How soon does a woman become pure after a man?' said, 'With one's own, immediately; with a stranger, never.'" The same statement is reported by Stobaeus, sermon 72, and in the *Progymnasmata*, p. 69. Iamblichus, in his *Life of Pythagoras*, mentions this in the place already cited. The same author, ch. 11, attributes it to Pythagoras: "In that assembly, it is said that Pythagoras also pronounced this statement, which is tossed about in the conversation of many: that a wife, rising from her husband, may, with maintained piety, betake herself to the sacred rites on the same day; but from a strange man, never."

(46) Themisto. Laertius, lib. X, seg. 1, calls her Themista; see Cicero, *Orat. in Pisonem*; Lactantius, *Institut.* lib. III, cap. 25. Concerning her and the other women who applied themselves to philosophy, consult Menagius’ *History of Female Philosophers*.

(47) Myia. Iamblichus, near the end of the book mentioned above, in enumerating the disciples of Pythagoras, says: "Myia, wife of Milon of Croton." Suidas records that Myia was the daughter of Pythagoras and Theano. Porphyry, Laertius, and Lucian in his *Encomium on the Fly* also mention her.

(48) Arignote. She is also stated to have been the daughter of Pythagoras and Theano. According to Suidas, she wrote on the Bacchanalia and the mysteries of Dionysus and other philosophical matters. Therefore, where we read "Dionysius" in Clement, one should write "Dionysus," as Menagius observed in his notes on Laertius, lib. VIII, seg. 42, and Kuster in his *Suidas*. Porphyry mentions in his *Life of Pythagoras* that Pythagorean writings by Arignote existed in his own time.

(49) The daughters of Diodorus. Jerome, in his book *Against Jovinian*, says: "Diodorus the Socratic is said to have had five daughters who were dialecticians of remarkable modesty." Philo, the teacher of Carneades, wrote a very full history of them.

(50) Diodorus, surnamed Cronus. Strabo, lib. XIV, says of Jasso: "From there also came Diodorus the dialectician, who was surnamed 'Cronus,' a name which was falsely attributed to him at first. For Apollo was called 'Cronus,' having been his master; but it was transferred to Diodorus because of the obscurity of the true Cronus."

(51) Philo the dialectician. He was a disciple of this Diodorus, a fellow pupil of Zeno of Citium, and, as has already been said from Jerome, the teacher of Carneades.

(52) Hipparchia. Diogenes Laertius wrote her life in lib. VI, seg. 96.

(53) "Dog-marriage." Correctly *cynogamia*. Theodore Sylburg, in his Greek Index, and Suidas s.v. Crates, write: "Having married Hipparchia the Maronite, he called the marriage a 'dog-marriage'." Tatian, not far from the beginning of his *Oration to the Greeks*: "Who could bear witness to the 'common-marriage' of Crates...?" where the learned Oxonian editor rightly substitutes *cynogamia*.

^A Arete, the daughter of Aristippus of Cyrene, instructed Aristippus, who was called "the Mother-taught." ^B There also studied philosophy with Plato Lasthenia the Arcadian and Axiothea the Phliasian. As for Aspasia the Milesian, about whom the comic poets write so much, Socrates derived profit from her for philosophy, and Pericles for rhetoric. I pass over others, therefore, so as not to make the discourse too long, and do not enumerate the poetesses—Corinna and Telesilla, Myia and Sappho—or the painters, such as Irene the daughter of Cratinus, and Anaxandra the daughter of Nealces, as Didymus says in his *Symposiaca*. But the daughter of Cleobulus, the wise man who was monarch of the Lindians, was not ashamed to wash the feet of her father's guests. In the same way, the blessed wife of Abraham, Sarah, herself prepared "hearth-cakes" ^C for the angels; and royal maidens—among the Hebrews—used to pasture sheep; whence even Nausicaa, who is in Homer, went to the washings. A temperate woman, therefore, would wish first of all to persuade her husband to be a partner with her in the things that lead to happiness; but if that is not possible, let her strive for virtue alone, while obeying her husband in all things, so that she may never do anything against his will, except for those things which are thought to pertain to virtue and salvation. But if anyone should hinder from such a disposition either a wife or even a maidservant who is moving toward such a way of life without pretense, he seems to be doing nothing else at that moment than ^D acting against justice and temperance.

^A His desire is to render his own house unjust and intemperate. It is therefore impossible for a man or a woman to become learned in anything without having employed instruction, mediation, and practice. We say that virtue is placed not in other things, but most especially in ourselves. For while one may ward off other things by waging war against them, that which is in our power, ^B nowhere—not even if one were to strive most vigorously—can that be hindered; for the gift is given by God, and it is not subject to any other person. Whence intemperance could be thought to be the evil of no one other than the one conducting himself intemperately, while temperance, conversely, is the good of the one capable of mastering himself.

CAPUT XX. Of the Duties of a Well-principled Wife

Euripides describes a woman who loves her husband honorably, giving this counsel: ^B

To follow with good words What the husband says is proper to seem, To labor in earnest, That she may declare what is pleasing to the husband.

And again, similar things to these:

It is sweet, if any evil Happens, for the wife to be saddened with her husband, In order to have a share in both grief and joy.

Then, describing her gentleness, or her benevolence even in calamities, he adds:

But I, even for you who are faring ill, will bear a part, And be called a sharer in your misfortunes.

P. 621 ED. POTTER, 521 ED. PARIS.

(65) Epictetus in the beginning of his Enchiridion: "Of things that exist, some are in our power, others are not in our power... and those that are in our power are by nature free, unhindered, and unimpeded, while those that are not in our power are weak, servile, hindered, and belong to others." ^C

Euripides, offering counsel, says:

To speak well, ^D When he says anything, it is proper to seem so, even if he is not saying it, And to labor, If she intends to speak in a way that is pleasing to the one with whom she lives.

And again, somewhere else, things similar to these:

It is sweet, if any evil He does, for the wife to show distress with him, And to have a share in common of grief and joy.

Then, he shows her being gentle and affectionate in this way, even in calamities, and adds:

But I [(68)] will endure even for you who are sick, And I will share in your evils.

^A Nothing is bitter to me, for it is right to be happy with friends. For what indeed is a friend, if not this? ^B Marriage, then, is also sanctified when it is perfected according to the "Word," if the union submits itself to God and is administered with a "true heart in full assurance of faith," having had their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and having washed their bodies with pure water, and holding the confession of their hope; for He is faithful who promised. A happy marriage, however, should never be judged by wealth or beauty, but by virtue.

"For none," says tragedy, "Does beauty profit for a spouse, But virtue profits many; for every good woman, Who cleaves to her husband, knows how to be temperate."

Then, as if giving admonitions, he says: "First, this exists even if the husband is ugly; One must judge him beautiful if she is possessed of a mind. For it is not the eye that judges, but the mind." And what follows this? For very properly does Scripture say that woman was given to man by God as a "helper." It is clear, therefore, I think, that she will determine to heal, by reason and persuasion, each of the troubles that may befall the husband in their domestic life. But if he does not listen, then she will endeavor, as far as is possible by human nature, to lead a life without sin, whether she must die with the Word or live; deeming God to be the helper and partner of such an action, who is in very truth a defender and savior, and for the present and the future, making Him the leader and guide of every action, deeming temperance and justice to be her task, and setting as her goal to be loved by God. Gracefully, therefore, does the Apostle in the Epistle to Titus say that the "aged women" ought to be "in a holy demeanor," not "false accusers," not "given to much wine," in order that they may train the young women to be "lovers of their husbands, lovers of their children, discreet, chaste, pure, keepers of the home, good, obedient to their own husbands," so that the Word—

^C "Sweet it is, when a misfortune happens to her husband, For the wife to be sorrowful, and to have a part In common of grief and joy. As for me, I will endure even to suffer with you while you are sick, And I will share in your evils; for nothing is for me Bitter, which I shall bear of yours: to suffer misfortune with friends, And to be happy, is right; for what indeed is a friend, If not this?"

^D Furthermore, Grotius exhibits these verses, together with those preceding and following, in this manner emended and arranged in the *Excerpta ex incertis Euripidis tragoediis*, pages 423, 424:

"Sweet, when fortune rages, to grieve with the spouse For the spouse, and to share the part of goods and sorrows: I, myself, being sick, will suffer your grievances with you, I will endure burdens equally: nothing will be heavy for you, Nothing bitter. The lot of a friend must be held in common, whether Joyful or mournful. For what else is it to love mutually?"

In almost the same way they exist in the fragments of Euripides, v. 296.

^A so that the word of God may not be blasphemed. "Rather," he says, "pursue peace with everyone, and the holiness without which no one will see the Lord; seeing to it 72 that there is no fornicator or profane person, like Esau, who for a single meal sold his birthright, and that no root of bitterness, springing up, causes trouble, and by it many are defiled." Then, as if placing a finishing touch on the question regarding marriage, he adds: "Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge." Since one goal and one end has been shown for both husband and wife, regarding him who is perfect, Peter says in his Epistle: "For a little while now, if need be, being grieved in various temptations, that the proving of your faith, much more precious than gold which perishes and is proved by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ; whom, having not seen, you love; in whom, though now you do not see him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and glorified, receiving the end of your faith, the salvation of souls." For this reason, Paul also boasts of having been, for Christ's sake, "in labors more abundantly, in stripes above measure, in deaths often." ^B

CHAPTER XXI. Perfectum seu vere gnosticum describit.

Here I find "perfect" taken in many ways, according to the man who excels in each individual virtue. Thus someone is perfected and brought to completion, both as pious and religious, and as tolerant, and as continent, and as a worker, and as a martyr, and as a gnostic. But I do not know if anyone is perfect in all these at once ^C as long as he is a man, except only He who for our sake put on humanity, even while he was under the bare law. Who, then, will be perfect? He who professes abstinence from evils. And this is the way to the Gospel and to well-doing. But the gnostic perfection of the legal man is the receiving of the Gospel, so that he who is of the law becomes perfect. For so did he who was of the law, Moses, predict that one must listen, so that we may receive, according to the Apostle, the fulfillment 76 of the law, which is Christ. And in the Gospel he is already advancing, whereas the ^D abstinence from evils is a stepping-stone for very great progress; and this is more than just a degree of greater progress; but rather, it is in addition to doing good; as the author says below, p. 528 ed. Paris. And more fully, Str. VI, p. 645: "There is, however, in the body a first purification of the soul, so that it abstains from evils; which some indeed consider to be perfection; and this perfection is indeed common to any believer, whether he be Jew or Greek. But the justice of the gnostic advances beyond this perfection, which others speak of as such, to the actual performance of good works."

STROMATUM LIB. IV.

the fulfillment of the law is Christ. ^A In the Gospel, moreover, the Gnostic now progresses, not only by using the law as a stepping-stone, but by grasping it and understanding its meaning, just as the Lord who gave the Testaments has handed it down to the Apostles. But even if he should also live uprightly (since it is impossible for knowledge to follow upon a difficult task), and having most rightly confessed Him as a martyr, should become such through love, receiving greater dignity as among men—even so he will not arrive at being called perfect in the flesh. For the completion of one’s life has laid claim to this title, once the Gnostic martyr has already arrived at showing and properly exhibiting the perfect work, and through a love that is gnostic, having shed his blood with gratitude, has sent forth his spirit; blessed, then, will he be from that point on, and rightfully called perfect, ^B "that the surpassing greatness of the power may be of God and not from us," as the Apostle says. Let us only preserve the faculty of free choice and charity; "in everything afflicted, but not distressed; destitute, but not in dire straits; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed." For it is necessary for those who are hastening toward perfection, according to the same Apostle, "to give no offense in anything, but in everything to commend ourselves, not to men, but to God." Let this, however, be the corollary, to obey also those who are men; for it is reasonable to do so for their sake as well, on account of the slanderous abuse they offer. The commendation is ^C"in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labors, in watchings, in fastings, in purity, [X] in knowledge, in long-suffering, in kindness, in the Holy Spirit, in love unfeigned, in the word of truth, in the power of God, that we may be the temples of God, having been cleansed from all defilement of flesh and spirit. And I," he says, "will receive you, and I will be to you a father, and you shall be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty." "Let us perfect," he says, "holiness in the fear of God." For even if fear brings forth sadness, "I rejoice," I say, "not that you were made sad, but that you were well-disposed to repentance. For you were made sad according to God, so that you might in nothing be harmed by us; for legitimate sadness according to God works repentance unto salvation."

^A not to be repented of; but the sadness of the world works death. For behold this very thing, that you were made sad according to God, how much eagerness it worked in you; but defense, but indignation, but fear, but longing, but zeal, but vengeance; in everything you have shown yourselves to be pure in the matter. These are the pre-exercises of gnostic training. Since the almighty God himself has given some apostles, others prophets, others evangelists, others pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edification of the body of Christ, until we all come ^B into the unity of faith and the recognition of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; we must labor so that we may become gnostic men and be perfected as much as possible, while we still remain in the flesh; and living here in perfect concord and consensus, we must meditate to concur with the will of God, unto the restitution of the truly perfect nobility and kinship into the fullness of Christ; which is absolutely perfected by our «perfection». And now we discern by what reason and in what manner and when the divine Apostle says «perfect», and how he shows the differences of those who are perfect. Again: «To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for profit; for to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge according ^C to the same Spirit, to another faith in the same Spirit, to others gifts of healings in the same Spirit, to others operations of powers, to one prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. But all these things operates one and the same Spirit, dividing separately to each as he wills.» Since these things are so, the prophets are indeed perfect in prophecy, the just in justice, and the martyrs in confession, and others in preaching—not being indeed devoid of common virtues, but exceeding in those to which they have been ordained. For who of sound mind would say that a prophet, like Abraham, was not just? For why—are not the just also, ^D Bellica namque Deus dedit huic ut munera obiret, Illi ut saltaret, cithara cantuque sonaret, says Homer. «But each has his own gift from God; one this way, another that way.»

^A The apostles, however, were full in all things. You will find, therefore, if you wish, from their Acts and writings, their knowledge, life, preaching, justice, chastity, and prophecy. It must be known, however, that even if Paul is of a more recent time, having flourished immediately after the Lord’s assumption, his scripture nevertheless hangs from the Old Testament, drawing breath and speaking from there. For faith in Christ, and the knowledge of the Gospel, is an exposition and fulfillment of the Law; and for this reason it is said to the Hebrews: «Unless you believe, you shall not understand» — that is, unless you believe in Him who was foretold through the law and signified by the oracle of the law, you will not understand the Old Testament, which He himself explained by his own presence.

CHAPTER XXII.

Quocirca, he who is intelligent and discerning, this man is also a Gnostic. ^B Now his work is not merely abstaining from evils (for that is, as it were, a step toward greater progress), nor is it doing some good thing out of fear; for it is written: «Whither shall I flee, and where shall I hide from thy face? If I ascend to heaven, thou art there; if I go to the ends of the sea, there is thy right hand; if I descend into the depths, there is thy spirit.» Nor is it for the hope of a promised honor; for it is written: «Behold the Lord, and his reward is before him, to render to every man according to his works;» and, «What eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and has not ascended into the heart of man, are what God has prepared for ^C those who love him.» But benevolence alone, which is done for the sake of charity and for the sake of the beautiful itself, is what is to be sought by the Gnostic man. Now, indeed, from the person of God, it was said to the Lord: «Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations for thy inheritance,» teaching a most royal request: to ask for the salvation of men, without reward, so that we might inherit and possess the Lord. For conversely, to desire the knowledge that concerns God for the sake of some utility—namely, that this might happen or that might not happen—is not proper for a Gnostic; rather, for him, the knowledge itself suffices as a cause for contemplation. For I would dare to say that he who pursues knowledge for the sake of divine science itself will not choose it because he wishes to be saved. For the act of understanding extends from constant exercise into perpetual understanding. Now, perpetual understanding is the essence ^D of the one who knows, having become an indivisible union, and eternal contemplation remains a living substance. If, therefore, one were to propose to the Gnostic, by way of hypothesis, whether he would choose the knowledge of God or his own eternal salvation...

and let it be assumed that these were separate, though they are in fact entirely conjoined—he would not hesitate at all, but would choose the knowledge of God, ^A judging that the knowledge which transcends faith through love is desirable for its own sake, as a distinctive excellence. This, then, is the first beneficence of the perfect man: when it is not performed for the sake of any usefulness concerned with himself, but because he has judged that it is beautiful and honorable to do what is good, his activity, vehemently impelled, will conduct itself well in deed in all things. It does not act rightly in some matters and not in others, but being established in the habit of doing good, and having lived his life after the image and likeness of the Lord, he acts neither for the sake of glory—or, as the philosophers say, ^B fame—nor for the sake of a reward, whether from men or from God. And if, in any way, something contrary should happen to him while he is doing good, he will let it pass without remembering the injury, meeting the return of evil with a good disposition, so that he may be, as it were, "just and good" toward the just and unjust. To such as these the Lord says: "Be perfect, as your Father is." For this man, the flesh is mortified; yet he lives himself alone, having consecrated his tomb as a holy temple to the Lord, with his soul, which was formerly subject to sins, now turned toward God. This man is no longer merely continent, but has arrived at the habit of impassibility, ^C awaiting the putting on of the divine form. "If you do alms," he says, "let no one know it; and if you fast, anoint yourself, that God alone may know, and not even one of men." But not even he himself who shows mercy ought to know that he is showing mercy; for thus he would be merciful at one time and not at another. But when he performs the act of beneficence out of habit, he will imitate the nature of the Good; and the disposition will then be both nature and constant practice. One must not be removed by being lifted up, but must arrive by walking. For this is what it is to be "drawn by the Father," having passed through the whole of the "narrow way," and having been deemed worthy to receive the power of grace from God, ^D to run upward without hindrance; even if they hate…

the elect, he knows their ignorance and pities them, because their soul is involved in such great ignorance. ^A Rightly then does this knowledge love, and it teaches and instructs even those who are ignorant to honor every creature of the Almighty God. If indeed he has learned to love God, such a person will in no way have his virtue cast aside, neither awake nor in a dream, nor by any fantasy; since the habit itself never departs from itself, nor falls away from being a habit. Whether therefore one should call knowledge a habit or a disposition, ^B for in that it never admits diverse impressions, the ruling faculty remaining unaltered, it does not take on any diversity of phantasms—those dreaming illusions born of the day’s movements. For this reason, also, the Lord commands us to "watch," so that our soul may not at all be affected even in a dream; but He bids us to preserve the conduct of the night also, as though it were being enacted in the day, pure and unspotted. For this is, to the extent of our power, assimilation to God: to keep the mind in the same state. And this state of the mind is such as a mind should be. But a diverse disposition arises from over-attachment to material things. It seems to me that they have called the night *euphronē* (prudent), ^C because at that time the soul, having rested from the senses, inclines toward itself and partakes more of discernment. For this reason, then, the rites are held mostly at night, signifying the soul's withdrawal from the body during the night. "Let us not sleep, then, as the rest do, but let us watch and be sober; for they that sleep, sleep in the night, and they that are drunken are drunken in the night. But let us, being of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation." Whatever, further, they say concerning sleep, the same refers to the soul, for ^D those who, having passed through each of the narrow ways, are to arrive, this is what is meant by being "drawn by the Father," to be made worthy to receive the power of grace from God and to run up without hindrance. For He says: "Enter through the narrow gate... for the gate is narrow, and the way is hemmed in, which leads to life." "No man can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draw him." Rightly, then, does this knowledge love even those who are ignorant, and it teaches and instructs every creature of the Almighty God. "We are sons of light, and sons of the day." But we, being of the day, let us be sober. This, however, is true beyond all else—that those who use the intellect the most move the senses but little. For they even built the Muses' sanctuaries far from the cities; and they called the night *euphronē*, thinking that stillness and freedom from distraction contribute greatly to the discovery and consideration of the things sought. "Euphronē" is the night, from our thinking well in it; and [it is] considered the time of prudence and counsel; for the reason, when it is at leisure, becomes the judge of things.

^A And we must also understand [this] about death; for each [state] indicates the departure of the soul, one more, the other less—which is also something one can take from Heraclitus: "A man in the night lights a lamp for himself, having died, his eyes extinguished; yet living, he touches the dead: sleeping, having extinguished his sight; awake, he touches the sleeper." For "Blessed are those who know the Lord," ^B according to the Apostle: "for it is high time to awaken from sleep; for now our salvation is nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand. Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light." By "day" he allegorically signifies the Son and the light; and in turn, the commandments are "armor of light," metaphorically. For this reason, they say that those who have been washed must go to sacrifices and prayers clean and shining; and this is done for the sake of a symbol or sign, that is, being outwardly adorned and purified. But purification is to think and feel those things which are holy. Furthermore, there is also the image ^C of baptism, which was also handed down from Moses to the poets in this way:

Then having drawn water, wearing clean garments on her body, Penelope goes to prayer; .... Telemachus instead, Having washed his hands in the grey sea, prays to Athena.

This was the custom of the Jews, that they would also often be baptized in their beds. Well, therefore, was that also said: Be not clean by the bath, but by the mind.

^D For, as I think, that is the perfect cleanliness which is of the mind and of works and of thoughts, and furthermore the sincerity of speech also, and finally, innocence in dreams. But enough, I think, for a man is repentance.

^A Indeed, I think that for a man there is a purgation—a perfect and stable repentance—if, having condemned ourselves for our preceding actions, we proceed forward, «after these things» taking thought and lifting up our mind away from those things which delight us through the senses, as well as from our former transgressions. If, therefore, the science that is called knowledge ought to have an etymology, its exposition must be taken from “station” and rest, since it brings our soul, which previously was being carried about now in one way and now in another, to a standstill regarding things. Likewise, an etymology must also be given for faith—the station of our soul regarding the Being.

We, however, desire to know him who is always and in all things righteous; who, neither fearing the punishment set by the law, nor avoiding the hatred of those associates who pursue the wicked for their transgressions, nor dreading the danger from those who have been injured, remains righteous. For he who abstains from doing any unjust deed because of these things is not virtuous of his own will, but is good through fear. And Epicurus, for his part, says that the wise man according to him ^B chooses to commit injustice for the sake of some gain, because he cannot take it as a certainty that he will be able to escape notice. Thus, if he were to know that he would not be detected, according to him, he would commit injustice. And such are these dark dogmas. But if anyone refrains from injustice because of the hope of the reward to be received from God for righteous deeds, not even then is he good of his own will; for just as fear makes the former righteous—or rather, makes him seem righteous—so does a reward make the latter righteous.

This hope, which is after death, is known not only to those who pursue the wisdom of the barbarians—as being good for the righteous, but the opposite for the wicked—but also ^C to the Pythagoreans; for they too taught hope as a final goal for those who philosophize; ^D where even Socrates in the *Phaedo* says that “good souls depart from hence with good hope,” and again, censuring the wicked, he contrasts them, saying that “they live with evil hope.” Heraclitus also appears to agree with this, through what he says when discoursing about men: for he says that there awaits men after death things which they neither hope for nor expect.

^A Divinely, therefore, does Paul write openly to the Romans: "Affliction worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed" (Rom. V, 3-5); for it is on account of the future hope that there is patience; "hope," however, is also—being ambiguous—the rendering and restoration of hope; which also "maketh not ashamed," as it is no longer put to shame by reproaches and insult. But he who obeys solely by reason of the calling, in that he has been called, does not approach towards knowledge either through fear or for the sake of pleasures; for he does not look around to see if some useful gain or pleasure ^B will follow him from without; but being drawn by the love of Him who is truly lovable, and being led towards what is fitting, he is a pious worshipper of God. Whence, even if he were to receive by hypothesis from God the power to do the things that are forbidden without any punishment, and even if he were to receive a promise that he would obtain the goods of the blessed on account of these things—nay, even if he were persuaded that God would be unaware of what he does (though that is impossible)—he would never be induced to do anything contrary to right reason, since he has once chosen that which is truly good and desirable for its own sake, and for that reason to be sought after and loved. For we have not understood that the good resides in the belly’s food. ^C But he has heard that "meat will not commend us" (1 Cor. VIII, 8), nor yet marriage, nor even abstinence from marriage in ignorance, but the Gnostic work proceeding from virtue. For the dog also, an irrational animal, might be said to be continent, while it fears the one who lifts the stick, and for that reason abstains from food. Know well that for such people, if the promise made to them were taken away, and the fear threatened were removed, and the impending danger vanished, their purpose would at once be revealed.

CHAPTER XXIII.

For what reason the perfect, as far as possible, abstain from things pleasant to the senses, with a view, clearly, to better things.

For they do not accommodate themselves to the nature of the thing itself, ^D so as to comprehend in a truly Gnostic way that all things are indeed good which were created for our use—as, for example, marriage and the procreation of children, if we use them with temperance—but that it is better that one, through that assimilation to God, should become dispassionate and endowed with virtue.

^A And those, who abstain from things that are brought forward from without—whether they are good things or bad—abstain from some indeed, but from others not at all. But even those from which they abstain while loathing them, they appear by this very action to be speaking ill of both creation and the Creator; and even if they seem to be behaving faithfully, they hold an impious judgment. But the saying: “Thou shalt not covet,” stands in need neither of any necessity imposed by fear, which compels one to abstain from pleasant things, nor of any reward, which through a promise persuades one to check their impulses. Neither do they choose obedience for the sake of the commandment, but rather for the sake of the promise—those who have obeyed God through the promise, having been caught by the bait of pleasure. Nor, indeed, would an aversion to sensible things necessarily produce an affinity to things perceived by the intellect; but on the contrary, an ^B affinity for things perceived by the intellect occurs in the Gnostic naturally, through a turning away from sensible things; as one who, through the choice of good things, has Gnostically chosen the Good, at once marveling at creation and hallowing the Maker, and hallowing that assimilation to the Divine. “But I will free myself from desire,” one might say, “for the sake of the affinity to Thee, O Lord; for the dispensation that has been created is beautiful, and all things are well ordered, and nothing comes to be without a cause. It is ^C necessary for me to be in Thy presence, O Almighty; and even if I am here, I am with Thee; but I wish to be free from fear, that I might be able to draw near to Thee, and to be content with few things, imitating Thy just election, which discerns the good from things like them.” Most mystically and holily, the Apostle, teaching us the truly pleasing election—not by a rejection of other things as if they were base, but by considering some things better than others that are beautiful—has revealed this, saying: “So that he who gives his own virgin in marriage ^D does well; and he who does not give her in marriage does better, for the sake of what is becoming and the ability to attend upon the Lord without distraction.” We know, moreover, that things which are difficult to procure are not necessary, but that those which are necessary have been made easy to procure through the goodness of God. Therefore Democritus speaks well when he says that “nature and instruction are similar things,” and we have briefly returned the cause for this; for instruction does indeed rearrange and compose a man; and in rearranging and composing him, it makes it his nature; and it makes no difference whether one has been fashioned so by nature, or transformed by time and learning. Now the Lord has provided both: the one through creation, the other through the re-creation and renewal that comes from the Testament. And that which is beneficial to that which is more sovereign, this is more desirable; and the most sovereign thing of all is the mind. Thus, therefore, things that are truly beautiful appear most pleasant, and from Him is acquired the fruit which it desires, the stability of the soul. He who listens to me, he says, [index: entries preserved]

^A will rest in peace, trusting, and shall be free from fear of any evil. Trust in God with all your heart and with all your mind. In this way it is possible for the gnostic to have already become God. I said, you are gods and sons of the Most High. Empedocles also says that the souls of the wise become gods, writing in this way:

Lastly, prophets and song-chanters, and healers, And leaders rise up among mortal men; From these sprout forth gods, greatest in honors.

Now, man is formed, absolutely and in general, according to the idea of the spirit innate to him. For he is not created without form or shape in the workshop of nature, where the generation of man is mystically perfected, since both the art and the essence are common. But this man here, or the individual man, receives his character from the form of the soul, which is innate, according to what he has chosen. For this reason, we also say that Adam was perfect as regards his formation; for nothing was lacking to him of those things that confer the character of form and species to man. But that which he received in the process of becoming—the perfection ^B and the being justified through obedience—this was his growing into a man, namely that which lay in his power, or his free will. But that he chose, and indeed that he chose what was forbidden, is not the fault of God, but of the one choosing. For generation is twofold: one being of those who are born, and the other of those who are being made. And the manliness and courage of man, since his essence is, as they say, subject to passions, renders him who possesses it immune to fear and invincible, so that anger serves as a kind of bodyguard to the mind in patience, endurance, and such like; while temperance and salutary prudence are set over desire. But God is impassible, and devoid of anger and desire. ^C Yet, He is not called immune to fear for this reason, that He avoids things that are terrible. Nor is He temperate, in the sense that He rules over desires; for the nature of God does not fall into anything terrible, nor does God flee from fear; just as He will not desire, so that it would be necessary for Him to rule over desire. Mystically, therefore, it was said among us, and by the Pythagoreans too, that man must also become one; since the high priest himself is one, God being one, according to the unchangeable ^D disposition of the always-becoming divine [themselves] to what is good. Straightway the Savior, through desire, removes also the.

^A wrath, which is the desire for vengeance. For passion, in general, is in every kind of desire. But the man who is being deified [(45)] into impassibility becomes spotless and unique [(46)]. Just as [(47)] those who are at sea and are stabilized by an anchor pull the anchor, yet do not pull it [to them], but rather pull themselves toward the anchor, so too those who, through the gnostic life, are drawing to themselves God, have unwittingly been brought to God. For he who serves himself serves God. In the contemplative life, therefore, one takes care of himself while worshipping God, and through his own sincere purification, he beholds the holy God holily. For temperance, being present, [(48)] considering and beholding itself ceaselessly, is assimilated to God as far as is possible. ^B

CHAPTER XXIV.

On the reason and the end of punishments inflicted by God.

Straightway, that which is in our power is that of which we are equally masters, as we are of that which is opposed to it; such as philosophizing or not, and believing or disbelieving. Because, therefore, we are masters of each of the two things that are opposed to one another, it is found that what is in our power is possible. Moreover, commands are such as to be able to be done or not done by us, which are reasonably followed by praise and blame; and those who ^C are punished for the sins committed by them are punished for these alone [(49)], for what has been done has passed, and what has been done could never become undone. They are indeed forgiven by the Lord, those things before faith, not that they may not have been done, but so as not to be regarded as done. Yet Basilides does not say that all are [forgiven], but only that involuntary ones and those by ignorance are forgiven, just as if a man, and not God, were bestowing such a gift. Concerning this he says the Scripture [(50)] says: "Take ^D heed, O lawless one, that I shall be like you." But if we are punished even for voluntary things...

we are not punished so that they might not have been done—since they have already been done—but because they were done. Now, punishment does not benefit the one who has sinned so that he has not done it, but so that he may not sin again, nor yet that any other might fall into the same things. Wherefore, the good God chastises for these three reasons: first, that he who is chastised might himself become better; next, that they who can be saved may be prepared by being admonished through examples; and third, that he who is injured might not be held in contempt and be susceptible to suffering injury. There are also two modes of correction: the one is by teaching, the other by punishing, which we have also called the disciplinary mode. It must be known, however, that those who fall into sins after the washing ^B are those who are being corrected; for the things done before were forgiven, but those things which happen afterward are purged. Concerning the unbelieving, it has been said that "they are reputed as dust, which the wind casts from the face of the earth, and as a drop which falls from a bucket."

CHAPTER XXV.

"Blessed is he who has the discipline of knowledge, and is not impelled toward the losses of citizens nor toward unjust actions, but contemplates the immortal nature, the ornament of the universe, and by what reason, and in what manner, and in what way it has stood together." And for those who are of such a kind, the meditation on base deeds never takes hold. ^C Merely, therefore, Plato too says that he "who contemplates the ideas will live as a god among men; but the mind is the place of the ideas, and of the mind the God is." He called him who contemplates the invisible God a "living god among men." Furthermore, in the *Sophist*, Socrates also named the Eleatic stranger, who was a dialectician, a "god, such as are the gods to external guests." For when the soul, having risen up from generation, is by itself, and holds converse with itself, and is with Christ, as is said a little later. ^D "Are you not aware, then, O Theodore, that you are unwittingly bringing along, as the Homeric account says, not a stranger, but some god who, as he says, is among men with others, as many as partake of a sense of justice, and notably the god of hospitality himself, who keeps company with them and observes the insolence and good order of men? Perhaps, then, this one of the higher powers follows even you, to observe and refute us who wander from the way of disputation; he is a god of refutation."

^A similes, who go about into the cities. For when the soul transcends generation and exists by itself, and converses with forms or ideas, such as he who is called the coryphaeus in the *Theaetetus*, he, having become like an angel, shall be with Christ, and shall be engaged in contemplation, always observing the will of God; truly here:

"He alone is wise, but others flit like shadows."

For the dead bury their own dead. Whence Jeremias says: "I will fill it with dead born of the earth, whom my wrath hath smitten." God indeed, since He cannot be demonstrated, cannot be the object of knowledge; but the Son is both wisdom, and knowledge, and truth, and whatever else has any kinship with this. And, in fact, He possesses demonstration and the faculty of reasoning. ^B All the powers of the Spirit, when they have become one thing in summary, contribute to the same end, namely to the Son; but He is ineffable regarding the conception of each of His powers. And in fact, the Son does not become simply "one" as a unit, nor "many" as parts, but as all things are one; and hence all things are. For He is the same circle of all powers, which are rolled into one and unified; and for this reason the Logos has been called "Alpha and Omega," of whom alone the end becomes the beginning, and He terminates again at the beginning from above, having nowhere found a separation. Wherefore also to believe in Him and through Him is to become a monad, being indivisibly united in Him; but to disbelieve is to dwell in doubt, and to be separated, and to be divided. ^C For this reason the Lord says: "Every alien son is uncircumcised in heart, and is uncircumcised in flesh"; that is, being unclean both in body and in spirit; "he shall not enter into the holy places from among the aliens in the midst of the house of Israel, except the Levites." But He has called those "aliens" who have not wished to believe, but have desired to disbelieve. Only, therefore, those who live purely, being truly priests of the

All sorts of beings, they go about the cities, Watching the hubris and good order of men.

...if, indeed, it seems so to you, concerning those who are chiefs. "As the angels of God are in heaven." ...to bury their own dead. And to fill it with the dead of men, whom I struck in my wrath. "He alone is wise, but others flit like shadows." He who is wise, but others flit like shadows. ^D "The Lord God says: 'Uncircumcised in flesh, he is; into the holy places...'"

^A of my sanctuary, among all the aliens who are in the midst of the children of strangers.'" If our earthly house of this tabernacle be dissolved. For this reason, since all the tribes were circumcised, those were considered holier which were anointed as high priests, and kings, and prophets. ^B Whence He commands them not even to touch the dead, nor to enter where those have passed away; not because the body is something small, but because it is of sin and carnal disobedience, and is embodied, and dead, and for this reason abominable. Therefore, it is permitted to the priest to enter only for a father and mother, for a son and for a daughter who has died; because these alone are kinsmen of flesh and seed, from whom the priest himself has received the proximate cause of his entry into life. But these also are purified for seven days, during which the generation is completed; for on the seventh day rest is observed; but on the eighth ^C he offers a propitiation, as it is written in Ezekiel, by which propitiation one is to receive the promise. Perfect, I think, is the purification and cleansing, which is the faith propitious to the Gospel, taught through the law and the prophets, and the purity through entire obedience, along with the putting away of worldly things, up to the grateful return of the tabernacle from the enjoyable use of the soul. Whether, therefore, the time be that which, through the seven periods which are numbered, returns to the highest rest; ^D or the seven heavens, which some count by ascent; or whether the "inerrant region," which draws near to the intelligible world, be called the eighth: the Gnostic says that one must emerge from generation and sin. At any rate, during the seven days the sacrifices for sins are offered. For there is still a fear of change; and he touches upon the seventh circuit. But Job, the righteous man, says: "I myself, naked, went out from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return there"; not naked of possessions—for this is minor and common—but as a righteous man, he departs naked of vice and sin, and of that dark image [(following the Latin: "tenebricoso idolo")] that dogs those who have lived unjustly. For it must be understood more elegantly regarding the words of Job: "Naked of vice and sin, just as from my mother's womb, I was fashioned from the earth in the beginning; naked of vice, into the same earth I shall return; naked, not of possessions—for this is minor and common—but of vice and wickedness, and of that dark image that dogs those who have lived unjustly." And "to be turned," O friend, this must be considered, and heavy, and earthly, and visible; which such a soul, possessing, is weighed down and is dragged back again into the visible place, through fear of the dark and of hades, as it is said,

[an] image (72). For this was what was said: "Unless you be turned and become (73) as little children," pure in flesh, but holy in soul, by abstaining from evil works, showing (74) that He wishes us to be such as He has also begotten from the womb of water (75). For generation, succeeding generation, wishes to make immortal through progress: "But the lamp of the wicked (76) shall be extinguished." Truly, the purity both in body and soul, which the gnostic follows, the all-wise Moses, having ^A beautifully used repetition, indicated, describing the incorruption of both body and soul in the case of Rebecca thus: "But the virgin was beautiful (77); no man knew her." Rebecca (78) is interpreted "Glory of God"; but the glory of God is incorruption. This is the true justice, not to desire more of another's than is fitting, but for the whole to be a sanctified temple of the Lord. Justice, therefore, is peace and stability of life, to which the ^B Lord sent (him) off, saying: "Go in peace (80)." For Salem is interpreted as "peace," of which our Savior (81) is recorded as king, whom Moses says (82): "Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who brought forth wine and bread (83), the consecrated food, as a type of the Eucharist." And Melchizedek is interpreted as "king of righteousness"; and it is a synonym [for righteousness and peace (84)] ^C rolling around monuments and graves, around which also some shadowy phantasms of souls have been seen, such as such souls provide—images—which have not been purely set free, but partake of the visible: wherefore they are also seen. Being rolled around monuments and the tombs, around which also are seen some shadowy phantasms of souls, such as such souls provide, which have not been purely set free, but partake of the visible; wherefore they are also seen. An "ever-invisible image" ^D becoming. Showing. "But the virgin was very beautiful to look upon." Patience. This is Isaac, who is translated "laughter," which it is fitting to play with Patience, which the Hebrews call Rebecca. It is called by the Greeks Patience, but by the Hebrews Rebecca.

The Melchizedek history

^A And Melchizedek is expounded as "king of justice." By the same name, Justice and Peace also take pride. But Basilides, who has apostatized, considers Justice and her daughter, Peace, to remain stationed in the ogdoad. ^B However, we must now move on from the more naturalistic questions to the more evident moral ones; for the discussion of the former will follow after the present treatise. Thus, it is in truth our Savior who initiates us into the mysteries, fittingly in accordance with what the tragedy says:

*Videns videntes, ipse donat orgia.*

If you ask, "What kind of things are these, which I call orgia?" you shall hear again:

*Arcana non bacchantibus scire haud licet.*

But if anyone should inquire further, with curiosity, what sort of things these are, let him hear again:

*Te scire non fas, digna sint scitu licet;* *Qui est impius, sunt huic Dei infesta orgia.*

God, however, is without beginning, ^C the perfect beginning of the universe, and the maker of the beginning; and insofar as He is essence, He is the beginning of the moving principle; insofar as He is good, the beginning of the moral principle; and insofar as He is mind, the beginning of the logical and critical principle. Hence He is also the only teacher, being the only one from the most high, pure Father, who instructs man.

CHAPTER XXVI.

No, they do not act rightly who attack creation ^D

and defaming the body, not considering the constitution of man, which was made upright for the beholding of heaven ^A and the organs of the senses, which were fashioned to tend toward knowledge, and the limbs and parts, which are fitted for what is honorable, not for pleasure. Whence this dwelling place receives a soul most precious to God; and it is deemed worthy of the Holy Spirit, through the sanctification of both soul and body, being perfected by the shaping of the Savior. Furthermore, the mutual consequence of the three virtues is found in the Gnostic man, who is occupied with divine things morally, naturally, and logically. For wisdom 95 is the knowledge of divine and human things; justice is the harmony 94 of the parts of the soul; and holiness is the service of God. But if someone should say that they are defaming the flesh, and because of generation itself bring forward Isaiah saying: "All flesh is grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass; the grass is withered, and the flower has fallen; but the word of the Lord 95 abides forever;" let him hear the Spirit interpreting through Jeremiah what is sought: "And I scattered them as chaff borne by the wind into the wilderness; this is the lot and portion of your disobedience, says the Lord. As you forgot me and hoped in falsehoods, I also will reveal your back parts upon your face; and your shame will be seen, your adultery, and your neighing ^B," and what follows. For this is "the flower of the grass" 96 and "to walk according to the flesh" and "to be carnal" according to the Apostle, in the sense of being in sins. It is acknowledged that the soul is the superior part of man, and the body the inferior; but neither is the soul good by nature, nor again is the body evil by nature; nor indeed is that which is not good, immediately evil. For there are certain intermediate states, and preferred things, and rejected things 97, that occupy a middle ground. It was necessary indeed ^{C D}

^A that the composition of man, which is produced among sensible things, should consist of diverse elements, but not of contrary ones, namely of body and soul. Therefore, good actions, as being better, are always attributed to that which is more excellent, namely the ruling spirit; whereas pleasurable and sinful acts are assigned to the inferior, sinful spirit. Immediately, the soul of the wise and Gnostic man, as one sojourning in the body, behaves toward it gravely and respectfully, not with undue affection or indulgence, in that it is about to abandon the tabernacle as soon as the time for departing and migrating calls it: "I am a sojourner in the land," it says, "and a stranger with you." ^B And from this, Basilides says that the election of the world received [the notion of being] a stranger, as if it were by nature supramundane. But this is not so; for all things belong to one God; nor can any one be by nature a stranger to the world, since there is but one essence and one God. But the elect man lives as a stranger, knowing that all things are to be possessed, and then to be rejected; and he makes use of those goods which the Peripatetics wish to be threefold; and even of the body, just as one who is traveling far abroad makes use of inns and lodgings that he meets with on the way; taking care, indeed, of worldly things and of the place in which he is lodging, but leaving the residence and the possession, as well as the use of them, without attachment; and he follows with a prompt and eager spirit Him who leads him out of this life, in no way turning back ^C nor seeking any excuse to turn back ^D; giving thanks for his temporary stay, and blessing God for his departure, while embracing the dwelling in heaven. "For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven; if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For we walk by faith, not by sight," as the Apostle says. "But we are well pleased rather ^D to depart from the body, and to be present with the Lord." But "rather" is used in a comparison; and comparison exists among those things which fall under similarity; as the stronger is stronger than the strong, but the strongest of the fearful. Whence he subjoined: "Wherefore we make it our aim, whether being absent or being present, to be pleasing to Him," to the one God, clearly, whose work and creation all things are, both the world and the things above the world. I admire Epicharmus, clearly saying: "For one who is naturally pious in mind, no evil things can happen."

^A Superius manet in coelo spiritus. And the lyric poet singing: "But the souls of the impious hover under heaven in bloody pains, under inevitable yokes of evils; but those of the pious dwell in the heavens, singing hymns to the blessed Prince." Therefore, the soul is not sent down hither from heaven to the lower things; for God works all things toward the better; but he who has chosen the best life, out of God and righteousness, exchanges earth for heaven. ^B Justly, therefore, Job, having attained to knowledge, said: "Now I know that thou canst do all things, and nothing is impossible for thee. For who can report to me what I did not know, great and marvelous things which I did not understand? But I vilified myself, deeming myself to be earth and ashes." For he who is in ignorance is sinful, "both earth and ashes"; but he who has become established in knowledge, being assimilated to God as far as he can, is already spiritual, and therefore chosen.

That Scripture calls the senseless and disobedient "earth," the prophet Jeremiah will make plain, speaking concerning Jehoiakim and his brothers: "Earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord; write this man, an abdicated man." ^C Another prophet also says: "Hear, O heaven, and give ear, O earth," calling the understanding "hearing," and the "heaven" the soul of the gnostic, which has taken up to itself the heaven and the divine nature of divine things, and by this has become an Israelite; for he who has chosen the contrary, ignorance and hardness of heart, he has termed "earth." And the "Give ear," he called from the organs of hearing, the ears, attributing fleshly parts to those who attend to sensible things. These are they about whom the prophet Micah says: "Hear, O peoples, the word of the Lord, ^D you who dwell in pains." And Abraham said, "By no means, O Lord, who judgest the earth," since he who has disbelieved, according to the saving voice, "is already judged." And in the "Kings" it is written that the judgment and the pronouncement of the Lord is thus: To the righteous [it is given]...