Book 3

LETTER OF ACACIUS AND PAUL, PRESBYTERS, TO EPIPHANIUS

Letter written in the ninety-second year of the era of Diocletian, the twelfth year of Valentinian and Valens, and the eighth year of Gratian, to Epiphanius the Palestinian, an Eleutheropolitan, who had once been father of a monastery situated in the territory of Eleutheropolis, and who is at this time bishop of the city of Constantia, in the province of Cyprus. It is from Acacius and ^A Paul, presbyters and archimandrites—that is, superiors of monasteries—in the region of Carchedon and Beroea in Coelesyria. In it they request that he write against all heresies, having been further urged by many others and, so to speak, compelled to arrive at this task.

To my most honorable and, in all things, most religious lord and Father, Bishop Epiphanius, Acacius the presbyter and Paul ^B the presbyter, archimandrites, greeting in the Lord.

The very sight of your piety, Father, was enough to fill us with spiritual words and to implant in us such a longing for you, once we were permitted to enjoy the sight of you. But because the report of Christ’s disciple, going before him, proclaims everywhere the fragrance of his words and actions, it troubles and compels us to strive to be filled with his discourses and thoughts. Therefore, it would have been fitting for us, by approaching you in person, to be bathed in the communion of that grace which is in you, just as it was in the apostles. ^C But since poor health and bodily weakness hindered that journey, we ourselves were unable to fall at your feet to hear and learn your spiritual and holy words flowing from your mouth. For we are persuaded that, if we were worthy, by coming to you and hearing you, we would be strengthened in the manner of the holier life we have undertaken, provided that we might deserve to reach its final and ultimate end. Since, therefore, we are weighed down by poor health, we earnestly entreat your piety not to grudge us a share of those gifts truly bestowed upon you by the Savior. For we confess, not only we ourselves ^D but also all who have heard, that in this generation Christ has raised up for us a new apostle and preacher—a new John—to proclaim what must be observed by those who have committed themselves to this course. Therefore, since our common brother Marcellus is constrained by such a report and is drawn by the desire for your piety, and is also of our own monastery, having him to serve as the minister

^A of so great a daring on our part, sinners that we are, towards you, the disciple of the Savior. We ask that you deign to grant us, for our instruction, those things which you spoke to some of the brethren—things which, while light for you, the righteous man, would be a cause of rejoicing in the Lord for us sinners who share in them. For when we are filled with your spiritual words, we are eased of the burden of our iniquities. We have heard the names assigned by your reverence to the heresies, and for each of these religions we ask your holiness to declare the heresy to us in plain terms. For the gift is equal for all. And we ask you, righteous in the Lord, to offer up prayer on behalf of all those who desire you and await the gift from you. We are in fasting and prayer [wishing] that our common brother, having been gladly received by your reverence, may bring the gift bestowed by you, and thus send up the customary prayers to the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. ^B All the brethren hope to be strengthened by the prayer made by you on their behalf. We beseech you not to hesitate to share the divine grace which you have received from the apostles. All the little ones who are in the monasteries are sending up prayer to the Most High that they may receive a spiritual gift from your piety. May you continue to be healthy in the Lord, and cheerful in Christ, and in the Holy Spirit [may you continue] to guard the throne entrusted to you, and the divine gift, until the crown which awaits you.

EPISCOPI EPHIPHANII RESCRIPTUM

^C

The rescript of Epiphanius to the priests Acacius and Paul, regarding the things they had written to him concerning his writing against the heresies.

To the most honorable lords, and fellow priests, Acacius and Paul, Epiphanius sends greeting in the Lord. Just as ancient writers were accustomed in prefaces or prologues, and titles, to demonstrate as if by an enigma the outline of the whole proposed work—so we too, using the same genre of speech, write this preface for you, beloved, summarizing in brief the importance of your request concerning the matters against the heresies. For since we have undertaken to declare to you the names of all the heresies, and to reveal their unlawful deeds—just as if they were poisons and venomous things—and at the same time to apply antidotes ^D as well, to serve as remedies for those who have been bitten, and as a precaution to protect those who are in danger of falling into them—we record this very thing for the studious of honorable matters: the *Panarion*, or medicine chest, interpreting it as a defense against serpents, which is, through three books, eighty heresies—which are beasts, whether...

the riddles of serpents. But there is one

Rescript of Epiphanius to Acacius and Paul

I. Furthermore, we wish all you who are studious of honorable things to be asked, O readers, that you might forgive us—as we are but men, and especially since we are disposed to defend the parts of piety with labor and divine zeal—both in perusing this prologue itself, and the exposition of the following heresies, and the profession of truth, and the doctrine, and the faith of the holy Catholic Church as expressed by us; forgive us, I say, if ever we have been so bold as to use somewhat more or superior language ^B for the patronage of the most holy and most venerable name, relying upon divine powers, if God grants us the same, since we seek those things which exceed our own power. For this discourse is undertaken for the sake of truth, and this study for the sake of piety. In addition to this, I vehemently request of you, that if by chance you happen upon something (although it is not our custom to scoff at anyone, or to cast words at them), but if, due to our most ardent zeal against the heresies, and in order to deter the readers from them, we have spoken somewhat more sharply—as if we were calling them impostors, peddlers, or wretches—that you would be willing to forgive us. For the very necessity of the contest and the disputation imposed upon us such a labor, by which readers might be called away from them, and so that it might be manifest that their functions, mysteries, and dogmas are alien to our institute and forbidden: and so that from the very speech, we might set forth, and finally, by that greater sharpness of the disputation, we might be able to call back ^C at least some from their contagion.

II. All these things which are contained in this work are explained through the aforementioned three books: the first, the second, and the third; which three books we have divided into seven volumes. In each volume a certain number of heresies and schisms is contained. In total, they are eighty; the names and causes of which are these: 1, Barbarism; 2, Scythism; 3, Hellenism; 4, Judaism; 5, Samaritanism. From these, the rest of the sects have flowed; for before the advent of Christ the Savior, after the barbarian and Scythian superstition, these [others] emerged from Hellenism. 6, The Pythagoreans, who are also the Peripatetics, having been divided by those around Aristotle; 7, the Platonists; 8, the Stoics.

9, the Epicureans. Then the Samaritan sect, which sprouted from Judaism. This also went into four factions. 10, the Gortheni; 11, the Sebuæi; 12, the Essenes; 13, the Dositheans. There follows Judaism, concerning which it was said, which received its own figure and mark from Abraham. Then it was expanded by the law of Moses given to the son of Jacob named Judah, who was called Israel, and through David, who was king of that people and from that same tribe, it obtained the title of Judaism. From this Judaism there issued these seven heresies: 14, the Scribes; 15, the Pharisees; 16, the Sadducees; 17, the Hemerobaptists; 18, the Ossæans; 19, the Nazarenes; 20, the Herodians.

^B Following these sects, in the succession of times, the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ shone forth as salvation to the whole world, and with it the doctrine of the Gospel, and the preaching of the heavenly kingdom. Which indeed is the unique fountain of salvation and the true faith of the catholic and apostolic Church. From this, all the following sects, which prefer the name of Christ alone, but not the faith, were cut off and torn away: 1, the Simonians; 2, the Menandrians; 3, the Saturnilians; 4, the Basilidians; 5, the Nicolaitans; 6, the Gnostics, who are also the Stratiotici, and Phibionitæ, who by some are called Secundiani; by others Socratitæ or Zacchæi; by others yet Coddiani, and Borboriani or Barbelitæ; 7, the Carpocratians; 8, the Cerinthians, who are also the Merinthians; 9, the Nazarenes; 10, the Ebionites; 11, the Valentinians; 12, the Secundiani, to whom Epiphanes and Isidorus are added; 13, the Ptolemæans; 14, the Marcusians; 15, the Colorbasians; 16, the Heracleonites; 17, the Ophites; 18, the Cainites; 19, the Sethians; 20, the Archontici; 21, the Cerdonians; 22, the Marcionites; 23, the Lucianists; 24, the Apelleians; 25, the Severians; 26, the Tatiani; 27, the Encratites; 28, the Cataphrygians, who are also the Montanists and Tascodrugitæ, who are themselves divided; 29, the Pepuziani, who are also the Priscillianists and Quintilians.

^C To these are added the Artotyritæ; 30, the Tessarescadecatitæ, who predetermine one day each year for the celebration of the Pasch; 31, the Alogi, who reject the Gospel and the Apocalypse of John; 32, the Adamiani; 33, the Sampsæans, who are also the Helcesæi; 34, the Theodotiani; 35, the Melchisedecians; 36, the Bardesianists; 37, the Noetians; 38, the Valesians; 39, the Cathari, who are also the Novatians; 40, the Angelici; 41, the Apostolici, who are also the Apotactici; 42, the Sabellians; 43, the Origenists, authors of the filth; 44, the Origenists, from Origen, who is also called Adamantius; 45, those of Paul of Samosata; 46, the Manichæans, who ^D are also called Acuanitæ; 47, the Hieracites; 48, the Meletians, who in Egypt form a schism; 49, the Arians, who are also the Ariomaniacs; 50, the sect of the Audians; 51, the Photinians; 52, the Marcellians; 53, the Semniarians:

54, the Pneumatomachi, who are also called Macedonians and disciples of Eleusius, who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit of God; 55, the Aerians [and disciples of Aëtius]; 56, the Aetians, who are also called Anomoeans, to whom Eunomius is joined, or rather the Anomoean; 57, the Dimeritae, who do not confess the incarnation of Christ to be perfect, who are also called Apollinarists; 58, and also those who say that holy Mary, the ever-virgin, after she had brought forth the Savior, joined with Joseph, whom we have called Antidicomarianites; 59, and those who offer a cake in the name of the same Mary, who are called Collyridians; 60, the Massalians, to whom are joined the Martyrians, who are from the sects of the Gentiles, and the Euphemites, and the Sataniani.

Now, reverting again, and dividing these by book, I will show in this, my summary, how many of these eighty heresies are in the first book, and in order in the second, up to the third; but also, for each of the seven tomes which are arranged into the three books, how many heresies are contained in each. And the series of all these is as follows: In the first book there are three tomes, and forty-six heresies, along with their names—I mean Barbarism, Scythism, Hellenism, Judaism, and Samaritanism. In the second book there are two tomes, twenty-three heresies. In the third book there are two tomes, eleven heresies.

So in the first tome of the first book there are twenty heresies, which are these: Barbarism, Scythism, Hellenism, Judaism. ^B The differentiations of the Greeks are: Pythagoreans, or Peripatetics, Platonists, Stoics, Epicureans; Samaritan heresy, which flowed from Judaism. The Samaritans are divided into four parts, thus: Gortheni, Sebuaei, Essenes, Dositheans. The heresies of the Jews are seven, thus: Scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, Hemerobaptists, Ossaei, Nasaraei, Herodians.

In the second tome of the first book there are likewise thirteen heresies, thus: Simonians, Menandrians, Saturnilians, Basilidians, Nicolaitans, Gnostics—who are also (called) Stratiotici—and Phibionites, the same, and by others called Secundiani, and by others Zacchaeans, who are also called Coddiani, and Borborites, and Barbelites, Carpocratians, Cerinthians—who are also called Merinthians—Nazoraeans, Ebionites, Valentinians, Secundiani, to whom are joined Epiphanes and Isidorus, and Ptolemaeans.

In the third tome of the same first book there are thirteen ^C heresies, thus: Marcosii, Colorbasii, Heracleonites, Ophites, Cainans, Sethians, Archontici, Cerdonians, Marcionites, Lucianists, Appelleians, Severians, Tatians. This is the summary of the three tomes of the first book.

The second book has two tomes. In the first tome of the second book, which is the fourth according to the sequence of the number from the beginning, there are eighteen heresies, thus: Encratites, Cataphrygians—who are also (called) Montanists—and Tascodrugitae; the Tascodrugitae were divided from the aforementioned, Pepuzians, who are also (called) Quintillians, to whom are joined the Artotyritae, Tessarescaedecatitae, who place the Pascha on the same day of the year; the Alogi, who reject both the Gospel and the Apocalypse of John, the Adamiani, the Sampsaei, ^D

who are also called the Helcesaei; the Theodoriani, the Melchisedeciani, the Bardesianistae, the Noetiani, the Valesii, the Cathari, the Angelici, the Apostolici, who are also called the Apotactici, to whom are joined those called the Saccophori; the Sabelliani, the Origenistae who are the authors of filth, and the Origenistae who descend from Origen Adamantius. In the second tome of this same second book, which is the fifth in the aforementioned order of numbering, there are five heresies, as follows: the Paulianistae, the Manichaei, who are also called the Acuanitae, the Hieracitae, the Meletiani (a schism in Egypt), and the Arians. This is the summary of the tomes of the second book. Similarly, there are two tomes in the third book. In the first tome of the third book, which is the sixth according to the numbering we mentioned ^B, there are seven heresies, as follows: the Audiani (who are a schism), the Photiniani, the Marcelliani, the Semiariani, the Pneumatomachi (who slander the Holy Spirit), the Aeriani, and the Aetiani, from Aetius the Anomoean, to whom is joined Eunomius, who is also an Anomoean. But in the second tome of the same third book, which is the seventh tome according to the division of the tomes we spoke of—which is the seventh tome and the end of the treatise—there are four heresies, as follows: the Dimoiritae, who do not confess the perfect incarnation of Christ, and who are also named the Apollinaristae; then those who say that the holy and ever-virgin Mary, after she gave birth to the Savior, had relations with Joseph, whom we call the Antidicomarianitae; and those who offer a cake to the name of this same Mary, who are called the Collyridiani; and the Massaliani; and, following these, a ^C defense of the right faith and truth, which is the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. This is the summary and inscription of the entire treatise against the eighty heresies, and the one defense of the truth alone, that is to say, of the Catholic and Orthodox Church, arranged in three underlying books, but divided into seven tomes. Now, in what follows, we shall set forth another summary and compendium of the first book, in which book twenty heresies are contained. For in the first place, the mothers and original designations of all the heresies, from which the others sprang, are four in number.

The first is Barbarism, which in itself lasted from the days of Adam for ten generations until the time of Noah. It is called Barbarism because the most ancient of mortals had no specific authority, nor did they agree with one another, but each person ordered ^D his life according to his own will, and each man set his own inclination and whim before himself as his law.

The second is Scythism, from the days of Noah until the time of the building of the tower and Babylon; and after the time of the tower, it continued for a few years, that is, until Phalec and Ragau, who moved toward the climate of Europe into the region of Scythia and were reckoned among those nations, from the time and life of Thare, from whom the Thracians have originated.

^A The third is Hellenism, which began from the times of Seruch through the medium of idolatry, and—just as each one then followed a certain superstition—it moved toward a more civilized application and toward customs and laws. The generations of men, however, began to be arrayed under the rule of idols, to which they conformed and whom they made into gods. They began by depicting the origin of these through colors and representing those long ago honored among them—either tyrants, or magicians, or certain persons who had done something in their lives deemed worthy of memory, by reason of their prowess or physical strength. Afterward, from the times of Thare, the father of Abraham, they introduced the error of idolatry by means of images. Because they honored their ancestors with images, and fashioned statues of the dead—at first by the potter's art, and then the industry spread to all arts of imitation. For ^B both architects, by hewing stones, and silver-smiths and goldsmiths, by fashioning their own materials, and the rest in turn, contrived effigies. The Egyptians, Babylonians, Phrygians, and Phoenicians were the first of all to become the authors of this superstitious cult, and of images and mysteries. From them, most things were transferred to the Greeks, beginning from the age of Cecrops and thereafter. Much later, after a long interval, they began to celebrate Saturn, Rhea, Jove, Apollo, and the remaining gods.

The Greeks received their name from a certain Hellas, a man who lived in the region of Greece; though as others say, it is from the olive which sprang up in Athens. The Ionians were the founders of this race, as is found in more accurate history, being named from Javan, one of those who built the tower when the languages of all men were divided. For which reason, all are called *Meropes* because of the divided speech. ^C Later, in more recent times, Greek superstition departed into heresies and sects; such as the Pythagoreans, Stoics, Platonists, Epicureans, and others. Furthermore, at that same time, there existed a distinct form and character of true piety and religion, together with the natural law, which from the foundation of the world perpetually separated itself from those nations, down to the present day—positioned between the barbarian, Scythian, and Greek superstition—until it was united with the piety of Abraham. Then indeed, Judaism, from the times of Abraham, acquired its own form, and through Moses, the seventh from Abraham, and the law delivered by God, it was amplified; and from Judah, the fourth son of Jacob, who was also named Israel, through David, who was the first to obtain the kingdom from the tribe of Judah, the perfect name of Judaism ^D was obtained. For the Apostle, speaking succinctly of these four heresies, clearly said: "In Christ Jesus there is neither Barbarian, nor Scythian, nor Greek, nor Jew, but a new creature." Now, these are the distinctions of the Greeks: The Pythagoreans, or Peripatetics, asserted a monad and providence; Pythagoras taught not to sacrifice to those who are supposed to be gods, and forbade both the eating of living creatures and the partaking of wine.

^A He also distinguished between things above the moon, which he called immortal, and things below, which he called mortal, and taught the transmigration of souls from bodies into other bodies, even into living creatures and beasts. Moreover, he instructed them to observe silence for a period of five years. At the end, he desired to be considered a god.

Platonists established God, and form, and that the world is generated and perishable, but the soul is unbegotten, immortal, and divine. They held that it has three parts: the rational, the spirited, and the appetitive. They wished that women should be common to all, so that no man should have a private wife as his own, but that those who wished might have relations with those who were willing. They likewise maintained the transmigration of souls into various bodies, even into beasts. Finally, they taught that many gods were produced from the One.

^B The Stoics define the universe as a body, and consider this sensible world to be God. Some asserted that its nature consists of the substance of fire. They define God as mind, and as the soul of the whole existing mass, that is, of heaven and earth, while His body, as I have said, is the whole universe, and His eyes are the stars. They persuade themselves that the flesh of all things perishes, and the soul passes from body to body.

The Epicureans posited that atoms and indivisible, uniform, and infinite bodies are the first principles of all things, and they taught that pleasure is the end of happiness, and that neither God nor Providence governs affairs.

^C Samaritanism, and the Samaritans who derive from it, is a departure from Judaism, which is older than the sects among the Greeks and their established tenets. Having adopted the religion of the Greeks, and intermingling it in some part with Jewish dogmas, this sect arose around the times of Nebuchadnezzar and the captivity of the Jews. Being immigrants from Assyria to Judea, and having received only the Pentateuch of Moses, which the king had sent to them from Babylon through a priest called Ezra, they have everything in common with the Jews, except for the abhorrence of the Gentiles and the desire not to touch any of them, and except for the rejection of the resurrection of the dead and the other prophets after Moses.

There are four sects of the Samaritans: the Gortheni, who celebrate feasts at different times than the Hebrews; the Sebuaei, who differ from the Gortheni for the same reason concerning the feast days; the Esseni, who do not oppose either party but celebrate feasts indiscriminately with whichever they encounter; the Dosithei, who live according to the same customs as the Samaritans, such as circumcision, the Sabbath, and the other things, and use the Pentateuch. ^D They are more observant than the others in abstaining from living creatures, and they live in fasting most continually. Some of them practice virginity, others continence, and they believe in the resurrection of the dead, which is strange to the Samaritan dogma.

^A The sects of the Jews are seven in number.

First, the Scribes, who were learned in the Law and were interpreters of the traditions of the elders among them; being more scrupulous in a voluntary ritual, they observed customs which they had not learned from the Law, but had devised for themselves as special forms of worship and requirements of the legal code.

Pharisees, which can be interpreted as "the separated," who, professing the most holy way of life, seemed to excel others in probity. Among them the resurrection of the dead is defended, as it is among the Scribes, and they do not deny the existence of angels or the Holy Spirit. They present an exceptional discipline of life. They adopt certain times for continence and even for virginity. They are accustomed to fast twice in the week and—like the Scribes—to wash pitchers, dishes, and cups more frequently. In addition to this, they offer tithes and first fruits; they pray assiduously; they take special care over certain cults and superstitious types of clothing, such as dalmatics, tunics, and somewhat broad phylacteries—that is to say, purple ornaments, fringes, and pomegranates attached to the borders of their garments, which were symbols of that temporary continence they practiced. They also introduced notions of genesis and fate.

Sadducees, whose name comes from "exactest justice." They were of the race of the Samaritans and took their origin from a certain priest named Sadoc. They reject the resurrection of the dead and deny both angel and spirit; in other respects, they are similar to the Jews.

Hemerobaptists, who differed in nothing from the Jews, save in this one thing: they maintained that no one could attain eternal life unless they washed daily.

Osseni, whose name signifies "the most impudent." They performed all things according to the prescription of the Law; but they also made use of other Scriptures after the Law. Most of the later prophets they rejected.

Nasaraeans, which can be interpreted as "extinguishers." They prohibit the eating of flesh altogether; they abstain from anything with an animal life. They accept and believe in all the patriarchs who are contained in the Pentateuch up to the times of Moses and Joshua the son of Nun, namely: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and those before them, as well as Moses himself, Aaron, and Joshua. However, they do not believe that those five books are by Moses, and they boast of possessing others different from them.

Herodians, who, while they behaved as Jews in all things, professed that Herod was the Christ, and they ascribed the dignity and name of Christ to him.

This is the first volume, which contains twenty heresies. In it, also, the subject of the Incarnation of Christ and the confession of the truth is discussed in the final section.

OF OUR HOLY FATHER EPIPHANIUS, BISHOP OF CONSTANTIA IN CYPRUS, AGAINST EIGHTY HERESIES, THE WORK CALLED THE PANARION, OR MEDICINE CHEST.

BOOK I, VOLUME I.

^A1. Embarking upon the task of proclaiming and speaking of faith and unbelief, of orthodoxy and heterodoxy, I shall first make mention of the beginning of the creation of the world and of the order of events that followed it. I shall not approach this by my own power, nor moved by my own reasonings, but as the Lord and merciful Master of all has revealed to His own prophets, and through them has deigned to bestow upon us the knowledge of all things, in such measure as human nature can bear. Indeed, as I begin to consider these things, I am at the very outset placed in no small struggle and am greatly afraid, as I undertake a work that is no trivial matter. I call upon the holy and only-begotten Son of God, Jesus Christ, and His holy Spirit, that He may illumine the mind of my own unimportance toward the enlightenment of this knowledge. For while the writers of the Greeks, both poets and prose-chroniclers, when they apply themselves to some mythical composition, invoke some Muse (for it is not God they invoke; their wisdom is demonic, earthly, and not coming down from above, according to that which is written), we, however, invoke the ^B

all-holy Master to take hold of our poverty and to breathe in His Holy Spirit, that we might compile nothing counterfeit into the writing of the promise. And having asked for this very thing, knowing our own inadequacy, we beseech Him to grant us the same according to the measure of faith and according to proportion.

^B II. Let the scope for everyone who happens upon this work be, regarding the entire subject, that the discoveries are as the seasons and times allow, as much as our small mind, having been exercised, was able to comprehend. We do not by any means promise an account of everything in the world. For they are unspeakable and speakable, and untold, and not to be reckoned by number, and as much as has reached humanity, they are unattainable, known to the Master of all alone. But the promise concerns the difference of opinions and knowledges, of promises of faith from God and of unbelief, of heresies and of corrupt human opinion sown in the world by led-astray men, from the time when man was fashioned upon the earth down to our own time, that is, the eleventh year of the reign of Valentinian and Valens, and of Gratian. ^C As for the heresies and the highest matters which we are about to bring to the knowledge of those who happen upon them, some we know from love of learning, some we have grasped by hearsay, and to some we have been present with our own ears and eyes. And we trust that we have provided the roots and teachings of some from an accurate report, and of others a portion of what proceeds from the same. Some of these we learned through the writings of ancient authors, others through the hearsay of men who accurately confirmed our understanding; and we have gathered this whole concern together, not undertaking it by ourselves, nor imposing upon ourselves promises that exceed our brevity. For indeed, this very discourse, which we ^D labored to compose—by the will of God, from the men of philosophy, who in one place in one way, and in another place in another way, urged our weakness and forced us, so to speak, to pass over into this matter, as your honorable selves requested in writing through prophetic letters, my most honorable and most beauty-loving brothers Acacius and Paul, fellow presbyters. Since, therefore, not without God did you examine the votes of the requests because of the

^A surpassing love of the servants of God, for which I have been deemed worthy to approach, I shall begin to speak, not with the elegance of words, nor with some persuasive tones, but in simple dialect, in simple speech, and with the precision of those things which are made clear in the speech.

III. And Nicander the author indeed made for himself the knowledge of the natures of wild beasts and reptiles; and other authors [made for themselves the knowledge of] the materials of roots and herbs; as Dioscorides the herbalist, and Pamphilus ^B and King Mithridates, and Callisthenes and Philo, Iolaus the Bithynian, and Heraclides of Tarentum, Cratevas the rhizotomist, and Andreas and Bassus the Tulian, Niceratus, and Petronius Niger, and Diodotus, and certain others. In the same way, we also, attempting to reveal the roots and opinions of the heresies, do so not for the sake of harm to those who encounter them, but just as it was a matter of study for the aforementioned authors not to signify evil, but for the fear and safety of human nature, ^C for the sake of knowing the terrible and deadly things, and to be forearmed, and to escape with the power of God, through paying attention—and not competing—with them. And for those who have encountered such things, and have been plotted against by such things, whether by exhalation, or bite, or sight, those very people who worried about these things and provided antidotes from roots and herbs for the invalidation of the wickedness of the aforementioned reptiles—so also for us the work [has been undertaken], through the exhortation of the aforesaid and of ourselves, most desirable ones, to reveal the ^D painful forms and deadly bites of the terrible reptiles and wild beasts. And for the opposition of these, as much as we are able, we will place as antidotes, in brief, if it be anywhere one or two words, to drive back their poison, and to save him who wishes, after the Lord, and who has fallen, whether by voluntary intent or involuntary, into these same reptilian teachings of the heresies, provided he himself wishes to be freed from those heretical dogmas, as if from the poison of a serpent.

IV. For indeed from the beginning, Adam, having been formed on the sixth day from the earth, and having received the breath of life, was made a living being. For it is not, as some think, that he began on the fifth and was finished on the sixth; for the understanding of those who say this has erred. He was simple and innocent, possessing no other name, nor glory, nor opinion,

^A nor any division of life by which he might be designated, or indeed called by any other name than Adam, which is interpreted "man." To him is fashioned from himself a wife, similar to him, of the same body and of the same breath. And children are born to him, male and female. And having lived nine hundred and thirty years, he paid the debt of nature. His son was Seth. His son was Enos; and in succession, Cainan, Malaleel, and Jared. From this point, as we have received from our ancestors, from then on did the evil contrivances in the world begin to occur, ^B both from the beginning through the disobedience of Adam, and then through the fratricide of Cain. Now, in the times of Jared and beyond, sorcery and magic arts, licentiousness, adultery, and every injustice erupted. Not yet, however, was there any differing opinion, nor a contrary dogma, but there was one language alone, just as there was but one race scattered upon the earth at that time. To this Jared is born a son named Enoch, who pleased God and was not found; for God translated him, and he did not see death. Enoch begat Mathusalas, Mathusalas begat Lamech, and Lamech begat Noah. And the righteous judgment of God, having brought a flood of water upon the inhabited world, utterly blotted out all flesh of men and of the rest. But Noah, having pleased Him and found grace, was preserved by God's command in an ark; ^C indeed, that previously mentioned Noah, and his three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, his own wife, and the three wives of his three sons, so that eight human souls were saved in the ark of that time from the water of the flood, and from every kind of wild beast and animal, of cattle and the rest that are upon the earth, for the restoration again of the substance of all things in the world, some being saved two by two, and others seven by seven. And thus the tenth generation passed away through two thousand two hundred and sixty-two years. And the flood ceases, and Noah and his house became a remnant for the world. Not yet was there heterodoxy, nor any differing nation, nor any name of heresy, but not even idolatry. For since each of the men walked according to his own judgment (for a single law was nowhere found; for each man became a law unto himself, and walked by his own judgment, even as the usage is in the Apostle, not only of barbarism, but of other things. For he says: "For in Christ Jesus there is neither barbarian, nor Scythian, nor

Greek, nor Jew" , the status of those times, which existed under the ten generations, was termed barbarism. After the flood, when the ark of Noah had settled in the mountains of Ararat ^A, between the Armenians and the Cardyeans, on the mountain called Lubar, there was the first habitation of men after the flood. And there Noah the prophet planted a vineyard, and became the settler of the place. And his children (for the Scripture does not signify that he begat any more) had children and children's children, up to the fifth generation, for six hundred and fifty-nine years, besides Shem. And in the order of the account, I will set forth the genealogy of the one son. Therefore Shem begat Arphaxad, Arphaxad begat Cainan, Cainan begat Salah, Salah begat Eber, a pious and God-fearing ^B man, and Eber begat Peleg.

V. And there was nothing upon the earth, no heresy, nor another and another opinion, but only men were described by one lip and one tongue. And there was only wickedness and piety, the law according to nature, and the choice of the will of each one according to nature; and there was no error from instruction, nor from the writings of authors. There was no Judaism, nor any other heresy, but, as I might say, the faith which is now lived within the holy Catholic Church of God, being from the beginning, and later again revealed. For to him who is willing to see truly, the beginning of all things is the Catholic and holy Church, from the very purpose itself. For Adam was formed as the first-created, not circumcised, but having foreskin in the flesh; yet he was not an idolater. And he knew Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; for ^C he was a prophet. Therefore, not having circumcision, he was not a Jew; and since he worshipped nothing else, he was not an idolater. For Adam was a prophet, and he knew that the Father said to the Son: "Let us make man." What then was he, having neither circumcision nor worshipping idols, but showing forth the character of Christianity? Just so must one conceive regarding Abel, and regarding Seth, and regarding Enos, and regarding Enoch, and regarding Methuselah, and regarding Noah, and regarding Eber, up to Abraham. And at that time piety and impiety were active, and faith and unbelief: faith ^D holding the image of Christianity, and unbelief holding the character of impiety and lawlessness, contrary to the law according to nature, up to this aforementioned

^A point of time. In the fifth generation after the flood, while men were just being increased from the three sons of Noah in the succession of their children’s children, they had come into being ^B to the number of seventy-two, the leaders and principal heads in the world. As they expanded and moved further onward from Mount Lubar and the borders of Armenia—that is, the land of Ararat—they arrived at the plain of Sennaar, where they eventually chose to settle. ^C This Sennaar is now situated in the Persian region. This place formerly belonged to the Assyrians. There, then, having held council, they determined among themselves to build a tower and a city. And because they, having inclined from the climate toward Europe into Asia, had all been named, according to the custom of the time, Scythians. They build the tower and construct Babylon, and God was not pleased at the work of their folly. For He confounded their languages, and from one, He divided them into seventy-two, according to the number of the men of that time who had been found. Whence they were also called Meropes, on account of their divided speech. And a rushing wind cast down the tower. They were therefore divided over the whole earth, to the right and to the left, some returning to where they had set out.

^D (11) "Where they chose to settle." Perhaps "place they chose" (re-reading the Greek).

(12) "This place formerly belonged to the Assyrians." The land of Sennaar, and Babylon itself, he says, first pertained to the Assyrians. He has regard, however, to that which is read in Gen. x, 11: "Out of that land (Sennaar) went forth Assur, and he builded Nineveh, and the streets of the city, and Chale." Truly, some hold Assur to be a proper name, as R. Selomo, who separated himself from the custom and company of the impious; and Aben-Ezra records that he was the son of Japheth. For my part, in this place I interpret Assur more willingly as the Assyrian nation, or Ninus himself, the founder of the Assyrian kingdom. Moreover, it seems to look toward that which is in Isaiah, chap. xxiii: "Behold the land of the Chaldeans: such a people was not. Assur founded it." They led its strong men into captivity, they dug under its houses; they laid it in ruins. But the Hebrew texts offer another meaning: "This people was not there of old. Assur founded it with ships," or, as others say, "for desert dwellers," who raised up its fortresses, but (the Chaldeans) destroyed their palaces, etc. Which R. David explains thus. It is not strange, or incredible, what is predicted concerning the destruction of Tyre. Behold, Babylon and Chaldea itself have not always had the same inhabitants; but it has itself experienced change. For the people of the Chaldeans did not have their seat there of old: but the Assyrians held it in the beginning, and raised up cities therein. Then the Chaldeans, having driven out the Assyrians, occupied it, who, Kimchi says, were sprung from Chasad, son of Nachor, from chap. xxii of Gen., verse 21. These things are from the Hebrews, although Aben-Ezra and, from the Latins, Jerome hold otherwise. For the LXX differ entirely. From these it is gathered that the Assyrians formerly held Babylon. And it pleases some that the ancestors of Sennacherib invaded Babylon; for the reason that in 4 Kings, chap. xvii, 24, the king of the Assyrians, Sennacherib, translated inhabitants from Babylon, and from Cutha, and from other regions to Samaria. Truly, the Assyrian king of the Babylonians is sometimes called such in the Scriptures, and geographers are authorities that Babylonia was comprised under Assyria.

(13) "All were named." The origin of the name of the Scythians from the Hebrew word *semol*, with a point, which is "to turn aside," "to err." It can also be derived from a point on the right, which signifies "to run about" and "to walk about." Each notion agrees excellently with the customs of the Scythians: whom it is certain were wanderers, and lived in wagons. But that reason for the name which Epiphanius brings, that they inclined from the climate toward Europe into Asia, does not greatly please me. Nor do I think it true that those ancient men were marked by the name of Scythians, who after the flood built that tower. The *Etymologicon Magnum* writes *skyein*, which is "to be angry" and "to knit the brow," from which *Scythes* is named: because the Scythians are irascible. Or did the Greeks rather deduce it?

(14) "And from one into seventy-two." He treats of the same distribution of languages and nations in Heresy XXXIX, which is that of the Sethians: where he also says that the seventy-two languages, as many as there were "heads," and authors of the stock, flourished. This is the common number of the mother-languages and peoples, about which chronologists contend. The calculation of which, indeed, does not seem to me sufficiently explored and certain: not only because the Greek codices dissent from the Latin and Hebrew in number; but also because most of the "heads" are counted in the number along with their posterity and sons. But it is not credible that a distinct people and language constituted them. For certainly Heber was not different in language from Phaleg; as Augustine also thinks. Furthermore, all the Canaanite peoples were allotted a common idiom. Thus that partition of seventy-two languages falters. But neither is it very necessary to labor at this, that we should assign to so many nations its own domicile and region. In which many pursue the similarities of names too ambitiously. For it is probable that most, having left the borders which they had occupied, and their settlements, betook themselves elsewhere. For what Moses narrates, that all nations were propagated from them, is not to be accepted in such a way that they first, and *immediately*, settled regions and set foot in their possession, but that their posterity at least migrated thither. But to discuss these things would be a work of longer duration, and of a different undertaking.

Others have gone forth to the regions of the East. Still others have occupied Libya, and if anyone wishes to grasp the precision regarding these, he might find how each of those who migrated received his lot according to his own fatherland. ^A Since Mistrem takes over the lot of Egypt, and Chus the Ethiopian, and Phous the Axumitic parts, and Rhegma and Saba, as also Thoudin and Eloud, the regions toward the country of the Garamantes.

VI.

Rhagau begat Saruch; his son was Seruch, which name signifies provocation. ^A At this time, among men, the idolatry and superstition of the Gentiles had its beginning, as we have received it from those before us. Yet at that time that superstitious worship had not yet reached the point of carved idols, or hewn stones, or wood, or silver and golden statues made of any other substance; but the human mind was discovering wickedness in itself solely by means of colors and images; and through free will, learning, and intellect, instead of goodness, it devised what is contrary to the law. A son, Nachor, is born to Seruch; and Nachor begets Thara. From this point, the making of statues began. ^B

On the Name Seruch and Its Meaning

[alt-version omitted]

Various are the origins and interpretations of Hebrew names among Epiphanius, partly obscure, partly somewhat absurd. For many things escape even the most learned through inadvertence. Nor for that reason was Epiphanius unskilled in Hebrew, whom Jerome confirms as having been knowledgeable in Greek, Syriac, Hebrew, Egyptian, and partly Latin language, in his *Apology against Rufinus*, in which he calls him wittily "bilingual," because he knew both Greek and Latin. Among the false derivations, this very interpretation of the word Serug is put forward by a certain Calvinist, along with several others: as when he concludes that the rest of the Fathers were not exempt from error; thus, he considers that especially Epiphanius erred in explaining names. We shall see the rest, which he notes in this writer, here and there in their proper places. As regards the present word, he thinks [it is] poorly translated by Epiphanius, since this name should be written Serug, and it signifies "propago" (offshoot), not "provocation." So he says. But the reason for defending Epiphanius in this place is easy and clear. ^C For first, it was not for him to write otherwise, since the LXX received it in the former way. And it may be that in Hebrew also, at least in some copies, it was not read as [...] from which the LXX rendered it Seruch in Greek. For [...] is usually rendered by the letter sigma, as in [...], Nachor and Cham. However, in whatever way it was written, the glossema of Epiphanius can be defended by some convenient interpretation. In the first place, [...] signifies that it is "perplexum" (tangled) and "intricatum" (intricate): whence [...], an offshoot, not [...], as pleased the Calvinist. Wherefore, he himself wrongly translates Serug, or [...], as "propago," when reason demands that it should be "intricatus" (tangled) and "perplexus" (perplexed). And because things that are of this kind—that is, tangled and perplexed—are wont to "erethizein," that is, to provoke and irritate by their entanglements: thence perhaps it is called [...] from the more recondite language. For not all the powers of all words are expressed in the holy scriptures. But if it is as the LXX found in the Hebrew, who wrote Seruch; it will fit beautifully in this way. [...] in Chaldean and Rabbinic means "to act perversely," as in 2 Samuel, chapter 19, concerning Semei: [...], he acted perversely, ^D he rebelled. Hence [...] means iniquity, sin, rebellion; [...] means rebels. See Elias in *Thisbi*. And thence Seruch, that is, from rebellion, contumacy, and stubbornness. The same word in Hebrew is the same as being "superfluum" (superfluous), to exceed, which also indicates another origin of the same notion: as if it were from [...], to act wantonly, to insult, and to irritate procaciously. But that interpretation of Epiphanius is far more probable than what is read in Jerome’s book *De Nominibus Hebraicis*: that it might be "corrigia" (thong) or "perfectus" (perfect). For [...] does not mean a thong: whence Seruc, [...], should not be read as Serug. Although the letter kaph at the end is pronounced with a "raphe" (aspiration). Therefore in Greek it is Seruch. Whether Jerome or the LXX Elders read it thus in Hebrew, one does not wish to guess. The other glossema, which Jerome adds, namely "perfectus," I do not understand, nor do I think it pertains to the matter. But who would not know that many Hebrew words, because they were written otherwise in Greek and distorted from their origin, have been a snare to even the most learned Fathers, so that they might falsely affix the wrong meanings to them? Let it be an example, as we were writing these things, it accidentally occurred to us: The same Jerome, in his Epistle to Ageruchia, interprets Noemi, whose story is commemorated in the book of Ruth, as "consolatio" (consolation), which in Hebrew is [...].

(25) *And idolatry and Hellenism began among men.* This is drawn from the *Chronicle of Eusebius*, which is read in the Scaligerian Greek edition, page 13. But there Seruch is called the son of Japheth, not of Shem, as also in Suidas under the word Seruch, where almost the same things are declared. Indeed, even that which is contrary to what Eusebius wrote is added by Epiphanius: *Not yet in the age of Seruch were stones, or wooden statues, or silver or golden ones fabricated; but in paintings and colors, as Tertullian speaks, the preparation of idolatry consisted.* But Eusebius says: *For those, he says, and those who were before them, were either warriors, or leaders, or those who performed deeds of valor, or worthy of memory in life for virtue, and as being their forefathers, they honored them with pillars among men.* Thus these may perhaps be reduced to harmony, so that Epiphanius denies that idols and statues, only skillfully made and fashioned with carvings, existed through that time; but not shapeless trunks, or stones, or columns, in which sense Eusebius is to be understood, when he calls them [...]. For from those rough and unpolished statues and columns, idolatry began. Clem. Alex. *Strom.* 1, *Before therefore that...* He argues in the same place that the demons imitated the column which went before the Israelites in the wilderness. Thus the Athenians used to consecrate little columns and obelisks before their doors to Apollo, whom they called Agyieus. Aristoph. scholia on *The Wasps*. Agyieus is a column tapering to a point, which they set up before the doors; and they say they are peculiar to Apollo, or to Dionysus, or to both. *Duraeoi* (before the doors), if they are *Antelioi* (before the sun/doors) gods, they are the ones before the doors. ^D Thus it is closer to the truth that those shapeless masses were set up as gods in the beginning. Then gradually art and articulation were added, with Daedalus as the author, as they say. Concerning whom Themistius *Orat.* 15, and finally images and paintings expressed with colors, although Epiphanius thinks the contrary.

^A To return to the matter: from Seruch was born Nachor; from him Tharra was begotten. From this time, idols were first discovered from clay and the potter’s craft, by the artisan Tharra, to whom the times of the human race were propagated over a space of about three thousand, three hundred, and thirty-two years, up to the twentieth generation. And no man ever before this died before his father; but fathers, dying before their children, used to leave their sons as their successors. And let no one mention Abel; for he did not die a natural death. From the time ^B Tharra set himself up as a rival to God, having fashioned [idols] through the arts of his own potting, he received a reward worthy of his deeds, as he himself was in turn provoked by the loss of his own son. Wherefore the divine Scripture, having remarked this, says: *And Aran died before his father Tharra in the land of his birth* (Gen. xi, 28).

VII. Up to this point a certain Scythian succession and designation remained. As yet there was no heresy, nor had any other device crept in, save only fornication—the invention of idols. And afterwards, they deified either wretched tyrants or sorcerers who had deceived the world with their enchantments, honoring their monuments; and long afterwards, those around Cronus and Zeus, Rhea and Hera, and those with them; and then, worshiping the acinaces (sword), ^C as did the Sauromatae of the Scythian race, and Odrysus, the forefather of the Thracians; from whom the race of the Phrygians derives its origin—whence also the Thracians are called after Thera, who was born during the building of that tower. All time has been corrupted from then on, the error having taken its beginning from that time until the predetermined season, mixing up the paths. Writers and historians from that time, having gleaned from the Egyptian nations... ^D and for the feet of the beast there is no certain measure, by which he had written that that exaggeration was smaller. Regarding this, a little before, when he explains the method of sacrifices, and how they used to immolate victims, certain things are read which are partly unknown to the interpreters and partly corrupted. The victim itself is set down tied by the forefeet. The sacrificial priest, standing behind the animal, pulling the end of the rope, throws the beast down. Soon, as it falls, he calls upon the god by name to whom he makes the sacrifice. Then he puts a noose around its neck. Laurentius translates these words wrongly: "removed first the fillet." These things are corrupt. Write what is Ionic. Thus elsewhere: concerning the acinaces, see Clement of Alexandria in the *Protrepticus*, and Lucian in *Toxaris*. The Phrygians trace their origin to the Thracians. Dardanus certainly first settled in Samothrace, whence he crossed into Phrygia. But they also claim that the Asiatic Mysians were propagated from the European Moesians or Mysians. Strabo explicitly says the same in book X.

^A of the magic arts and sorcery; and this was transferred to the Greeks from the age of Cecrops. At that time Ninus was ^B in Assyria, and Semiramis, being contemporary with Abraham, as was the eighteenth [(30)] dynasty of the Egyptians.

(28) "And this was transferred to the Greeks." In his *Chronicon*, Anno 464, Eusebius notes: Cecrops was the first to offer a sacrifice and call him Zeus.

(29) "And [there was] at this time Ninus in Assyria..." Eusebius taught in his *Chronicles* that Abraham was born in the 43rd year of Ninus, and persuaded all his successors of this; for there is no one among the ancients after Eusebius who has not held this to be certain, and prefixed it as an indemonstrable starting point for his own chronology. But Eusebius varies in calculating the intervals of the Assyrians and Medes. In the later book of his *Chronicles*, which contains the expanded years, there are 1196 years from the birth of Abraham—which he reckons as the 42nd of Ninus—to the death of Sardanapalus. With the addition of the 43 years of Ninus, which precede the birth of Abraham, and the 65 of Belus (the same author counts 55 elsewhere), 1303 years are accumulated, during which the Assyrian monarchy held sway. The Medes follow: to whom he assigns 260 years. Thus, he puts the beginning of Cyrus and the Persians at year 1457. Here Scaliger finishes his criticism of Eusebius, insolently mocking him on almost every page. The head of his accusation is that he omitted some Assyrian kings and subtracted from their years. For since he described the series of those kings and the years of each one from Africanus, but in Africanus there are 41 kings and 1484 years attributed to them, Eusebius expunged four kings and 161 years. Then, by subtracting other years in turn, he brought his calculation to a point where he would limit the Assyrian empire to about 1300 years. Scaliger thinks he did this with the intention of directing the times of those kings toward his own plan and ^C preconceived notions. Therefore, this is a massive anachronism of Eusebius, if one believes Scaliger; from which it happened that he placed the birth of Abraham in the 43rd year of Ninus, when it should have been relegated to the 31st of Belus, which is almost 259 years from the 40th of Ninus. But this reasoning of Scaliger is most empty; from it follows the utterly absurd conclusion that the beginnings of the Assyrian kings existed before the flood. For he considers the world was created in the year of the Julian Period 764, from which to the Dionysian birth of Christ, which falls in the year 4715 of the same period, there are 3950 years. Furthermore, he casts the death of Sardanapalus and the end of the Assyrians into the year 3840 of the Julian Period, which is the year 3077 of the world. Again, the flood occurred, as he thinks, in the year of the world 1657. When 3077 is subtracted from these, 1420 remain. Yet the Assyrians reigned for 1484 years. Therefore, Belus began his reign 64 years before the flood. No method of proleptic time can have a place here, where historical truth and the time of true kings and a true empire are sought. For what sin did Eusebius commit, who omitted those years from which only absurdity followed? Could he not have had Ctesias, Diodorus, and others, instead of Africanus, as authors from whom he could compile the number of those Assyrian kings? Indeed, Diodorus, whom Eusebius cites in the first book of his *Chronicon* on page 29 of the Greek edition, counts Sardanapalus as the thirty-fifth from Ninus; thus, with the addition of Ninus and Belus, there are 37 kings, just as many as Eusebius recounted. But if those four kings omitted by Eusebius were nonetheless to be inserted, it was incumbent upon him, fearing mockery, to deduct a few years at least from the periods of each, so that the beginnings of the Assyrian period might be contained within the limits of the flood.

We, as we trace the footprints of this most obscure and ancient empire, shall choose a fixed epoch which is constant among almost all chronologers. It is that of Cyrus and the Persian kingdom: for which all set the 55th Olympiad, the first year. This Olympiad began, as will be shown elsewhere, in the year 4154 of the Julian Period. Therefore, the Persian empire began either in this very year, or in the following, that is, the first year of the Olympiad lapsing. For certain reasons, we designate the year 4155 to the beginning of Cyrus. Now, we assign to the Medes, who preceded the Persians, 317 years, along with Diodorus and Ctesias. Therefore, their beginning falls in the year 3838 of the Julian Period. The world, as our opinion holds, was founded in the year 750 of the Julian Period. Indeed, we believe there are about 3483 years from the foundation of the world to the Dionysian birth of Christ in the autumn. Thus, the flood occurred in the year 2386 of the Julian Period, the 1656th of the world. From this to the beginning of the Persians, 1769 years are reckoned; to the Medes, 1452. Therefore, if, as Diodorus and Eusebius were pleased to hold, the Assyrian empire is extended to 1300 years, the beginning of Belus is rightly established by us in the 153rd year after the flood, the 1809th of the world, and the 2539th of the Julian Period. From this, it follows that the first year of Belus precedes the birth of Abraham by 140 years, if you attribute 65 years to Belus. Finally, that Abraham was born not in the 43rd year of Ninus, but in the 23rd of Semiramis: since his birth falls in the 292nd year after the flood, 2678 of the Julian Period, 1948 of the world. These things are to be proposed here regarding the Assyrian interval and beginning; they will have to be proven by us elsewhere.

A discussion ^D of the Egyptian dynasties, and of Scaliger's intemperance toward Eusebius, could have been instituted here. For in this case, too, the method of proleptic time and fictitious dynasties has muddled all the tracks of truth. But the brevity of our notes warns us to touch upon these things lightly, and not to lean too heavily into those questions. Africanus in Manetho recorded thirty-one dynasties of the Egyptians, to which he assigns 5354 years. Eusebius is widely different from him, both in the order of the dynasties and in the sum of the years. Scaliger therefore odiously attacks the man, and having explained all the dynasties of Manetho, he pushes their head far beyond the origins of the world. This is opportune for the instigation of fables, but frivolous and ridiculous for investigating historical truth. For it is no small ineptitude to give a place to these trifles and pedantries in history and chronology, and to blame Eusebius for this reason: that, abstaining from fabulous delights, he entered a certain path by which he might accommodate these things to history. Since, therefore, the beginnings of the Egyptians, as we have said, are most obscure, let us consider the most recent times of these dynasties, whose history is more certain, so that we may restrain the effusive wantonness of fables within certain terms and limits. Cambyses, as Herodotus is the author, conquered Egypt in the fifth year of his reign, shortly after the death of Amasis. Up to this time, 26 dynasties are counted by Africanus, totaling 5159 years. There can be no doubt about the beginning of Cambyses, since it is most liquidly consistent both from history and from astronomical observations in Ptolemy. It agrees upon the 4185th year of the Julian Period. Therefore, the seventh year of his empire began in the year 4189, which we define as the 3459th year of the world. From the flood to this time, 1805 years elapsed, in which space the intervals of the dynasties are to be contained, to which Eusebius assigns 1491 years from the birth of Abraham to the fifth year of Cambyses. But he writes that the 16th dynasty began at the birth of Abraham; from which Epiphanius departs, who posited the 18th, so that by the same

^A Sicyonians alone were then reigned over, whose kingdom’s beginning was Europe.

VIII.

VIII.

^A From Abraham, the sect did not yet have a name, but only those who held to this same piety were called Abrahamites, from Abraham. For he had eight sons; but Isaac was the only heir, because he lived according to his father's will, was devoted to piety, and had been granted to his father by the promise of God. Before him, he had fathered Ishmael by the handmaid Hagar. Keturah also bore him six children. These were dispersed throughout what is called Arabia Felix: Zembran, and Jezan, and Jesboe, and Sove, and Emmaden, and Madian, along with the son of the handmaid; Ishmael was his name, as I said. He occupied territory and founded what is called Phares in the desert. ^B Twelve sons were born to him, from whom are the tribes of the Hagarenes, also called Ishmaelites, and now known as Saracens. Isaac begat two sons, Esau and Jacob. At that time, the race of the pious was called both Abrahamites and Isaacites. As Esau moved into Idumea, a region lying to the south and east of the land of Canaan, he became a settler of Mount Seir and built a city called Edom. Sons were born to him, and each ruled in Idumea by succession, and they were also called the princes of Edom. From this lineage, if you exclude Abraham from the sequence and begin the numbering from Isaac, Job comes in the fifth order. For Isaac begat Esau, Esau begat Raguel, Raguel begat Zara, and Zara begat Job, who beforehand was called Jocab, but was given the name Job a little while before the trial that came upon him. The rite of circumcision was in practice. ^C But Jacob, fearing the wrath of his brother Esau, fled on the advice of his father and mother to Mesopotamia, to Phadan, beyond the other part of Mesopotamia which is called Susoba; and he took from there wives from his own kindred, four in number; and they bore him twelve sons, who were then called patriarchs. As he was returning to the land of Canaan towards his own father Isaac and his mother Rebecca, a vision appeared to him from...

God ^A by the fords of the Jordan; they call it the torrent of Jabbok, where he beheld the camps of angels. And behold, he says, a man from evening, and he wrestled with him until dawn, whom the Scripture identified as an angel; who, by way of blessing, gives to Jacob a name of dignity, Israel. Rising from that place, Jacob named the name of the place "The Sight of God," because the one who said to him through the blessing, "That your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel shall it be called," distinguished it by saying: "For you have grown strong with God, and with men you shall be powerful." From this time forward they are called Israelites.

^B IX. And after the descent of Joseph into Egypt, Israel himself also goes down with his whole house, with sons and grandsons, with the wives of those mentioned before, and others, to the number of seventy souls. The race of Israel dwells in the land of the Egyptians for five generations. For Jacob begets Levi and Judah and the other ten patriarchs. Levi begets Caath. Judah begets Phares. Caath begets Amram. Amram begets Moses. Phares begets Esrom. Esrom begets Aram. Aram begets Aminadab; Aminadab begets Naasson in the times of Moses; and Naasson in the fifth generation from Levi. Israel goes out from the land of Egypt through the Red Sea amid divine signs, and camps in the desert of Sinai. And at the giving of the oracles from God to His servant Moses to number the people from twenty years ^C old and up to fifty years, he found men able to draw a sword and carry weapons of war to [the number of] six hundred and twenty-eight thousand five hundred. And it was at that time that Inachus was among the Greeks.

^B known to the Greeks, whose daughter was Io, who was also called Atthis, from whom also [comes] the Bosphorus, of which the city in the Euxine Sea is named Bosphorus. The Egyptians, however, call her Isis, and they worship her as a goddess. A river, too, that is called Inachus bears the same name as him. From thence the mysteries and rites among the Greeks had their origin, which had been poorly devised beforehand among the Egyptians, the Phrygians, the Phoenicians, and the Babylonians, and were transferred to the Greeks from the land of the Egyptians by Cadmus, and by Inachus himself, who was called Apis ^C beforehand, and who built Memphis. But they also took their origin from Orpheus and certain others; and later they were organized into sects in Epicurus, and Zeno the Stoic, and Pythagoras, and Plato, from which time they began to be strengthened, down to the Macedonian times, and those of Xerxes, king of the Persians, after the first destruction of Jerusalem, and the captivity under Nebuchadnezzar, and Darius, and the times of Alexander the Macedonian. For Plato was known at that time, and those before him, Pythagoras, and Epicurus who came after. Whence indeed, as I said before, they took their pretext, and the writings among the Greeks came into existence. ^D

^A And the heresies of the philosophers that were bruited about in the time following these agree with one another in the deception, and weave together a concurrent knowledge of idolatry and impiety and atheism; yet, by this same deception, they are knotted together against themselves and differ one from the other.

OF THE STOICS

Which is the third heresy of the Gentiles, but the fifth in the sequence.

I. As far as the Stoics are concerned, this is their opinion regarding divinity. They assert that God is a Mind, which is, as it were, the soul of the whole visible mass—of the heavens, to be sure, and the earth, and the rest of things—as in a body. Furthermore, they distribute the one divinity into many particular natures, namely into the sun, the moon, and the stars, into the soul, the air, and the rest of things; and they admit ^B the transfusions and migrations of souls from other bodies into others. Indeed, they maintain that they depart from the body and enter in again, and are born again: and they weave together that criminal dogma with a certain abundance of error. Otherwise, they proclaim that a certain particle of God, and the same immortal, is the soul. The prince of the Porch, or Stoic sect, was Zeno, about whom there is various discourse. For some think he was the son of a certain Cleanthes of Tyre; others make him a Cittiean from the island of Cyprus; whom they narrate lived at Rome for some time, and from there went to Athens, and in the Stoa, that is the Porch, publicly set forth those dogmas. There are not lacking those who distinguish two Zenos, the Eleatic and the one about whom I have just spoken. ^C However that may be, the same decrees flowed from both. And so, the latter makes matter equal to God, just as the other heresies do. But indeed, he also asserts the necessity of fate and origin, by whose laws all things are tempered and affected. Therefore, whatever brevity of the work instituted allows to be disputed against his wickedness, and to be prepared as an auxiliary medicine—but so that in no way does that same work grow into an immense bulk—I shall here, I say, briefly object against him, that I may not seem to have omitted it: and so I shall meet him.

II. Heus tu! I say. Can you tell us from whom you received this teaching? Or who indeed is the holy Spirit that has spoken to you from heaven regarding this error of yours? For you violently obtrude two things at the same time as equal in duration, namely matter and God. Therefore your discourse ^D will collapse, and will be without foundation.

For you confess that there is some creator, whom you also call Almighty; but then you divide this into polytheism. Of whom, then, could he be the creator, if matter is his contemporary? For it would be, of itself, its own master, not having received its beginning from any cause, and not being subject to anything. But if the creator receives an emanation from it, having found this, it would be a kind of incapacity and a contribution for the sake of necessity to the one who provided himself with it, not from the things that are his own, but from things external that were lying ready, so that he might establish his own handiwork. ^B And concerning the transmigration of souls, there is a great deal of baseness in your corrupted mind, you self-styled philosopher, who also profess knowledge to men! For if it is a part of God—and, indeed, an immortal one—yet you consign it to most wretched bodies, not only of wild beasts, but even of serpents and, in the condition of the vilest living things, you join it to the creation of that thing, which in your view obtained its substance from God; and what could be more wicked than that?

III. But you also object to us regarding Fate, from which all things originate that happen to man as well as to other things. But by one very brief statement that fiction of yours will vanish. ^C For if the very thing itself—to become wise and prudent, to be born as a participant or non-participant in reason, and all other things of this kind—is brought about by the necessity of Fate, then let all legal decrees be silent; for the power of Fate dominates adulterers and other scoundrels. Indeed, it would be more just for punishment to be demanded from the stars, which bring about the necessity, than from him who commits the act entirely under compulsion. But let me argue this in another way: if the situation is as they wish it to be, come now, let the schools be silent: let the sophists, rhetoricians, grammarians, doctors, and all other disciplines, and the countless multitude of menial arts, cease. And let no one teach any longer; if, indeed, knowledge is supplied to the human race by the benefit of Fate and not by the discipline of letters. For if the necessity of Fate can make men learned and erudite, let no one devote effort to a teacher: but let those Fates, who spin the threads, imbue the minds of men with disciplines, just as you profess in that empty and false dogma of yours.

CONCERNING THE PLATONISTS,

Let these things suffice against Zeno and the Stoics. As far as Plato is concerned, he is mired in the same mud. For concerning the transference ^D and vicissitude of souls from other bodies into others, and concerning the multitude of gods and the remaining kinds of idolatry and superstition, his opinion is the same. But concerning matter, perhaps he does not think entirely the same as Zeno and the Stoics. For he knows God himself, and says that all created things are from the essence of God. But now, having exalted it so excessively and impiously, he insults it again with another excess, by introducing pigs, and donkeys, and animals even more dishonorable than these.

to have been (certain powers); and he holds that there is a first cause, and a second, and a third. And the first cause is God, but the second cause is that certain powers were produced by God, and through these same powers the matter was produced. For he speaks as follows: "The heaven has been produced along with time; for it will be dissolved at the same time." In this he overturned his own previous opinions regarding matter, for he had previously once stated that matter was coeval with God. ^B

OF THE PYTHAGOREANS,

Which is the fifth heresy of the pagans, the seventh in order.

But before him Pythagoras and the Peripatetics, while professing to define one God, have slipped into another kind of philosophy and other doctrines. Both he and his followers share the same opinions with the Platonists regarding the abominable and impious sentiment concerning the transmigration of bodies and the transition of souls, and the corruption of bodies. This man finally ended his life in Media. He says that God is a body—namely, the heaven. And he establishes that his eyes and other parts, as in a man, are the sun and the moon and the other stars and the elements in heaven.

OF THE EPICUREANS,

Which is the sixth heresy of the pagans, the eighth in order.

1. To depart from the former: Epicurus removed Providence from the world. He believed that the universe consists of atoms and is resolved back into atoms. In addition to this, he held that all things happen by chance; and that the world subsists, forever being generated by nature and perishing, while it is reborn again from itself, and makes no end to its propagation and destruction. Furthermore, he held that the entire universe was like an egg, around which a spirit, like a serpent in coils, bound nature like a crown or a belt. But while it strove to squeeze the matter and the nature of the universe more tightly into one, it then separated the whole mass into two hemispheres, and from this came the excretion of indivisible corpuscles; ^D so that the lighter and more subtle parts flew upward, namely light, ether, and that which was the finest part of the spirit; but that those things which were heavier and, as it were, dross, settled to the bottom; and of this kind was the earth, or the dry itself, and the humid nature of the waters. He adds that all things are moved by themselves, and through the whirling of the pole and the stars—

as if by the movement of that serpentine spirit. And we have spoken of these matters in part. ^A

II. Now, we must refute these four sects together for the sake of brevity in our reading. From these beginnings, and indeed even before them, as I said at the start, poets, historians, logographers, astronomers, and the authors of other errors—who readied the mind for countless evil causes and digressions—darkened and muddied the perception of humanity. And thus the first error arose: the devised superstition of idols and the teaching of the worship of demons. Everything was divided, between Hellenism and Judaism; though Judaism was not called by that name at first, but rather it was called by the name of Israel, the title of the godly religion, until the successions were brought forth. For Naasson, who was made prince of the tribe of Judah in the desert, begat Salmon; Salmon begat Boos; Boos begat Obed; Obed begat Jesse, among those who were then called the godly Israelites. Jesse begat David the king, who first reigned from the tribe of Judah. From him, the kings in succession from his seed, son succeeding father, have continued down the line. Before this David, Saul, son of Cis from the tribe of Benjamin, had held the kingdom in Israel by nature, but no son succeeded him; rather, the kingdom was transferred to the tribe of Judah through David first. For the first-born son of Jacob himself is Ruben, the second Simeon, the third Levi, the fourth Judah, from whom they are called Jews, because of the tribe of Judah, which came from the lineage of the godly, who shifted into this name. They were indeed formerly called Israelites, who are now called Jews. ^{B C}

III. Up to this point in time, four generations of men on earth have been brought forth, each of which came together separately in its own time to the age and beyond that which we have just indicated. For from Adam to Noah, Barbarism prevailed. From Noah to the building of the tower and the times of Seruch, who lived three generations after it, Scythian superstition prevailed. From the building of the tower and Seruch, and also Aram, to Abraham, the Gentile sect flourished. Finally, from Abraham and his descendants, the sincere religion emerged, which began from Abraham himself and was transmitted through his lineage, and especially the tribe of Judah, from whence Judaism received its name. That this has been truly said by me is confirmed by the testimony of the divine and most holy apostle of Christ, Paul, when he disputes thus: *In Christ Jesus there is neither barbarian, nor Scythian, nor Greek, nor Jew, but a new creature.* Since even in the beginning, when the creature was first created, being still new, it had no peculiar or distinct name. In agreement with this, ^D

they are said in another place by the Apostle: ^A *I am debtor both to the Greeks and to the Barbarians; both to the wise, and to the unwise* (Rom. 1, 14), so that he might show that among the Jews, both the wise and the unwise are as the Scythians. To all these, he says, I am a debtor. From that time forward, therefore, the name of the Jews was transferred to the race of Israel, beginning from David; and from that time, that entire race was perpetually distinguished by both names, that is, of the Israelites and of the Jews; from the times, I say, of David and his son Solomon, and of his son in turn, Roboam, who reigned in Jerusalem after Solomon. But so that I may not be passing over things that pertain to the religion of the Jews in a cursory manner, nor fail to indicate the subject of their belief, I ^B shall select a few things from the many. For the things concerning the Jews are, so to speak, manifest to all. Therefore, I shall not undergo much labor to recount that subject in the most minute detail, but rather I shall present here only a few things out of the many, which it is necessary to touch upon.

IV. Therefore, the Jews, who received the succession of both lineage and religion from Abraham, obtained from him the rite of circumcision, which he was commanded by God to observe in the ninety-ninth year of his age: for the cause which we proposed above; namely, so that his posterity, dwelling in a foreign land, might not cast away the name of God from themselves, but rather carry about upon their bodies a sort of branded sign, by which they might be both reminded and rebuked if they should commit any fault, and that they might altogether persevere in the ancestral religion and ordinance. ^C Then Abraham's son, Isaac, was circumcised on the eighth day after he was born, according to the decree of God. And it is acknowledged that at that time circumcision existed by the command of God; but it was ordered then as a type, as we shall show later when we proceed in sequence. The same children of Abraham—I speak of him and thereafter Isaac, Jacob, and his children—continued to be circumcised and to hold fast to the fear of God, both in the land of Canaan, Judea, and Philistia, so called then, but now called Palestine; and in Egypt as well. For Jacob, who is also Israel, went down into Egypt along with his eleven sons, in the one hundred and thirtieth year of his life. ^D Now Joseph, his other son, was already there in Egypt wielding power, having been sold by his brothers out of envy. But the providence of God, working with good things for the righteous man, turned the plot against Joseph into a marvelous outcome. Therefore, as I said, Jacob went down into Egypt, and the sons born of him, and their wives and descendants, numbering seventy-five souls, as the first book of the Pentateuch according to Moses contains, clearly setting forth all these matters.

They remained there for five generations, as I have often said. Now, however, it is necessary to repeat these things. For the generations from Jacob remained, numbered through Levi, from whom the priests were established, and through Judah, from whom after some time the king David arose. And Levi begat Kohath and the others; Kohath begat Amram; Amram begat Moses and Aaron the high priest. This Moses brought the sons of Israel out of the land of Egypt by the power of God, as the second book according to the legislation contains ^A.

V. Concerning the polity of the sons of Israel

The same Jews, therefore, also received prophetic oracles concerning the coming Christ, who was ^D called prophet but was in reality God and the Son of God, and although called an angel, was nevertheless the Son of God, who was to become man and to be reckoned among his brothers, as all the divine Scriptures indicate, especially the fifth book of the Law, according to the legislation, which is Deuteronomy, and all those that follow.

(56) *And they became common.* In this passage *chudaioi* means abundant, numerous. Epiphanius, however, takes this word as though it signified viles and the despised—for such is the power of the word. Hence, a kind of date, sacred to the gods, was called *chudaion* by the Jews by way of contempt. Pliny, lib. xxiii, c. 4: "For those which we might call in honor of the gods, [he] called *chudaeos*—a Jewish race, an affront to the divine powers."

^A VI. As for those Jews, up to the time of their return from the Babylonian captivity, they possessed these prophets and the books of these prophets: first, Genesis; second, Exodus; third, Leviticus; fourth, Numbers; fifth, Deuteronomy; the sixth book, Joshua son of Nun; seventh, Judges; eighth, Ruth; ninth, Job; tenth, the Psalter; eleventh, Proverbs of Solomon; twelfth, Ecclesiastes; thirteenth, the Song of Songs; fourteenth, the first book of Kings; fifteenth, the second book of Kings; sixteenth, the third book of Kings; seventeenth, the fourth book of Kings; eighteenth, the first book of Chronicles; nineteenth, the second book of Chronicles; twentieth, the Book of the Twelve Prophets; twenty-first, Isaiah the prophet; twenty-second, Jeremiah the prophet, with his Lamentations and the Epistles both of him and of Baruch; twenty-third, Ezekiel the prophet; twenty-fourth, Daniel the prophet; twenty-fifth, the first book of Ezra; twenty-sixth, the second book [of Ezra]; twenty-seventh, the book of Esther. And these are the twenty-seven books which were given by God to the Jews. They are numbered as twenty-two, however, according to the letters of the Hebrew alphabet among them, because ten of these books are grouped into five pairs. We have spoken clearly about this elsewhere.

There are also two other books held by them as doubtful, namely the Wisdom of Sirach and the Wisdom of Solomon, ^B besides certain other books that are called apocryphal, that is, obscure. Now, all those holy volumes taught the Jewish discipline and the observances of the Law until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; and they were rightly conducted, being tutored by the Law, if they had accepted Christ, who was proclaimed and prophesied to them by that tutor—I mean the Law—so that, having accepted His divinity and His incarnate coming, they might know that it was not the destruction of the Law, but the fulfillment of the Law. For the types were in the Law, but the truth is in the Gospel. For there, fleshly circumcision served for a time until the great circumcision, that is, the Baptism which prunes us of sins ^C and seals us in the name of God. And there was the Sabbath, which held us until the great Sabbath, that is, until the rest of Christ, that we might celebrate the Sabbath from sins in Christ. And there was the irrational sheep sacrificed there, guiding us to the great sheep, which was sacrificed in heaven for us and for the sake of the whole world. And there was the tithing maintained there, so that the *iota*, which is the decimal—the first element of the name of Jesus—might not escape us.

^D VII. Since, therefore, they were led by the type and did not attain to the perfection which was preached through the Law and the prophets and all the others, and through every book, they were cast out from

^A the cultivation, and the Gentiles entered in, since those could no longer be saved unless they returned to the grace of the Gospel. For all their ordinances have been rendered void, every testimony saying this, as it is in all Scripture. But we shall briefly state from one testimony the inevitable and inviolable nature of the decree against them, so that one may see exactly the judgment against them. As it says: "Whatever soul shall not listen" to that prophet, "it shall be utterly destroyed from its tribe, and from Israel, and from under the heavens." For as the Lord was going to bring to a perfect and saving completion those things which had been mystically delivered through the Law, and since the Law was not able to perfect man, because the ordinances in it were written carnally, while they are truly fulfilled in the Lord Christ, it was required that he who does not listen to Him, nor endure to have salvation, even if he performs the Law, be excluded from all hope of obtaining salvation. ^B For the Law cannot render a man perfect, because it embraces all the thick and carnal defenses of justifying oneself, which are fulfilled in reality in the Lord Christ.

So far let it be said by me concerning the sect of the Jews. For I have recounted a few things, that I might not pass over their whole life in silence, but might point it out in part. For the argument concerning them is manifest to all, so to speak, as is the refutation against them. We have also shown the beginning, from where they had their introduction, that from the beginning they were called worshippers of God because of the piety of the patriarch Abraham, because of their being of his seed; but from his descendant, I mean Jacob, who was also Israel, they were called Israelites. ^C And from the days of David, who reigned from the tribe of Judah, they were called both Jews and Israelites. All the twelve tribes, even until Solomon the son of David, and even until Roboam the son of Solomon, the grandson of David, even against the reproof of God and the unworthiness of Roboam, were divided as the twelve tribes; and they became two and a half with Judah, that is to say with Roboam, and nine and a half with Jeroboam. And the nine and a half were called Israelites and Israel, being reigned over by Jeroboam son of Nabat in Samaria. But the two were called Jews at Jerusalem, being reigned over by Roboam son of Solomon, and there were again successions of kings. ^D For Roboam begat Abias, Abias Asa, Asa Josaphat, Josaphat Joram, Joram Ochozias, Ochozias Joas, Joas Amasias, Amasias Azarias, who was also called Ozias.

^A Azarias, or Ozias, begat Joatham, Joatham Achaz, Achaz Ezechias. In the days of Ezechias and Achaz, the tribes of Israel were deported to the borders of the Medes. After this, Ezechias begat Manasses, Manasses Amos, Amos Josias, Josias Jechonias, who is also called Sellum [(60)], and was named Amasias. This Jechonias begat the Jechonias who is called Sedecias, and Joakim.

II. And let no one doubt concerning this [(61)]. ^B The succession of the later kings of Judah is entangled and obscure in many ways, and is made more difficult by the genealogy of Matthew. We shall resolve both knots briefly in this place. Josias, the son of Amon, had altogether three sons who were heirs to the kingdom, as is clear from the book of IV Kings. The first to reign after his parent's death was Joachaz for three months (IV Kings xxiii, 30), who is also called Jechonias in the third apocryphal book of Esdras, chapter 1, 34. For our Maldonatus wrongly accommodated this to Joacim. The second is Joakim, who was also called Eliacim (lib. IV Kings xxiii, 34), who reigned for eleven years. The third was Sedecias; before whom Joachim, or Jechonias, the son of Joakim, ruled for three months (chapter xxiv, 17). But in I Paralipomenon iii, 15, four sons of Josias are named: Joanan, Joakim, Sedecias, and Sellum. Since many things are brought forward here by Interpreters and Chroniclers, the opinion of the Hebrews, and especially that of Aben Ezra in the 1st chapter of Daniel, of R. Levi ben Gerson, and of R. David on the book of IV Kings chapter xxiii, pleases us: that Sellum is the same as Joachaz, who obtained the paternal throne by popular faction and not by right of succession, which Scripture also declares in chapter xxiii, 30 with these words: *And the people of the land took Joachaz the son of Josias: and they anointed him, and made him king in the room of his father.* For if you look at the order of age, after Johanan, who seems to have been snatched away before his father’s death, the eldest was Joacim, or Eliacim. This was also taught by Josephus (lib. x, cap. 7) and Origen. For Joachaz was twenty-three years old when he was raised to the kingdom (cap. xxiii, 31); but Joachim, who took the kingdom after three months, was twenty-five years old; he was therefore two years older. Whence also Joacim was born about the sixth year of Josias, but Joachaz in the ninth. Third in the order of birth should be Sedecias, who was placed over the kingdom by Nabuchodonosor eleven years and six months after the death of Josias. He was in the thirty-first year of his age (cap. xxiv, 18). Wherefore he is younger than Joachaz, and was born in the twenty-first or twenty-second year of Josias. And yet in the book of I Paralipomenon, Sellum is numbered last, whom we have said is Joachaz. There is no lack of conjectures as to why Sellum was placed in the last position, which, so that we may not be too long, the chroniclers will provide. Although some Hebrews, like Aben Ezra in chapter 1 of Daniel, wish for Sellum, or Joachaz, to be the last of the children of Josias, and they attempt to interpret that Sedecias, when he began to reign, is said to have been twenty-one years old. For he writes that Sedecias was hailed as king three years before the death of Josias: whence when Josias died, he was in his twenty-fourth year. And he proves this from the fact that in Hieremias chapter xxvii, at the beginning of the reign of Joakim, the prophet was ordered to prepare bonds, and to give them to the messengers of the kings who had come to Jerusalem to Sedecias king of Judah, because the neighboring kings supposed that Sedecias, whom they had heard was made king three years before, was still reigning after the Father’s death, and they had sent delegates to him: thus Aben Ezra. Which interpretation does not please me greatly. But as it may be, Sellum is entirely Joachaz. For in Jeremiah xxii, 11, Sellum the son of Josias is said to have reigned in place of his father Josias: he is, however, Joachaz. Since these things are in part most certain, and deduced from the authority of the sacred books, in part they are probable; some things among them committed by Epiphanius need to be corrected. First, that he says Jechonias, the son of Josias, is the same as Sellum; for Matthew asserts that Jechonias was indeed born of Josias; but he calls the son of Jechonias not another Jechonias, but Salathiel. ^C And yet Sellum, or Joachaz, had no offspring; nor is Jechonias named by anyone other than the apocryphal book of Esdras. Wherefore Epiphanius understood by Jechonias, the son of Josias, Joacim, or Eliacim; whose son is Jechonias, also called Joachin ('Jehoiakim' and 'Jehoiachin'). But truly Joakim is nowhere called Jechonias: this is a first hallucination; the second is that he calls the same Jechonias, or Joachim, Amasias, from where he drew this I do not know; the third, and of all the most grave, is that he thinks Jechonias, that is Joacim, begat Sedecias, and Joacim. In lib. I Paralip. c. iii, 15, out of the four sons of Josias, Joanan, Joakim, Sedecia, and Sellum, the second, namely Joakim, begat Jechonias, and Sedecias, and Jechonias begat Salathiel. There were therefore two Sedecias, neither of them the son of Jechonias; but the former the son of Josias, who also reigned last of the line of David; the other the son of Joakim, who was never king. Epiphanius confused both of these; for he who is commemorated by him as Sedecias is the very one who reigned last of the kings. He also calls his brother Joakim, which is a fourth hallucination; unless someone might think Sedecias is named Joacim by Epiphanius by another name, so that *et Joakim* might refer to *called*. Which nevertheless is false: for the son of Joakim was Joachin, who is badly conceived here as 'Iωσεκείμ, whose uncle Scriptura calls Sedecias. Hieronymus in chapter 1 of Daniel observes that Joacim, son of Josias, is written with a 'kim', but the son of Joacim with a 'chin'. So many errors are committed by that most holy and learned man Epiphanius in those few words; to warn the reader of these is our duty and custom; to excuse them is a matter of kindness; to ignore or pretend to defend them is, however, neither a matter of duty nor kindness.

[(61)] And let no one be perplexed concerning this. Here a serious question is stirred up: whether the name of someone is missing in the genealogy of Matthew. For Matthew, having listed all the generations, distinguishes three intervals, to each of which he assigns fourteen generations. As if from Abraham to David fourteen: the same from David to the transmigration of Babylon: and finally the same from the transmigration to Christ. In the two former intervals the count is consistent; in the third, only thirteen heads are numbered. For by the name of generations Matthew understands the persons themselves, who either beget or are begotten. Wherefore one name, or one generation, is missing. When the enemies of the Christian name objected to this passage of Matthew as inextricable, the difficulty of the question stirred the wits of our people; and countless reasons have been devised: of which this seems most convenient to many, that by the fault of the scribes some name fell out. Wherefore Epiphanius thinks Jechonias was placed twice by Matthew; the repetition of which same word the copyists, thinking it mistaken, ill-advisedly corrected. Therefore thus Mat -

Matthew ^A having numbered the generations in three ways, from Abraham until David, he says there are fourteen generations; the two previous numbers are found to be clear, containing no deficit of number. For they contain the times up until Jechonias. But the third number is no longer found to have the fullness of fourteen generations according to the succession of names, but thirteen. Since some, having found Jechonias together with another Jechonias at the same spot, thought the number had been double-counted. But it was not a double-counting, but a clear number. For the son was called by the father's name, Jechonias of Jechonias. Therefore, some having removed the one name for the sake of elegance, carried away by ignorance, left the subject matter incomplete, and destroyed the promised number and the manifold nature of the relationship in the group of fourteen names. ^B

From that time on, the deportation of the Jews to Babylon took place. At this time of the captivity (62), the elders came to Nabuchodonosor in Babylon, requesting that some of his own people be sent as settlers into the land of the Israelites, so that the country might not remain totally deserted and overgrown. And he accepted their petition. For he was not delaying, and he sends four nations of his own, those called the Chuthæans (63), ^C and the Cudæans, and the Sepharuæans, and the Anaguganeans. These people, along with their own idols...

[alt-version omitted]

* * *

[Note: "Theum" thinks that he wrote: Josias however begat Jechonias, and his brothers in the Babylonian migration: Jechonias however begat Jechonias: Jechonias however begat Salathiel, etc. Now we know who this Jechonias is, according to the mind of Epiphanius. For the former is Joakim, or Eliacim, son of Josias. The latter is called by another name, Sedecias. But how absurd that is, is clear from the preceding. For if he speaks of king Sedecias, which he seems to want to do by the succession of the royal lineage, Sedecias is not the son of Jechonias, nor of Joakim, but of Josias. If he understands another Sedecias, who lived as a private citizen, he is indeed the son of Joakim, but not of Jechonias. For in 1 Paral. iii, 15, Joakim the son of Josias begat Jechonias and Sedecias, ^D Jechonias [begat] Salathiel. But Epiphanius has conflated Jechonias and Sedecias, whom Scripture so clearly distinguishes, into the same man. There is no doubt that the Jechonias who is said by Matthew to have begat Salathiel is the same as the one whom the book of Paralipomenon commemorates. But a different father than Jechonias must be sought for him. Our commentator Maldonatus substitutes Joakim for the repeated Jechonias: and thus reads, Joacim however begat Jechonias: Jechonias however begat Salathiel. Which is agreeable to Scripture. A manifold error, than which scarcely any greater has been committed by Epiphanius. For those colonists were sent into Samaria not after the destruction of Jerusalem, but much earlier—namely, after the deportation of the ten tribes—and that by Salmanassar, not by Nabuchodonosor. See 4 Kings ch. xxiv. Nor indeed was Epiphanius alone in that error, for Procopius also in [his commentary on] Isaiah says that Samaria and Judea were conquered by Nabuchodonosor. But in 4 Kings 24 it is said that the king of the Assyrians brought colonists from Babylon, and from Cutha and other regions into Samaria. Was Salmanassar then holding Babylon, as one who at that time was a tributary of the Assyrians reigning in it? This is indeed probable. For after that old and long-standing empire of the Assyrians was extinguished, the beginnings of the Babylonians started from Nabonassar, in the year of the Julian period 3967, about a hundred years from the established monarchy of the Medes; which began in the year 3838. Furthermore, Salmanassar carried away the ten captive tribes around the year of the Julian Period 3993, in the 6th year of Ezechias. From which to Nabopolassar, the father of Nabuchodonosor, are 96 years: for the death of Nabopolassar corresponds to the year of the Julian Period 4089, under whom, or rather before whom, the empire of the Babylonians began to flourish and be stirred up when that second [empire] of the Assyrians had already fallen. For after Assaraddon there is no longer any mention of Assyrian kings: but of Merodach son of Baladan, prince of the Babylonians, 4 Kings xx, 12, in the 14th year of Ezechias. And therefore I would believe that after Merodach, the Babylonian kings asserted themselves into freedom from the dominion of the Assyrians. Scripture conceives of these peoples [the Chuthæans etc.] far differently: The king of the Assyrians, it says, brought men from Babylon, and

the Cuthæans, the Sepharvaites, and the Anagoganæans. ^A These men, having gone up with their own idols, inhabited Samaria at that time, having chosen this land for themselves because it was both fertile and very productive. But in time, as they were being torn apart by wild beasts—namely lions, leopards, bears, and other savage creatures—incursions of which were occurring, they sent messengers to Babylon with prayers, because they were exceedingly amazed at the previously settled lifestyle of those who had inhabited the place before, specifically how they had been able to escape the predation and violence of the wild beasts. The king, having summoned the elders, asked what the way of life had been for those who were settled in Judæa, and how they had escaped the predation of the wild beasts despite such great bestial ferocity and injury existing in that land. They showed him the Law of God and, with understanding, revealed to him the consequences from their well-reasoned opinion. ^B For they said that no nation could settle there unless it performed the Law of the God of heaven, which was given through Moses. For God, they said, was the defender of the land, and did not wish for transgressions of idolatry or other things to be committed therein by foreign nations. He, being diligent and persuaded by the most truthful interpretation of those who had informed him, requested a copy of the Law. And they, having given it liberally along with the Law, sent a certain priest, Ezra [(64)], a teacher of the Law, from Babylon, to instruct the Assyrians who had settled in Samaria—the aforementioned Cuthæans and others—in the Law of Moses. This happened in the thirtieth year, more or less, of the captivity of Israel and Jerusalem. Ezra, therefore, and those with him, instructed the race in Samaria; and those who received the Law through Ezra, who came from Babylon, were called Samaritans. Then forty more years went by, and the captivity was relaxed, and Israel went up from Babylon.

^D

IX. The Beginning of the Heresies

a king was set up as their head. From this it happened that wars and strife arose, and nations were brought into conflict with nations, as each was forced to prefer its own will and to seize for itself the portion of another, owing to the insatiable greed implanted in us all in this life. Thus also at this time which I have described, as the single religion of the Israelites and the Scripture according to the Law passed over into other nations—namely, the Assyrians, from whom those sojourners, the Samaritans, originated—it happened that their minds also fell into discord. Consequently, error and dissension began to sow seeds from the one true religion into many corrupted opinions, just as it seemed good to each person, and each thought to exercise himself in the text and to interpret it according to his own desire.

24. SAMARITANS

^B 1. The Samaritans, then, who rely upon divine Scripture, follow immediately after the Greek sects we have already mentioned, which were foolishly devised by the ingenuity of men. The whole race of the Samaritans was so called. The name "Samaritans" is interpreted as "guards," because they were stationed in that land like guards, or because they were guardians of the ordinances according to the Law of Moses. The mountain on which they were settled was also called Somoron, and likewise Somer, from a certain ancient Somer, son of Somer—for that was the man’s name. This Somer had a father of the race of the Perizzites and Girgashites, who lived in that region at that time and traced their origin from Canaan, who had seized that tract of land—which is now called Judea or Samaria—which belonged to the sons of Shem, not to them, because Canaan himself was the son of Ham, the brother of Shem’s father. Thus it came about that the name "Samaritan" remains with them for various reasons: namely, from Somer and Somoron, from the fact that they were stationed as guards of the land, and finally because they kept the ordinances of the law. ^{C D}

^A II. Furthermore, they differ from the Jews in this first respect: that the writings of the prophets after Moses were not handed down to them, but only the five volumes given through Moses to the Israelite people when they departed from Egypt; I mean Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. In the Hebrew dialect they are called: Beresith, Ellesemoth, Vaiicra, Vaidabber, Ellehaddebarim. And in these five books the sign of the resurrection of the dead is scattered, yet it is not proclaimed clearly; and scattered within them are references to the only-begotten Son of God, and to the Holy Spirit, and against idols. But in them the introduction of the Monarchy is set forth more clearly; and within that Monarchy, the Trinity is spiritually proclaimed. ^B Those who accepted the Law made an effort to be moved away from idolatry and to acknowledge the one God; but they did not have the care to acknowledge it more accurately. Having stumbled, such people, not having grasped the standard of the entire part of the faith and of our life clearly, were ignorant of the resurrection of the dead and are unbelieving; and they do not accept the Holy Spirit, for they were truly ignorant. And this heresy, while rejecting the resurrection of the dead, and while pushing away idolatry, yet in its own way practices idolatry through ignorance, because the idols of the four nations have been hidden away upon the mountain that is falsely and deceitfully called Garizin [(68)]. For to anyone wishing to investigate accurately ^C concerning Mount Garizin, it must be known that the two mountains lie by Jericho, namely that of Garizin and that of Gebal, beyond the Jordan toward the east of Jericho, as it is in Deuteronomy and the book of Joshua. They practice idolatry therefore in their ignorance, by turning themselves in every direction toward the mountain when they pray, supposedly because it is sanctified. For it is impossible for the Scripture to be false, which says: They remained keeping the law, and worshipping their idols until this present day, as is related in the fourth book of Kings.

III. But they are refuted from every direction concerning the resurrection of the dead; first from Abel, because after he died, his blood communed with the Lord. But blood is not the soul, yet the soul exists in the blood. And he did not say: "His soul cries out to me," to show that there is hope for the resurrection of the bodies. ^D Furthermore, Enoch was translated so as not to see death, and was not found; and also Sarah, after her body had become dead...

womb and earth had dried up by custom, ^B was restored again for the sowing of seed, and the aged woman conceived a child according to promise through the hope of the resurrection. Moreover, Jacob also, caring for his own bones, gave commandments as though they were not perishing things. And not only he, but Joseph also, giving instructions in the same sequence, hinted at the form of the resurrection. Add to this the rod of Aaron, which, being withered, put forth shoots and brought forth fruit, in hope of life, signaling that our dead bodies shall rise again, and leading to resurrection. And the wooden rod of Moses, likewise, was quickened by the will of God, and becoming a serpent, it signified resurrection. And Moses also, blessing those of Reuben, says: "Let Reuben live, and let him not die," speaking of him who had long since departed, so that he might show that there is life for the dead after death, and a judgment of a second death unto condemnation. Wherefore he bestows a double blessing upon him, saying "Let him live"—in the resurrection, that is—and "let him not die" in the judgment, not meaning the death which is seen in the separation of soul from body, but rather that which consists in condemnation. These few things will suffice to overthrow their error. ^C They have also other ancient customs conjoined with extreme madness. For they are accustomed to wash themselves by pouring water over themselves whenever they return from abroad, as if polluted by some contagion; and they wash themselves and their garments with water when they have touched someone of another nation. For they consider it a defilement to touch anyone, that is, to come in contact with any other person of a different sect. So great is their senselessness.

IV. Now, observe, I pray, how easily their insanity can be refuted; you will perceive it without any difficulty. For they abhor the corpse of a dead person, though they themselves are dead by their own deeds. But it is proven by not just one or two, but by infinite testimonies, that the bodies of the dead are not to be detested. For that which the law seems to assert to the contrary, it willed to shadow forth by a riddle. For it is not as I said, two or three testimonies that verify this, but six hundred and twenty-two thousand men in the desert, and just as many others, and even more than these. Nay, even far richer are the passages of Scripture which make mention of the coffin in ^D which the bones of Joseph were stored. This coffin was carried about in the camp for forty whole years, and was neither an abomination nor did it spread any stain by its contagion. But the following was truly said by Scripture: "If anyone touches a dead body, he shall remain unclean until evening. Then he shall wash himself in water, and shall be cleansed." By which words it hints at the death of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the passion He undertook in the flesh. For from the fact that He added the article, it is necessary to point out the distinction of the name. For where the article is added to one certain and most evident thing, the confirmation of all things is through the article; but without the article, it must be taken indefinitely concerning any one of those that may occur. As, for example...

if I say "a king," I declare the name itself, but I do not clearly point out the one defined. For we speak of a king of the Persians, and of the Medes, and of the Elamites. But if we say with the addition of the article, "the king," the meaning is unambiguous. For the king who is sought, or who is spoken of, or who is known, or who is king over someone, is pointed out by the article. And if we say, "god" without the article, we have spoken of any random god of the nations, or of God who is. But if we say, "the God," it is clear that by the article we signify the One who exists, true and known; just as also "man" and "the man." ^A And if the law had said: "If you touch a dead body," the judgment would have applied to all, and the phrase of the question would have been laid down simply concerning every dead body; but when it says, "If any one touches the dead body," it directs the treatment toward one certain person, I mean the Lord, as has been shown to me above. And the law spoke this enigmatically for those who were about to lay hands upon Christ and deliver him to the cross; because they had need of purification, until the day should dawn for them, and another light should arise for them through the baptism of the water of the laver of regeneration; ^B as Peter also bears witness to me in this place, saying to the Israelites in Jerusalem, who said to him, "What shall we do?" because he had said to them, "This Jesus, whom you crucified." And to those who were pricked in their heart he said: "Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, and your sins shall be forgiven, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Of this dead one, therefore, the law speaks. But if the law also speaks of another defined dead one, it is interpreted otherwise. For it says: "If a dead man passeth by, shut your doors and windows, so that the house may not be defiled." As if he were speaking about the hearing of sin, that: "If you hear the voice of sin, or a form of transgression, shut your eye against desire, and your mouth against evil-speaking, and your ear against a wicked sound, so that the whole house may not be deadened," that is, the soul and the body. Wherefore ^C the prophet also said: "If death has ascended through the windows," and he does not altogether speak of these windows. For if we had shut the windows, we would never have been able to die. But windows for us are the senses of the body: sight, hearing, and the others, through which death enters into us if we sin through them. Joseph, therefore, buried Israel, and did not abhor it; and after death he fell upon his face and kissed him. And it is not written that he washed himself, so that he might be purified. The angels buried, as the tradition that has come down to us holds, the body of Moses the holy one, and they did not wash; nor were the angels defiled by the holy body. ^D V. I fear again lest I should bring to an end the question of...

^A resolution. But from one or a second reason, it shall be put to the wise to be made wise in the Lord, according to him of the contrary part. And if it should be for me to speak briefly concerning the Holy Spirit, I would not hesitate. Explicitly, then, the Lord says to Moses straightway: "Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, and I shall take of the spirit that is upon thee, and will put it upon them, and they shall bear the burden with thee." And concerning the Son, that we might know, the Father says: "Let us make man after our image and likeness." But "let us make" is not indicative of one person. And "the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven." And concerning the prophets, since the Pentateuch had been given to them beforehand, they no longer walked according to the other Scriptures, but to the Pentateuch alone, and not to the rest of the sequence ^B. And even if one should speak to them now concerning the others—I mean concerning David and Isaiah, and those following—they do not accept them, being held by the tradition delivered to them by their own fathers. And thus far let the explanation concerning the Samaritans be for me, spoken in a brief discourse, because of the fear I foresee, lest I extend the promise of this composition into breadth.

AGAINST THE ESSENES (71),

The Samaritans have been divided into four sects. Since they feel the same things among themselves concerning circumcision and the Sabbath, and the other things ^C prescribed in the Law, yet in a few things each of the three differs in some measure from their neighbors, except for the Dositheans only. For the Essenes remained in their first manner of life, exceeding nothing. After these, the Gortheni differed ^D among themselves because of something small; for a certain dispute has arisen between them, I mean between the Sebuaeans and the Essenes and the Gortheni. And the dispute is after this manner. The Law commanded 73 that the Jews be gathered together from everywhere to Jerusalem. And this frequently at three seasons of the year, both at the feast of Unleavened Bread, and at Pentecost, and at

^A the Feast of Tabernacles. Now the Jews who were dispersed lived scattered even in the borders of Judea and Samaria. And it happened that they were accustomed to make their journey through the cities of the Samaritans as they passed through to Jerusalem. Since, therefore, they happened to be having their gatherings for the celebration of the feast at one and the same time, collisions occurred as a result. But also when Ezra [(74)] was building Jerusalem after the return from Babylon, when the Samaritans asked to be allowed to contribute help to the Jews and to build it with them, they were refused by Ezra [(75)] and Nehemiah.

AGAINST THE SEBUAEANS [(76)], The second heresy from the Samaritans, and the eleventh in order.

And then the Sebuaeans, because of wrath and anger, changed [(77)] the times of the aforementioned feasts; first, indeed, moved by anger against Ezra, and second, on account of the aforementioned pretext, which provoked them to fighting over those passing through. These people set the new moon [(78)] of Unleavened Bread after the new year, which occurs in the autumn, that is to say, after the month of Tishri, which is called August by the Romans, Mesori by the Egyptians, and Gorpiaeus by the Macedonians. ^B [(79)]

^{C D} At that time the Sebuaeans, stirred by anger, changed the times of those three feasts of which we spoke: first, being angry with Ezra; then, because they were provoked to quarrels on the occasion of those passing by. Moreover, they place the new month of Unleavened Bread after the beginning of the new year; and it falls in the autumn after the month of Tishri, which is called August by the Romans, Mesori by the Egyptians, and Gorpiaeus by the Macedonians. Hence it is that they are called Sebuaeans [(78)], as it is probable, as Scaliger writes, that they are named from the Hebrew word *shabua*, which signifies a week. But he is not consistent in the reasoning he gives for this word. For in that place he thinks they are so named because they observe the whole... in the same religion in which they celebrate the day itself. For they offered the Omer, or sheaf; from which day the Sabbath, and all things which followed up to Pentecost, obtained their name... But the Samaritans called all the days that follow, which fall into the same week in which the day was, in such a way that between the offering of the Omer and the solemnity of Pentecost, there occur seven weeks...

[(77)] *Because of wrath and anger they changed.* Above he had said they had conceived wrath and quarrels against one another; now it is obscurely gathered that those hostilities occurred with the Jews: since, out of hatred for them, they began to usurp the time of those solemnities in a perverse manner.

[(78)] *They set the new month.* Whether the first month among the Samaritans and Sebuaeans of the year was Tishri, he does not sufficiently explain. For he says it was established by them after the new year; the head of which new year is... Furthermore, he compares Tishri with August. These things, therefore, are rugged and perplexing. If the new year began in the autumn, not certainly in Tishri, which corresponds to August. Why therefore does he so diligently circumscribe this same month with various names, if it is not the beginning of the year? Why then does he speak thus? Naturally in that month of which he has spoken, that is, in Tishri. For it follows, on the fiftieth day afterward. Wherefore before and in Tishri the Unleavened Bread is celebrated; and so the head of the year is Tishri. And it will be the same as established, at the beginning.

^A in the Roman tongue, but Mesori among the Egyptians, Gorpiaeus among the Macedonians, and Apellaeus among the Greeks. From this time, they consider the beginning of the year, and at once celebrate the Unleavened Bread. In the autumn, however, they perform Pentecost. They also celebrate their Tabernacles when the Jews celebrate the Unleavened Bread and the Passover. Yet they were not persuaded by the Sebuans.

30. AGAINST THE GORTHENI, Which is the third heresy of the Samaritans, twelfth in order.

The Gortheni and the other Essenes, being neighbors to others, do the same things as them. But the Gortheni and the Dositheans alone hold a rivalry against the Sebuans; and they—I mean the Gortheni and the Dositheans—celebrate their own feasts, ^B whenever the Jews perform those of the Unleavened Bread and the Passovers, of Pentecost and of the Tabernacles, and the fast which among them is esteemed as one day. The others do not do so, but rather, in a manner peculiar to the Essenes, as we have said before.

^{C D}

Against the Dositheans, the fourth heresy of the Samaritans, thirteenth in order.

^A Dositheans differ from these in many ways. For they confess the resurrection, and there are modes of life among them. They abstain from living creatures; but some of them also maintain continence after marriage; others remain virgins. Likewise, they hold to circumcision and the Sabbath, and to not touching anyone because they abominate every human being. The argument further introduces that they observe fasts and exercises. The pretext for Dositheus holding these views is as follows. Being a Jew, he joined the Samaritan nations, and having progressed in training according to the Law and in the traditions among them, he sought the primacy; but having failed and not being deemed worthy of any esteem among the Jews, he turned aside to the Samaritan race and established this sect. And, withdrawing into a cave, through an ^B excess of feigned wisdom and hypocrisy, he endured fasting, as the story goes, and thus died—in need of bread and water, voluntarily, as he pretended. A few days later, those who came to visit him found his body putrid and crawling with worms, and a cloud of flies swarming upon it.

And these are the distinctions of the aforementioned four sects that have come to our knowledge, which will be refuted by what has been said against them. Now I shall return again, weaving together the infiltrations that occurred in the succession of times and the wanderings of their errors ^C, and, while making my rebuttal against them by exposing their abominable practices, I shall attempt also to provide a brief argument for the refutation of the poison of those evil and destructive serpents.

Hitherto, the sects of the Samaritans have been completed.

^D As for how the Essenes with these celebrate the Passover—but behold, concerning the Essenes, I wrote above in heresy X: "They remained in their first mode of conduct, transgressing in nothing." But this man, and in the *Anacephalaeosis*, mostly celebrates feasts prematurely with the Sebuæans. By what knot shall I hold the face-changing Proteus? Are there two kinds of Essenes, as it pleased Serrarius, while Scaliger protested? That some lived with the Sebuæans, others with the Gorthenians and Dositheans, and imitated the rites of those with whom they lived only in performing solemnities? Which indeed the discipline of these, which held nothing more precious than leisure and quiet, persuades us the Essenes did for the sake of peace and concord. He seemed to exempt the Dositheans from the common hatreds and contentions of the Samaritans; but the contrary sense from this passage is to be attributed to those above: namely, that in a few and very light matters the factions of the Samaritans differ from one another, except for the Dositheans, who did not differ nothing from the rest, but differed not lightly, as they did, but most gravely. Moreover, Dosithei existed both before Christ and after him, and there is mention of many among the Hebrews. For [Dosthai] is Dositheus, which was denied in vain by Scaliger. But in chapter 3 of *Pirke Aboth*, a certain Dosthai son of Jonai is mentioned, whom he had learned from R. Meir. But he is different from this one of ours. Just as that other one, whom Origen mentions several times, and calls him a Samaritan in *On First Principles* book 2, as well as in other places, especially against Celsus book 2. But this Epiphanian one is older, from whom he soon indicates the Sadducees were propagated, who indeed preceded the birth of Christ. Concerning Dositheus and the Dositheans, read what our learned Serrarius discusses in his *Minerval* book 4, chapters 10 and 12. "To live" can be accepted in two ways: in both cases alter, so that "another" is implied, as it pertains to marriage. The former interpretation is simpler, and Cornarius followed it. In the latter, it is the same as to be dead, as "he lived" instead of "he died" among the Latins, as in Plutarch in his *Cicero*. We, having acknowledged both, have received the latter into the text.

JUDAISM SUBSEQUENTLY DIVIDED INTO SEVEN SECTS

AGAINST THE SADDUCEES

Which is the first sect of Judaism, fourteenth in order.

After those of the Samaritans enumerated by us, and the seven sects of the Greeks previously set forth, there arose seven sects among the Jews in Judea and Jerusalem before the incarnate coming of Christ the Lord.

The first of these were the Sadducees, being an offshoot ^A from the aforementioned Dositheus. These people name themselves Sadducees, supposedly deriving the appellation from righteousness (*dikaiosynē*), for *Sedek* is interpreted as righteousness. There was also a certain Sadok by name among the ancient priests. But these people did not remain in the teaching of their master. For they abolished the resurrection of the dead, ^B thinking in a way similar to the Samaritans; but they do not accept angels, which the Samaritans do not reject. They do not know the Holy Spirit, for they have not been deemed worthy of Him; they [continue the text into the next page].

^A perform these things as the Samaritans do. Yet these men were not Samaritans, but Jews. For they offered sacrifices in Jerusalem, and in all other things they acted in common with the Jews. But they too shall be overturned by the trustworthy voice of the Lord, which they brought upon themselves by the resolution of the question when they approached Him saying: "If there can be a resurrection of the dead?" And that there were seven brothers, and the first married a wife, and died childless. And the second took her, as Moses commanded, to marry the wife of the brother who had died childless, and to take the same to the brother in order to raise up seed in the name of the deceased. The first, he says, took her, and the second, and they died; and likewise all seven. "In the resurrection of the dead, whose wife shall she be, since all seven had her?" And the Lord said: "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God; for in the resurrection of the dead they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels." That the dead will rise, Moses teaches you, as God spoke to him, saying: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of the living, and not of the dead." And He stopped their mouths. For they are easily overcome, and are not able to stand for even one hour against the truth.

AGAINST THE SCRIBES

[The intervening Latin text, providing commentary on the Sadducees and the Scribes, is translated as follows:]

It has been rightly said by Epiphanius, and others, that the Sadducees did not know the Holy Spirit, so as to elect that category from the whole, by which denial they brought upon themselves a greater crime of impiety. Did they also reject all the sacred books, except the Pentateuch? All the ancients, especially Origen, Tertullian, Jerome, and Bede, affirm this; as also Elias the Thisbite, and others whom Serrarius cites as witnesses. Scaliger, however, denies this and thinks that Josephus asserts the opposite. But so far is Josephus from thinking the opposite, that he seems to build up that common opinion (see Origen, Book XII, ch. 1). For he teaches that the Pharisees handed down many things to the people: the Sadducees, therefore, at the example of Josephus, said that only those things were to be embraced and observed which were written, and not to keep those things from the tradition of the fathers. Thus, Josephus's words either indicate that the Sadducees admitted no books other than those of Moses; or at least they do not effect what Scaliger so stubbornly fights for, namely, that they embraced all the sacred books of Scripture, and rejected none. For in that place Josephus deals primarily with rites and customs, or laws, by which something is prescribed as to be done; which are contained almost exclusively in the Mosaic Pentateuch. Hence, since the Sadducees accepted only those things which were written, they understood that only the books of Moses were to be observed, by which [the laws] are comprehended, and not the historical or prophetic books; by which no new, or very few, ceremonies are commanded. See the rest in Serrarius.

^D

AGAINST THE SCRIBES

^A Scribes themselves emerged, interpreters of the law, and professing a sort of grammar, while they adhered to the other institutions of the Jews; which they intermingled with superstitious and caviling inventions. For they do not live merely by the prescription of the law, but further wash pitchers and cups, and dishes, and the rest of the utensils, as being cultivators of a sincere and holier discipline. For they also frequently wash their hands and cleanse themselves with waters and baths. They also have certain fringes, which are established as their marks, composed for pomp and ostentation, and to capture the praises of those looking on. In addition to these, they wore garments distinguished by phylacteries, which are certain wider strips of purple—of which, when the Evan- ^B -gelists speak, they refer to them as Scribes, Pharisees, and teachers of the law. Wherefore the νομικοί (lawyers) do not differ from the Scribes; and they are the same interpreters of the law, as also pleased Beza; and it is most false that the νομικοί are occupied properly with civil actions and forms. Equal is the delirium of Scaliger, when he separates the Scribes of the people from the Scribes of the law, as if the former were clerks or public notaries. Indeed, in Matt. ii, 4, Herod, when he had heard of the arrival of the magi and the birth of Christ, in order to inquire in what place Christ should be born, calls together the chief priests and the Scribes of the people, and seeks their answer. Who, therefore, could they be other than interpreters of the law and doctors? Certainly they were not those pragmatics, or form-writers, or clerks: whom no one would consult about a matter so great and so recondite, to understand and debate which no small use and knowledge of the sacred letters is required. As for that testimony of Luke, ch. xi, there is something singular in it, about which no interpreter, as far as I can know, has advised. For in Greek it is thus read: "Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites," verse 44, which also the Latin interpretation of the Royal Bibles retains. But in other Latin codices, and among Ambrose and Jerome, it is thus read: "Woe unto you, because you are as monuments which do not appear," etc. Nor are those words found, "Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites." And it appears that in some ancient Greek codices those were missing: which if they are expunged, that argument will perish; relying on which, Drusius had distinguished the νομικούς ^C from the Scribes. And although we read "Scribes and Pharisees" exactly as it exists in the Greek, yet no distinction is proven from that. For it is permitted to interpret it thus: since he had hitherto inveighed against only the Pharisees, finally, in verse 44, he had joined the Scribes also to the Pharisees. Because a certain one, who was only a Scribe and not a Pharisee, had taken this indignantly, he complained about that matter, that he attacked not only the Pharisees, but also his own order. This may be the simplest and most apt sentiment of this place. For all the evangelists use νομικούς for Scribes, and vice versa. Moreover, Epiphanius has described the office of the Scribes excellently, when he says: that they were certain seconders of the law, teaching a sort of grammatical science. Which, indeed, Beza wrongly notes to have existed from the Levitical tribe; for they could be from any, just as the Pharisees could.

On the knees, in the course of time, and with them the

indeed, since this is also mentioned in the Gospel [*], that he is not perhaps speaking of amulets. For since some are accustomed to call amulets phylacteria, the argument does not concern this at all; but because such persons used to wrap themselves in stoles or mantles, and Dalmatics, or Colobia made with broad purple bands of a deep-dyed shade, and those who speak more accurately are accustomed to call the purple marks phylacteria, for this reason the Lord also, according to them, called them phylacteria. The sequence of the passage makes clear the meaning of the name, and "the fringes of the garments"—the fringes, meaning the tassels; and the phylacteria, meaning the marks of purple. For He says: "Because you make broad your phylacteria, and enlarge the fringes of your garments." For each one used to have certain pomegranate-like objects [ῥοΐσκους] ^B upon the four (98) corners of the pallium, tied from the very warp at the time when he was observing continence or practicing virginity. For since each one, having taken a vow, appointed a time of abstinence, or continence, and that [as] it were, along with the meditation of His commandments, God commanded [the] constant and assiduous observance: "And you shall bind them," He says, "as a sign upon your hand, and they shall be and shall move between your eyes," in Hebrew [טוטפות]; the Chaldean [לציץ]... it is discussed variously both by the Hebrews and by our own. The LXX translate for that word: "And they shall be immovable before your eyes," and "immovable," and "phylacterion." [...] regarding the phylacteries, little pomegranates [were] on the fringes [...] [in] the high priestly vestment [...]

The interpretation of this word

^A a time of purity, or continence, and these were their prototypes, to indicate to men the things promised among them, so that no one might—supposedly—touch the sanctified things. There were four ^B traditions (or "Deuteroses") among them: one in the name of Moses the prophet; the second to their teacher, Akiba—or Barakiba, as he is called; another to Andan, or Annas, who is also called Judas; and yet another to the sons of Assamoneus. From these four traditions, whatever is deemed among them a conceit of wisdom—though most of it is foolishness—is cried up and sung; and it is boasted of and celebrated as a rank of preferable teaching.

AGAINST THE PHARISEES,

1. To these two heresies there is joined, in order, the heresy of the Pharisees, another group who thought the same things as these; I speak of the Scribes, who are interpreted as teachers of the law. For the "Nomici" (or lawyers) were joined with them. But the Pharisees thought differently from these again, holding to greater ways of life. For some of them, when they were training, would fix a period of ten, or eight, or four years—likewise of virginity or continence—praying continually; and they would set themselves to this struggle more frequently, so that they might, as they put it, not suffer anything bodily, nor be stolen by dreams, nor produce the ^C naturally shameful flow of the body. And some of them fashioned for themselves boards of only a span’s width, and at evening they would place themselves upon these, so that if anyone were to fall asleep and tumble to the ground, he would again be roused to prayer, in order to keep his life as sleepless as possible; others would gather pebbles and spread them beneath themselves, so that by being pricked they might not fall into sleep. ^D

Furthermore, it was their custom to fast ^A twice in the week, namely on the second day and the fifth day. They also gave tithes of their tithes; they gave offerings of the first-fruits, and thirty-fold or fifty-fold tributes, and they performed their sacrifices and vows most scrupulously. They went about in the aforementioned garb of the Scribes, and in other habits, and wearing women’s cloaks ^B along the broad streets in thonged sandals, and with the tongues of their shoes displayed as they walked. They were called Pharisees because they were separated from the rest of the people owing to the voluntary, excessive religiosity established among them. For *Phares* in the Hebrew language signifies separation.

II. They confessed the resurrection of the dead, and believed that angels and spirit exist. But they were ignorant of the Son of God, just like the others. Furthermore, fate and astronomy were held in very high esteem among them. ^C And so, the Greek names derived from the astronomy of the errors have been changed among them into other names in the Hebrew dialect. For instance, the sun is called by them *Hamma* and *Semes*; the moon, *Jeree* and *Hallebana*, whence it is also called *Mene*—for *Jeree* is the term for month, and *Mene* for the moon, just as among the Greeks the name is derived from the month. Mars follows, whom they name *Cochab Ocmol*; Mercury, *Cochab Ochmod*; Jupiter, *Cochab Baal*; Venus, *Serua*—that is, *Lued*—and finally, Saturn is called *Cochab Sabeth*. They have also other names among them; yet I have not been able to set forth their nomenclature accurately, but only those that are vainly regarded as such. ^D

^A into the number of elements by those wandering ones as names, which they call signs of the zodiac, and they have unlawfully led the world astray into impiety. Thus, again, they call them in Hebrew: Telaa, Sor, Thomim, Saratam, Ari, Bethula, Mozene, Acrab, Keset, Gadi, Dalmi, Deggim. These—I speak, indeed, of the Pharisees—following the Greeks in vain, changed the names into the Hebrew language thus: Aries, which among them is called Telaa; Taurus, Sor; Gemini, Thomim; Cancer, Saratam; Leo, Ari; Virgo, Bethula; Libra, Mozene; Scorpio, Acrab; Sagittarius, Keset; Capricorn, Gadi; Aquarius, Dalmi; Pisces, Deggim.

^B III. But these things have been set down by me not to unsettle those who encounter them, nor to establish the vulgar babbling of those who brought the unstable and mind-destroying nonsense of astronomy into human life. For this is refuted by the truth itself as being unstable and erroneous. We have also spoken in other discourses at length toward the refutation of those who imagine generation and fate, and especially in the preface of this work, matters have been dealt with by us in brief against them. But so that no one might think that we are acting out of calumny against anyone, and that we have not accurately set forth things true from traditions, these... ^C ...and they have lawfully led the world astray into impiety.

The wise Rabbi Moses explains the text "The heavens declare" by referring to the celestial spheres, since it is his opinion, and that of the philosophers, that the spheres are living and rational, serving God and praising Him with great praise.

[Regarding the diagram and its elements:] Northern segment; Southern; Zephyric; Eastern (Subsolanus). Fire; Earth; Air; Water. Aries, Leo, Sagittarius; Taurus, Virgo, Capricorn; Gemini, Libra, Aquarius; Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces.

Rabbi Moses, he says, explains that word, "they declare," in such a way that he refers it to the celestial spheres: since this is the opinion of him and the philosophers: that the celestial spheres live, and understand, and worship God, and render Him the highest praises. Hence, Baronius, in the cited place, thinks that the Jews were called "Coelicolae" (Heaven-worshippers) by the emperors in the *Codex* concerning the Jews and the Heaven-worshippers, because they worshipped the stars and the heaven. But Scaliger brings forward another reason for the name, about which we will speak more opportunely at the final heresy. Otherwise, it can be referred back to this, which in Origen, Book I, Celsus objected to the Jews: that although they acknowledged fate, they did not maintain that all human things depended upon it; nor did they remove from the midst the free will of man and the power of choice, as Josephus explains at length, Book XVII of the *Antiquities*, chapter 2, and in Book [II], chapter 12. Therefore, there was no reason why Epiphanius should direct the following discourse against the assertors of fate, especially against the Pharisees; in so far as that matter pertains to human actions and their free counsels, which the Pharisee Josephus asserts the Pharisees by no means abolished. ^D

^A And we have mentioned it by name. But it is the utmost ignorance and an folly not to be overlooked, for those who acknowledge the resurrection of the dead and define a just judgment, to assert also that there is fate. For how can there be both judgment and fate? For one of two things must necessarily be: either, if there is a generated existence, there is no judgment, because the one who acts does not act of his own volition, but by the necessity of the power of fate; or, since judgment exists and is truly threatened, and laws exist to judge, and those who do evil undergo punishment, and since the law of God is acknowledged to be most true, and His judgment most just, fate must be null and void, and have no basis at all.

IV. Since, because of the ability to sin or not to sin, one is demanded to pay the penalty for his sins, while another awaits praise for having done well, their difference is clearly defined; as it is also said with one just voice in brief truth, through Isaiah the prophet from the person of the Lord: "If you are willing, and listen to me, you shall eat the good things of the land; but if you are not willing, and do not listen to me, a sword shall devour you." For the mouth of the Lord has spoken these things. ^B So it is clear and beyond doubt to everyone that God granted free will, having said through Himself, "If you are willing," and "if you are not willing"; so that it is up to man to do good or to desire evil things. To which must be added, frequently and in many ways, and not in one voice but often, those things said by the Savior to them: "Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you have left the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy; and you tithe the anise, and the mint, and the rue, and you cleanse the outside of the cup and the dish, but the inside is full of uncleanness and intemperance. And you deem it righteous to swear by that which is above the altar—but to swear by the altar itself is, according to you, ^C to be released from the oath—and you say that swearing by heaven is nothing. But if anyone swears by that which is above it, this is considered righteous. Does not the altar bear what is laid upon it, and is not heaven the throne of Him who sits thereon? And that you say, 'If anyone says to his father and mother: Corban, which is a gift by which you might have been helped by me,' and he no longer honors father and mother; and you have nullified the commandment of God by your tradition of the elders. And you encompass sea and dry land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twofold a son of hell more than yourselves."

What then is there more redundant than these holy utterances, which one might cast against the refutation of the aforementioned? ^D I believe it is sufficient to be content with the Savior's true voices and words, against which they were unable to struggle, not even in the smallest degree.

AGAINST THE HEMEROBAPTISTS, Which is the 4th Heresy of Judaism, 17th in order.

^A Next is the sect of the Hemerobaptists; which, as it differs from the others in nothing, and embraces the same dogmas as the Scribes and Pharisees, so it does not only agree with the Sadducees in denying the resurrection of the dead, but also retains the common infidelity with them, and the depravity of other matters. But they have this one chief characteristic: that they wash daily, as much in spring and autumn as in summer and winter; from which they have obtained the name of Hemerobaptists. For they asserted that a man could not live otherwise than by washing himself in water every day, and purifying himself from every fault.

But that sect can be utterly overthrown by us in one word; for its dogmas are as estranged from the faith as they are joined to infidelity. For since they are washed every day, their very conscience convicts them that they have lost all the hope which they had conceived the previous day, along with their faith and expiation. For if they held to one baptism alone, they could place some confidence in it, as being perpetual and immortal. But now, those who are washed today, not for the sake of cleansing the body, but to expiate sins, and for that reason are, as they claim, purged of everything, are the same people who, when they are washed again the next day, declare that their previous day's baptism has indeed vanished. For unless that one had perished, there was no reason why they should repeat it again the following day for the expiation of sins. But if they do not cease from sinning at all, and think that they can be expiated by water while they persist in sinning daily, they err vehemently, nor is there anything more vain or absurd than their institution. For neither the Ocean itself, nor all the seas, nor the perennial waters of rivers or fountains, nor whatever rain there is anywhere, if ^B they come together, can wash away sins; because this does not happen according to the word or the commandment of God.

^C (10) Hemerobaptists. The evangelist Mark (chap. VII, 3 and 4) testifies that this was common to all Jews, and especially to the Pharisees, that they washed their hands frequently, and were baptized when returning from the market. Wherefore, this does not seem to have been a peculiar sect of the Jews; unless we say that some who desired to distinguish themselves from others in holiness were accustomed to wash frequently during the day, not only as often as they returned from the market, but even if they had not stepped foot out of the house. Such was that Banus to whom Josephus committed himself for training, as he left recorded in his Life. For he states that he was baptized in cold water often by day and night for the sake of purity. Thus the Essenes, according to the same Josephus (book 1, ch. 7), used to wash their bodies in cold water before meals. What, therefore, those Hemerobaptists whom Epiphanius mentions deserved, in order to constitute a sect distinct from the others, we do not sufficiently discern.

(11) Not, however, made equal to the Sadducees. The meaning that occurs at first sight of these words is the one that not only we ourselves, but also Cornarius, have expressed: that the Hemerobaptists agree with the Sadducees not only in denying the resurrection of the dead, but in all the other falsity of their dogmas. ^D "Not, however, made equal," he says, "to the Sadducees in the resurrection of the dead, but in their infidelity and other things." But this opinion differs vehemently from those things which are read a little earlier; both in the Breviary of the sects of this book, and in the Anacephalaeosis of all of them, they are found by Epiphanius. For it is constantly asserted everywhere that the Hemerobaptists do not differ in any part from the rest of the Jews; or, as he wrote in this place, from the Scribes and Pharisees. But if they have held the common denial of the resurrection with the Sadducees, and other dogmas regarding which those people were so abhorrent to the Pharisees and Scribes that they approached the Samaritans, just as he testified in declaring the heresy of those people; then certainly the Hemerobaptists are far separated both from the remaining factions of the Jews and from the Pharisees and Scribes. Which reasoning moves me to judge that the words of Epiphanius must be interpreted differently, and indeed in the contrary sense: and that the former is prior to what I placed in the Latin version. "Not, however, made equal," he says, "to the Sadducees." Not, however, agreeing with the Sadducees in this one head, because they do not, as it seemed to them, deny the resurrection of the dead, although they are twin to the Sadducees and the rest of the heresies of Judaism in the remaining points of perfidy, and especially in their contumacy against Christ.

For repentance cleanses, as does the one baptism through the naming of the mysteries. But I will pass over this as well, having deemed it sufficient to point out the antidote to their insanity in a few words. Up to this point, it is arranged for those who happen upon it.

AGAINST THE NAZARENES (12)

^A 1. Next, I shall set myself to recount the matters concerning the heresy called the Nazarenes, which follows the Hemerobaptists. These are Jews by race, originating from Galaaditis, Basanitis, and the regions beyond the Jordan, as the account that has come down to us contains. Since they are from the stock of Israel itself, they entirely Judaize, and hold almost no opinions beyond those already mentioned. For they kept circumcision in the same way, observed the same Sabbath, and adhered to the same feasts; yet they did not introduce fate or astronomy. And they accepted the fathers mentioned in the Pentateuch from Adam down to Moses, who were renowned for the distinction of their piety—I mean Adam, Seth, Enoch, Mathusalam, Noe, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, ^B Levi, Aaron, and Jesus the son of Nave—but they did not accept the Pentateuch itself. Indeed, they acknowledged Moses and believed that he received legislation, yet they say it was not this one but another. Hence, though they are Jews and keep all the customs of the Jews, they did not offer sacrifices, nor did they partake of anything that had been alive; rather, it was unlawful among them to eat meat or to offer it in sacrifice. For they claimed that these books were forged, and that none of these things had been authored by the fathers. This was the difference of the Nazarenes from the others, so that the refutation against them is not in one place, but is evident in many.

^B 2. First, regarding their acknowledgement of the fathers, the patriarchs, and Moses. ^C And as to another Scripture... ^D

^A of which the Scripture makes mention—whence could they have their knowledge of the naming of the fathers and their excellence, if not from the very Scriptures of the Pentateuch? And how can it be that truth and falsehood are in the same place? And that the Scripture is true in part, and in part false? Since the Savior said: "Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt." For a good tree cannot bring forth corrupt fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Their reasoning is therefore vain, and their teaching admits of refutation from many points: seeing that even to this day, not only are the things recorded in the Scriptures celebrated, but the very places where those wondrous deeds occurred are physically manifested. First, there is Mount Sion, where Abraham offered the sheep to God; it has retained that name to this day. Then there is the place where that oak of Mambre was, where the calf was set before the angels. And while he (Abraham) was preparing that service of meat for the angels, it is likely he was also a participant with them in it.

III. Moreover, regarding that lamb which was sacrificed in the land of the Egyptians, the memory of that event still remains among the Egyptians, even those who are idolaters. For at the time when the Passover was once celebrated there—which occurs at the beginning of spring and the equinox—all the Egyptians, in their ignorance, take red ochre and smear their sheep, and they smear the trees also, the fig trees and others, ^B claiming and saying, as it is said, that fire once consumed the whole world on this day, and that the fiery-looking form of the blood contains a certain power to avert this same calamity. But they say they do not know the reasons for this. Even now, they show the remains of Noah’s ark in the region of the Cardyaeans. And if anyone were to inquire more diligently, I have no doubt that he could also find the traces of the altar, which is its logical consequence, at the foot of the mountain; where Noah dwelt after coming out of the ark, and offered a sacrifice to the Lord God from the clean animals and the fat, at which time he heard this oracle from God: "Behold, I have given you all things, even as the green herb; sacrifice and eat." But I shall let pass the adulterated and foolish dogmas of this heresy, for these few points discussed by us thus far, brought forward to refute that error, are sufficient. ^C

CONTRA OSSENOS (14)

1. After this, again, there follows another heresy connected with these—the heresy of those called Ossenes. ^D

^A These also are Jews, just like those mentioned before, hypocrites in their manner and cunning in their thinking. Tradition has come down to us that they originated in the Nabatæan country, Ituræa, Moabitis, and Arelitis, regions situated beyond the Salt Valley—this is the name by which that tract of country, which lies above the sea now called the Dead Sea, is called in Holy Scripture. Now, if one interprets the name of this race, the Ossenes, it means "a sturdy race." Later, in the time of Emperor Trajan, after the coming of Christ the Lord, a certain Elxai joined them. Because he claimed to be a false prophet, he published a book which he purported to be inspired by a prophetic spirit, full of supposed divine wisdom. They mention that he had a brother named Jexeus. This man was depraved in his morals and an impostor; for, though he was a Jew by birth and sect, he in no way conformed his life to the prescriptions of the Law; but he substituted all kinds of other things in its place and led his followers astray. Among other things, he commanded them to swear by salt, earth, bread, heaven, the ether, and the wind as if they were deities. Sometimes he designated other witnesses: namely, heaven, water, spirits, the holy ^B angels of prayer, oil, salt, and earth. Furthermore, he hates virginity, condemns continence, and compels people to enter into marriages. He then left behind certain fabrications and dreams of his own as if they were apocalypses. He also taught that they were simulators; since he denied it was any crime if someone, during a time of persecution, venerated idols, provided he did not do so from the heart; or if one confessed something in word, but not in his heart.

^{B B} The deceiver is not ashamed to bring forward as a witness some priest of the lineage of Levi and Aaron, and of that ancient Phinees, who, reigning in Babylon during the captivity, venerated Diana in Susa and escaped the danger of death under King Darius; so that all his things are false and ridiculous inventions. Now, this man is linked above to the aforementioned heresy called that of the Ossenes, of which remnants still exist even today in that same Nabathaean land, which is also Peraea, near the land of Moab; a race which is now called the Sempsaeans. They imagine, as if by pretense, that they call him a revealed power, because 'Iel' is called a power in Hebrew, and 'Xai' a hidden one. But the vanity and arrogance of this institution has been thoroughly convicted, and they are greatly mocked by those who are gifted with any judgment for considering and discerning the truth. And it is possible to construct a most effective argument against them from these very people, especially in the times of Constantius and the subsequent emperors down to this day; for up until the emperor Constantius, a certain Marthus and Marthana, sisters of the line of Elxai, were held in their region like deities on account of the dignity of that origin. Marthus departed this life not long ago; Marthana still survives to this day, and the deluded heretics of that region were accustomed to carry around even her spittle and the other defilements of her body for the sake of curing diseases. All these things, however, were vain. But the race of heretics is proud and prone to fraud; for all wickedness is blind, and error is destitute of prudence. But what does it avail to linger any longer in pursuing the affairs of this impostor, or to recount the doctrines that he asserted against the truth?

III. ^C First, he taught his followers to deny God, when he persuaded them to participate in the detestable rites of idolatry through simulation. Then he deceived them more clearly; he said that faith could be abjured with the lips alone, and that there was no crime in this. So incurable is their malady and admits of no kind of remedy. For when the mouth itself, by which the confession of truth is expressed, is suborned to lying, who would believe that these people are not being gravely deceived, when it is clearly prescribed in the divine scriptures by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit: *With the heart one believes unto justice; but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation*? Furthermore, although he confesses Christ by name itself, when he speaks thus: "Christ is a great King," yet I have not been able to discern from that fraudulent and adulterated book, which he published out of his own trifles, whether he spoke this regarding our Lord Jesus Christ. For he does not explicitly signify this; but he simply speaks the name of Christ, as if indicating or expecting another, as far as we understand. For he even forbids praying with the face turned towards the Orient, and denies that we ought to be intent upon that direction; but [he commands us to have] Jerusalem...

[as our orientation], and that those from the West [should look] toward the Orient in the same, and those from the South and midday toward the North, and those from the North toward the South, so that from every side the face may be opposite to Jerusalem. And observe the mental derangement of the deceiver. For he anathematizes sacrifices and sacred rites as being alien to God, and maintains they were never at all offered to God by the fathers and [by the ordinances of] the law; and he says that one must pray there—toward Jerusalem, where the altar and the sacrifices used to be—rejecting the eating of flesh [performed] among the Jews, and the rest [of the ritual], and the altar itself, and the fire, as if it were alien to God. But he defines the water as being good and excellent; yet he speaks of fire as something alien, [saying] through these words: "Children, do not go toward the appearance of fire, for you are being led astray; for such a thing is an error." You see, he says, "It is very near [to the eye], yet it is far off." ^B "Do not go toward its appearance; but rather go toward the voice of the water." And his mythologies are many.

IV.

^A of their judgment, and of their trampling, and of their labor, in the trampling in condemnation through my fathers, from the abjection that has passed away in the apostolate of perfection." And all these things are fulfilled in Him. For His power and deception have been brought to nothing. But if anyone should wish to hear the interpretation of the individual words in detail, I shall not be reluctant to do this, but I shall fully satisfy even those who desire to know these things minutely. Therefore, I shall ascribe its own proper interpretation to each word, which is of this sort: *Abar*, let it pass by; *Anid*, abjection; *Mois*, from my fathers; *Nochile*, of their condemnation; *Daasim*, and of their trampling; *Ane*, and of their labor; *Daasim*, in trampling; *Nochile*, in condemnation; *Mois*, through my fathers; *Anid*, from abjection; *Abar*, which has passed away; *Selam*, in the apostolate of perfection.

V. Of this sort is the heresy of the Ossenes mentioned by us, which, while it leads its life according to the Jewish rite, and adopts the Sabbath and circumcision, and does all things that are prescribed by the law, yet rejects certain books after the example of the Nazarenes: and it is separated from the other six sects as if by a schism. But regarding its total overthrow, that one thing will suffice, that it is utterly abhorrent to God. For since the Lord clearly asserts that the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, what else is it by which they are said to profane that day, except that while no one would do any work on the Sabbath, the priests in the temple, by performing sacrifices, would loosen [break] the Sabbath, and profane it by the perpetual sacrifice of animals? But I shall pass over that heresy. For this Elxai himself, in turn, is joined with the Ebionites who followed ^B the times of Christ, and also with the later Nazarenes; and four sects claim him as their author, which are affected by his deceptions: namely, the Ebionites, the later Nazarenes, the Ossenes who arose both before him and with him, and the Nazarenes of whom I have previously discoursed. But this is one of those seven heresies which existed in Jerusalem, and which were propagated until the coming of Christ, and thereafter from his times until the destruction of Jerusalem, which happened under Titus, brother of Domitian and son of the Emperor Vespasian. After Jerusalem was finally overturned, it stood for a short time with the other sects that ^C were then celebrated; and they were the Sadducees, I mean, and the Scribes, and the Pharisees, and the Hemerobaptists, and the Nazarenes, and the Ossenes, and the Herodians, until each of them, in its own opportunity and time, was scattered and perished.

VI. Finally, it ought to be enough that from the very insanity of these people, and from the very words by which they preach their dogmas, a remedy can be prepared against their lethal poison by one who is endowed with some prudence, so that he may easily condemn the sordid doctrine and loquacity of these men. Especially from this fact, that both in the law and in the Gospel it is ^D clearly said by the Lord: "There shall be no other gods for you beside me; you shall not take"

by the Lord: *Thou shalt not have other gods before me.* ^A Not to invoke the name of another in swearing. But in the Gospel He commands: *Swear not, neither by heaven, nor by earth, nor any other oath; but let your speech be, Yea, yea; and Nay, nay. For whatsoever is more than these is of the evil one.* Truly, I believe the Lord ordained this concerning the matter, because there were certain men who would arise, persuading others to use other names in swearing. First, therefore, [we must understand] that it is not right to swear, neither by the Lord himself nor by any other oath; for swearing is of the evil one. And evil, too, is he who spoke through Elxai, who compelled men not only to swear by God, but also by salt, by water, by air, by wind, by the earth, and by heaven. These two arguments, explained by me in passing, are sufficient so that anyone who wishes to be cured may have a ready antidote against his errors. Having passed over his quibbling ^B and the treachery of this heresy, I will proceed to the refutation of the seventh heresy, which was then held by these same people. And it is as follows.

AGAINST THE HERODIANS (22)

I. After this, and after those already mentioned, the seventh heresy was that called the Herodians. These people had nothing different from the others; but they were altogether Jews, idle, and hypocrites. They considered Herod to be Christ the Lord—the one who was expected in all the Scriptures of the Law and the Prophets—imagining that Herod was this Christ. Being deceived by this, they boasted of Herod, having been led astray by a scriptural passage, while also wishing to curry favor with the king of that time, through their vain glory. It was the passage: *A ruler shall not fail from Judah, nor a leader from his loins, until he comes for whom it is reserved.* Or as other copies have it: *Until that which is reserved for him comes.* ^C Now, since Herod (23) happened to be the son of Antipater, an Ascalonite, who was a temple-servant of the idol Apollo—of which Antipater the father was named Herod, and he was the son of Antipas—the same Antipater was captured by the Idumeans and, while living in Idumea, he became the father of Herod. And because his father was poor and unable to ransom his son—I mean this Antipater—he remained for a long time ^D

^A in servitude; later, he was ransomed by the contributions of the citizens along with his son Herod, and returned to his own home. For this reason some say he was an Idumean, while others know him to have been an Ascalonite; but later he became a friend to Demetrius, and was established as procurator over Judea. He became known to Augustus the emperor, and from being a procurator he became a proselyte, and he himself was circumcised, and he circumcised his son Herod, to whom came the inheritance of the kingdom of the Jews. He was king in Judea under King Augustus, being himself a subject by treaty. Since, then, he rules as someone from a foreign nation, while the kingdom from Judah and from David had continued by succession, and the rulers and patriarchs were those from Judah, but the kingdom was transferred to a foreigner, it seemed to those who were led astray to be a fitting argument for their error: to think that Herod was the Christ, following the sequence of the aforementioned scripture, "The ruler shall not cease from Judah, until he comes to whom it is reserved." They understood this as meaning that it was reserved for him, he says. For those had failed, and he is not from the lineage of Judah, nor is he from the nation of Israel at all. But for this man it was reserved to be the Christ.

^B II. But the things that follow refute them: "For he himself shall be the expectation of the nations, and in him shall the nations hope." But which of the nations hoped in Herod? And what expectation of the nations watches for Herod? And how was "He lay down among them, as a lion, and as a lion's cub; who shall rouse him?" fulfilled? And where finally did Herod wash his robe in blood, or his mantle in the blood of grapes, as our Lord Jesus Christ, who sprinkled his body with his own blood, and dyed his garments in the blood of the grape? But do you perceive what is said by me in your mind. For the Lord will give you understanding in all things. For he came in order to exhibit the expiation of the people of God, [He came] who, by the blood of his teaching, as it were, might ^C purify the teeth of men, which were defiled by the blood and smoke [of sacrifices] and by detestable sacrifices. And what need is there for me to list the multitudes? For they are infinite; and the pressure of time does not permit me to lengthen the discourse for the refutation of the aforementioned heresies in the preceding arguments.

III. Therefore, those seven heresies were altogether in Israel, in Jerusalem and in Judea; but the four aforementioned by us flourished among the Samaritans and in Samaria. But the greater part of them have collapsed. For there are no longer any Scribes, nor Pharisees, nor ^D Sadducees, nor Hemerobaptists, nor Herodians. Only a few are found in scarcity, or perhaps one...

or two Nazarenes above the upper Thebaid and beyond Arabia. And the remnant ^A of the Ossenes is no longer Judaizing, but has joined the Sampsaeans, who by succession are situated in the region beyond the Dead Sea. But now they have joined themselves to the sect of the Elkeseans. And it has come to pass that they have ceased from Judaism, just as a root might be cut, or the body of a reptile, and from it a two-headed snake has grown, rootless, in one semi-severed body, and hanging forth.

Thus far is the discussion concerning the four sects of the Samaritans and the seven of the Jews, of which they are no longer mentioned, or rather three of the Samaritan ones, the Gortheni, the Dositheans, and the Sebuaei, and the Essenes not at all, but as buried in darkness. Among the Jews, it is no longer so, but only the Jews and the Nazarenes. And the Ossenes have departed from Judaism into the sect of the Sampsaeans, and they no longer exist as either Jews or Christians. Let these things that I have said about the aforementioned sects suffice for now.

On the Incarnation of Christ, and the embodiment of his presence, and the truth of the one and only faith of God.

^B I. Immediately, following upon the heels of this, was the bodily presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, which arrived amidst the aforementioned seven sects in Jerusalem. His power extinguished these and scattered them. Henceforth, all the sects that came after are subsequent to His advent; I mean, after the annunciation was made to Mary in Nazareth through Gabriel, and after the entirely bodily presence of the Lord, and then the Assumption. For God was well-pleased for the salvation of men that His own Son should descend and be conceived in a virgin womb—the Word who is from heaven, begotten from the Father's bosom before time and without beginning, ^C and who came in the last days, being God the Word truly begotten of God the Father, co-essential with the Father, and in nothing altered from the Father, but being immutable and unchangeable; entirely impassible, not suffering, yet suffering with our race, having descended from heaven, and having been formed not from the seed of a man, but through the Holy Spirit; truly having taken a body from Mary, having fashioned the flesh for Himself from the holy womb, and having taken a human soul and mind, and everything that constitutes a man without sin, and having united it unto Himself by His own divinity; born in Bethlehem, ^D circumcised in the cave, presented in Jerusalem, taken into the arms by Simeon, acknowledged by Anna the prophetess, daughter of Phanuel, and taken to Nazareth.

^A And in the following year, having come to be seen before the Lord in Jerusalem, and having become one who was carried by his mother to Bethlehem on account of kinship; again, having been carried back to Nazareth, and at the second revolution of the year having come to Jerusalem and Bethlehem, being carried likewise by his own mother; and having descended in a house in Bethlehem with his own mother and Joseph—who was an old man and was with Mary—he was there, in the second year of his birth, observed by the Magi, to be worshipped and to receive gifts. And on that very night, having been warned by an angel, Joseph was taken into Egypt. From thence again, after two years, when Herod had already died and Archelaus had succeeded him, he returned.

^B For in the thirty-third year of Herod, and the forty-second of Augustus the Emperor, the Savior was born in Bethlehem of Judea. He descends into Egypt in the thirty-fifth year of Herod, and he comes up out of Egypt after the death of Herod. Therefore, in the thirty-seventh year of the same reign of Herod, the child was four years old, when Herod, having completed thirty-seven years, ended his life. And Archelaus reigns for nine years, at the beginning of whose reign Joseph, coming out of Egypt with Mary and the child, having heard that Archelaus was reigning, withdrew into the regions of Galilee and resided then in Nazareth. And Archelaus begat Herod the younger. And Herod reigns in the ninth year of the reign of his father Archelaus, according to the succession. And for the same [person], thirteen years are counted from the incarnate presence of Christ. ^C But in the eighteenth year of Herod who was surnamed Agrippa, then Jesus began his preaching, and then he receives the baptism from John, and preaches the acceptable year, opposed by no one—neither by Jews, nor by Greeks, nor by Samaritans, nor by any other person whatsoever. Afterward, being opposed, he preached the second year, and it became the nineteenth year for the same Herod, and the thirty-second for the Savior. And in the twentieth year of Herod the one called the tetrarch, the saving passion takes place, as well as the impassibility, or the tasting of death—the tasting of death, until he suffered on the cross in truth, but remained impassible in his divinity. For Christ having suffered for us in the flesh, says |the| Scripture; and again: Being put to death in the flesh, but brought to life in the spirit, and the things which follow. He is crucified, he is buried; he descends into the netherworld with his divinity and his soul; he leads captivity captive, and rises on the third day with his holy body, having united the body to the divinity, never again to be dissolved, never again to suffer, ^D never again to be subject to the dominion of death, as the Apostle says: Death no longer has dominion over him.

III. This body, therefore, the flesh itself, the soul itself, and everything of which he consisted—not anything other than the true body, but that same one which he endued with heavenly power—he joined into one identity, into one divinity, the incorruptible, fleshy [nature]

both corporeal and spiritual, at once concrete and refined, mortal and yet also immortal; that body which had been dissolved by no decay at all; whose soul was not left in Hades, nor was it itself yielded up in any part as an instrument to the service of sin, nor was the mind stained by any change for the worse. But he took to himself all things that are proper to men, ^B in such a way as to keep intact those things which the divinity had granted for the necessary uses of that true nature which he had united to himself—those uses, I say, which, in order to exist fully, require the support of the body, the soul, and the human mind: such as hunger, thirst, weeping, grief, shedding of tears, sleep, and rest. For all these things contain no stain of sin, but are signs of a most true incarnation, the divinity being truly joined to the humanity, not suffering human things, but the divinity assenting to natural needs, and those things which are outside of sin and forbidden change. He rose again, and when the doors were shut, he entered in, so that he might demonstrate the concrete to be refined, being the very same [as before] with flesh and bones. For after he had entered, he showed his hands and feet and wounded side, and bones and nerves, and the rest, so that what was seen was not a mere phantom. He confirmed by himself the ^C promise of our faith and hope in all things perfectly. And he ate with them not in appearance, but in truth; and teaching them, he instructed them to preach the kingdom of heaven in truth, signifying the great and most chief thing to the disciples, and saying, "Make disciples of all nations"—that is, convert the nations from wickedness to truth, from heresies to one unity. "Baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"—into the Lordly naming of the Trinity, the holy and royal seal; so that he might show from the name that there is no alteration of the one unity. For since those being baptized are commanded by him "in the name of the Father," the doxology is secure; "in the name of the Son," the invocation is not lacking; "in the name of the Holy Spirit," the bond is not divided, nor is it alienated as having the seal of the one divinity.

^D IV. Finally, he was taken up into heaven with that same body, and with the soul, and with the mind, having joined them into one unity and one spiritual subsistence. And having made them divine, he sat at the right hand of the Father, having sent forth heralds into the whole world: Simon Peter, and Andrew his brother, James and John the sons of Zebedee, whom he had long before chosen; Philip and Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas and Judas, and Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot. For Judas Iscariot, even though he was formerly numbered among the twelve, having become a traitor, was cut off from the holy catalog of the apostles. He sent forth also others, the seventy-two, to preach, of whom were...

the seven appointed for the service of the widows: Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus. Before these, Matthias, who was chosen by lot to take the place of Judas among the apostles. After these seven and Matthias who preceded them, he added—as we have said—the seventy-two, among whom were Mark, Luke, Justus, Barnabas, Apelles, Rufus, Niger, and the rest. Together with them all, he also chose the holy apostle Paul, who was made an apostle and herald of the nations and a completer of apostolic doctrine by a voice from heaven. And Paul, as they record, brought back the holy Luke—who was one of the seventy-two discipled who had been scattered into various regions—and made him his companion and helper for the Gospel, and also an apostle. And in this way the entire business of the Gospel was completed up to that time.

And thus far is my account concerning the eleven heresies, and the sequence, explained by me as best I could in summary, of the evangelical light that was brought into the world by Christ the Lord and His disciples. From these things I have said, it is possible for one to gather much, and to search out the prophecies and oracles from the Law, the Psalms, and other books, and to scrutinize the series and order of them all; and from these to verify clearly that the Incarnation of Christ the Lord was not spurious but real, and that it was heralded in the Old Testament, so that no room for doubt is left concerning it. But lest the treatment of this work grow to infinity, I will be content with what has been said.

Proceeding thereafter, I shall likewise recount in order those opinions which were afterwards introduced into human life under a very evil color and guise, having already recounted in brief—for the sake of brevity—the eleven sects of the Jews and Samaritans, together with the nine preceding them which arose from the Greeks, the barbarians, and others before the coming of the Savior, and which have persisted up to these present times.

Of the Nazarenes, or Christians

^C That which is the Nazarenes'—that is, the Christians'—was called "Christianism" by the Jews after a short interval, and it obtained that name from the apostles themselves, for Peter spoke thus: "Jesus the Nazarene, a man approved by God," and so forth. But afterwards, it began to be called Christianity at Antioch. There is, however, also another sect, properly of the Nazarenes, ^D of whom we shall speak in our own place in the course of the sequence.

THESE ARE THE CONTENTS OF THIS SECOND VOLUME OF THE FIRST BOOK, Containing thirteen heresies, as follows.

LIST OF THE CONTENTS OF VOLUME II OF BOOK I, Which includes thirteen heresies in this order.

I. ^A The Simonians, who derive from Simon Magus, who lived in the time of the apostle Peter and came from a village of Samaria called Gitta. A Samaritan by birth, this man professed the name of Christ only in words; he was the author of foul obscenity and most sordid sexual indulgence. He further advocated the promiscuity of wives. He denies the resurrection of the body and maintains that the world was not created by God. He also imposed his own image and that of the harlot with him, named Helena, upon his disciples for them to worship under the guise of Minerva. Among the Samaritans he sold himself as the Father, and to the Jews as Christ.

II. The Menandrians, who took their origin from this same Simon through a certain Menander; they differ from the Simonians in some respects. Menander asserted that the world had been produced by angels.

III. The Saturnilians, who in Syria increased the turpitude of the Simonians. ^B They added to their dogmas certain things to cause greater astonishment. Their leader was Saturnilus, who, just like Menander, made the world's creators angels—that is, seven creatures from them—and maintained that they had undertaken this task according to the intent of the Father above.

IV. The Basilidians, associates in that same foulness, trace their origin to Basilides, who had been a student along with Saturnilus among the Simonians and Menandrians. While he holds nearly the same views, he differs on certain points. He says there are three hundred and sixty-five heavens, and assigns angelic names to them. Therefore, he believes the year consists of that many days. He also adds the name Abrasax as that of a power, which expresses the number 365 by its letters, and asserts that this is the Holy Spirit.

V. The Nicolaitans are derived from that Nicolas who had been appointed by the apostles to care for the widows. ^C Burning with jealousy over his wife, he taught his own disciples to practice this preposterous lust with others. But he also brought into the world, in a disgraceful manner, Caulacauch, Prunicus, and other prodigies of names.

VI. The Gnostics, successors to these heresies, far surpassed all others in the madness of their turpitude and execrable foulness. In Egypt, they are called Milites and Phibionites; in the upper regions, Secundians; in other places, Socratites; and by others, Zachaeans. There are those who call them Coddiani; some call them Borborites.

They venerate Barbelo and Barbero, I know not what is customarily preached of them.

VII. The Carpocratians, named after a certain Carpocrates from Asia, who used to instruct his disciples in every manner of defilement and wickedness. For he claimed that if one does not go through all things and satisfy the will of all the demons and angels, he cannot ascend to the highest heaven, nor pass beyond the principalities and powers. He further asserted that Jesus had assumed a rational soul, and being imbued with the knowledge of heavenly things, had declared them to men; and that if anyone were to do the same things that Jesus once did, he would not be inferior to him. Finally, he rejected the Law along with the resurrection of the dead, just as the Simonians and all the others I have catalogued thus far have done. Marcellina of Rome was of this sect. He crafted likenesses of Jesus, Paul, Homer, and Pythagoras in secret, and followed them with incense and adoration. ^B

VIII. The Cerinthians, or Merinthians, arose from Cerinthus and Merinthus; they were Jews who prided themselves on circumcision. They claimed that the world was fashioned by angels, and that Jesus attained the dignity of Christ through the incremental increase of virtues.

IX. The Nazarenes confessed Jesus to be the Christ and the Son of God, but lived their lives entirely in accordance with the Law.

X. The Ebionites are very similar to the aforementioned Cerinthians and Nazarenes; the sect of the Sampsaeans and Elcesaeans is in some measure joined with them. They claim that Christ was created in heaven, as was his Holy Spirit. They narrate that he first poured himself into Adam and then departed from him; then he entered him again, and they claim that he performed this same act in the time of his manifest coming in the flesh. Although they are Jews, they use the Gospels nonetheless. They abhor the eating of flesh. They venerate water instead of God. They say, as I have said, that in his coming he clothed himself with a human being. Finally, they wash themselves in the waters repeatedly, both in winter and in summer, for the sake of acquiring purity for themselves, just as the Samaritans do. ^C

XI. The Valentinians deny the resurrection of bodies. They reject the Old Testament and the prophets. Yet they read those portions that can be adapted through figure and trope to their own heresy, and they accept them. But they have added certain myths of their own and have invented the names of thirty aeons of both sexes; these they claim were produced by the parent and creator of all things, and they make them to be gods and aeons. Finally, they think that Christ brought his body down from heaven and passed through Mary as if through a pipe. ^D

XII. The Secundians, and their associates Epiphanes and Isidorus, setting equal things among themselves, agree with the Valentinians; nevertheless, they posit some things different from them, and in addition, they instruct their followers in foul lust. They also deny the Incarnation.

XIII. The Ptolemaeans were disciples of Valentinus, who...

^A are joined with Flora. They hold the same dogma regarding those conjugations as Valentinus and the Secundians, but they differ in some respects. This is the summary of the second tome of the first book, which contains thirteen heresies.

SECOND TOME OF THE FIRST BOOK. ADVERSUS SIMONIANOS, HÆRESI XXI.

The first heresy since the faith in Christ our Lord, and the twenty-first in sequence.

A'. The first heresy is that of Simon ^B the Magician, which began from Christ and continues to the present. This sect, although it calls itself by the name of Christ, does not do so rightly or in a manner that guides, but rather commits terrible things according to the corruption they have forged for themselves. This Simon was a sorcerer. He hailed from Gittha, a city which in the time of the Samaritans was a city, but is now a village. He deluded the race of the Samaritans with enchantments. Deceiving and luring them, he claimed to be the great power of God and that he had descended from above. To the Samaritans, he ^C proclaimed himself to be the Father, while to the Jews he claimed to be the Son. He denied that he had truly suffered, and insisted that he had suffered only in appearance. He fawned upon the apostles, and he too, like the others, was baptized by Philip along with many. But all the rest, except for him, awaited the coming of the great apostles and received the Holy Spirit through their laying on of hands. For Philip, being a deacon, did not have the authority to confer the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands. But Simon, having a corrupt heart and an evil mind, and being attached to a certain foul greed for gain, and not at all departing from his wicked practices, offered money to the Apostle Peter, that he might give him the authority to bestow the Holy Spirit ^D upon others through the laying on of hands, thinking that he would give little and receive much, and that by conferring the Spirit upon others he would amass an abundance of money and make a profit.

^A This man, then, having his mind perverted by the demonic deception in magic, ^B and filled with fantasies, being always ready to exhibit his own wickedness and the barbarian and demonic practices through his sorcery, came forward into the public sphere. Under the pretense of the name of Christ—mixing honey with hellebore—he poured lethal poison into the splendor of that name for those whom he had ensnared in his evil, devious heresy, bringing death to those he convinced by the formal authority of the name of Christ. Being a lecher by nature, and restrained by the shame of his own promises, the charlatan fabricated a corrupted concept for those who were being deceived by him. For, having found for himself a wandering woman named Helen [(31)], originally from Tyre, he took her, while not revealing that he had any union with her. In a hidden place, wallowing in shame with this woman, the sorcerer would teach his disciples a certain mythical enchantment; he claimed, forsooth, to be the great Power of God, and dared to say that his prostitute was the Holy Spirit, and that he had descended because of her. "In each heaven," he said, "I disguised myself, taking the form of those in each heaven, so that I might escape my angelic powers and descend to the 'Ennoia' [Thought]—who is she herself, also called Prunicus [(32)] and Holy Spirit—through whom I created the angels; and the angels created the world and mankind." He maintained that this was the Helen of old, on whose account the Trojans and Greeks came to battle. He added a certain myth to these things: that the Power, descending from above, transformed herself. The poets spoke of this allegorically. For because of the Power from above—whom they call Prunicus, who is called Barbero or Barbelo [(33)] in other heresies—her beauty, having been revealed, incited them into a frenzy, ^C and for this reason she was sent to rescue [(34)] those rulers who had created this world. And the same angels came to war because of her; she herself suffered nothing, but she caused them to work out mutual slaughter upon one another, through which she cast desire for herself into them. As they held her so that she could not ascend upwards, each one of them would consort with her in a female and feminine bodily guise. As she was transferred from female bodies into various bodies of human nature, and of beasts, and others—that through the things they themselves perpetrate, killing and being killed, they might work out their own diminution through the shedding of blood—she, having collected her power again, would then be able to ascend once more to heaven.

^A III. Therefore the same [woman], he said, was she who existed in the times of the Greeks and the Trojans; nay, even before the creation of the world and after it, she had perpetrated similar things among the angels. But now she is with me, and for her sake I have descended; for she has hitherto been awaiting my arrival. For she is that "thought" which Homer called Helen. And for this reason Homer is compelled to represent her standing upon a tower and signaling to the Greeks by means of a torch the conspiracy against the Phrygians. He was characterizing, as I have said, the manifestation of the light from above by means of the torch-light. And so, concerning the wooden horse in Homer, which the Greeks believe was constructed for a purpose, this impostor of the nations contended again that it pertains to ignorance; for just as the Trojans, when they had out of ignorance dragged it to their own walls, brought ruin upon themselves, so also the nations, that is to say, all men who lack my knowledge, draw destruction upon themselves through ignorance. Furthermore, he said that Minerva was the same as this [entity] which he called "thought." And the impostor was accustomed to adapt to this the statement of the holy apostle Paul, twisting the truth into his own lie, [namely the text]: "Put on the breastplate of faith, and the helmet of salvation, and the greaves, and the sword, and the shield." All these things, spoken by the Apostle for the sake of a sound mind and a faith of pure demeanor and the power of the divine and heavenly word, this charlatan turned—as if performing the mimes of Philistion—to nothing ^B but mockery. "For why," he would say, "were all these things mystically fashioned into the types of Minerva?" Therefore, he kept saying, as I mentioned before, hinting at that woman who was with him, whom he had taken from Tyre, the namesake of the ancient Helen, calling her everything—"thought," Minerva, Helen, and the rest. "And for her sake," he says, "I have descended." For this is what is written in the Gospel: the strayed sheep. But he also handed over a certain image to his followers, claiming it was of himself. And they worship it in the likeness of Zeus. He likewise delivered to them another image of Helen, in the form in which Minerva is usually painted, and those who have been deceived by him worship these.

^C IV. He set up, moreover, mysteries of filth and of the flux of bodies—that I may speak more decently—which are carried out among men by the outpouring of seed, and among women by the monthly menstrual purge, [which are] collected into a certain most shameful gathering in order to perform mysteries. And these, he said, are mysteries of life and of the most perfect knowledge, which anyone who has received wisdom from God would consider to be rather an abomination and death than life. And the same man proposes certain names of the archons and [the names of powers in the firmament and heaven... ^D

and he assigns to these certain barbarian appellations. Moreover, he denies that any man can attain salvation in any other way than by learning these mysteries and offering such sacrifices to the Father of all through these archons and powers. He claims that this present age was created by the archons and powers of wickedness in a state of deficiency. He teaches only the corruption and destruction of the flesh, but the purification of souls—and this only if they have been initiated into the mysteries of his own most deceitful knowledge. And thus begins the origin of those called Gnostics. He further asserts that the Law is not from God, but from some left-hand intelligence; just as he believes that the prophets were not sent from the good God, but from some other and different power. And as he desires, he assigns to each one the Law to some being, David to another, Isaiah to this one, Ezekiel again to another, and he attributes each of the prophets to one archon or another. He holds that all these belong to the left-hand power and are outside the Pleroma. And he claims that everyone who believes in the Old Testament is subject to death. ^B

V. But this dogma is refuted by the very truth itself. For if he himself is the great power of God, and that little harlot with him is the Holy Spirit, as he himself says, then let him say, I ask, by what name that power should be called, or for what reason, when he bestowed some name upon the little woman, did he not bestow any at all upon himself? How could he have invented for the woman the title— ^C

(57) What does Epiphanius mean? For he denies that Simon bestowed any appellation upon himself. And yet he laid claim to the names of the three persons, and among other things, he called himself *the Power*: this is, as I interpret it, the Son of God. See Irenaeus. The question is asked by the great Petavius, what Epiphanius means when he denies that Simon bestowed any appellation upon himself, when he laid claim to the names of the three persons, and among other things called himself *the Power*. One may respond that the intention of Epiphanius is that Simon the Magician indeed bestowed a peculiar appellation upon Helena, [that of] the Holy Spirit, but for himself he held a general [appellation], the great Power of God: so much so that while he gave many certain and determinate names and epithets to Helena, he fixed none for himself, but assumed infinite ones: according to that which Simon himself says in Irenaeus: That he is the most sublime Power, that is, he who is the Father over all things, and that he bears to be called whatever men call him. And in Jerome on Matthew chapter XXIV: *I am the Word of God, I am the Beautiful, I am the Paraclete, I am the Almighty, I am all of God.* The same prince of heresiarchs is said to have stated, in Tertullian: *He descended, being the wisdom, to seek for the wandering demon*—or, according to the correction of Rigaltius: *He descended, being the wisdom, to seek for the wandering sheep*; or, as I would read: *He descended, being the wisdom, to seek for the wandering sheep*—or, *to be sought*; or: *He descended, being the wisdom, to seek for the wandering man.* Nor does the reading of Desiderius Heraldus on Arnobius please me so much: *He descended, being the wisdom, to seek for the wandering sheep, Ennoia.* I would also wish to warn the reader of a slight error which occupies the codices of Tertullian, in the book *De Anima*, chapter 54, where it is written concerning the first injection of Simon to Helena, that she generated *the angelic powers, ignorant of the Father, the artificers of this world.* It must be corrected to *artificer*, because the words of Irenaeus, whom Tertullian imitates not obscurely in that place, are: *To generate the angels and powers, by whom he also said this world was made.* COTELERIUS, notes on *Monumenta Ecclesice Græcæ*, vol. II, p. 763. ^D

^A And in what manner could that which is established fact have occurred, that he perished at a certain definite time in Rome, when the wretch fell from on high in the middle of the city and died? By what logic did Peter declare that he had neither lot nor portion in the sphere of godliness? And how can the world not exist from a good God, since all good things have been chosen from Him? And why should that power which spoke in the Law and the prophets, which foretold the coming of the good God, Christ, and forbade all wicked things, be called a sinister one? And would there not be one Divinity, and the same Spirit of both the New and the Old Testament, since the Lord said: *I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it?* ^B And in order to show that the law was proclaimed by Him and given through Moses, but that the evangelical grace was proclaimed through Himself and His incarnate presence, He said to the Jews: *If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.* And there are many other things to be set against the contradiction of that impostor. How can base things be vital, unless there be a demonic state of mind, when the Lord Himself in the Gospel says to those who were saying to Him: *If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.* But He said to them: *Not all can accept this. For there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven;* and He showed that to abstain by nature from ^C marriage is a gift of the kingdom of heaven? Again, in another place, He speaks regarding honorable marriage, which Simon himself, perverting it, basely manipulates for his own lust: *What God has joined, let no man put asunder.*

VI. Yet how the deceiver, once more forgetting his own triflings, convicts himself, as if ignorant of what he had already said! For having said that the angels were created by him through his own intellect, he added afterward that, in order to be hidden from them while descending, he had transformed his figure in each heaven. Therefore he was hiding precisely because he feared them. But what was that impostor fearing in the angels whom he himself had created? And will not this error, secretly sown by him, be easily refuted by any prudent person, when, as Scripture testifies, *In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth?* ^D And in accordance with this tenet, the Lord says in the Gospel, addressing God the Father, His own Father: *Father, Lord of heaven and earth.* If, therefore, God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the Creator of heaven and earth, all things spoken by the slanderer Simon—that the world was made in a state of imperfection by angels, and all the other things which the deluded deceiver utters to the world—are in vain.

^A VII. And these things, argued by us in summary against his heresy, shall suffice for those who read them, for a profession of truth and healing, and for a refutation of those who, through such beastly corruption, attempt to do wrong to the ignorant. But I shall pass on, and will proceed to the refutation of another heresy. For there is in this one a shifting and a duplicity, he being himself a deceiver, but wearing the guise of the name of Christ, like the serpentine corruption of abortions, produced from the eggs of asps, and other vipers, as the Prophet says: *They have broken the eggs of asps, and he who would eat of those eggs finds a viper, and in it a basilisk.* ^B But, as I said, having smitten him with the power of Christ through the words of truth, and having extinguished his contagion, let us go on to those which follow, beloved.

AGAINST THE MENANDRIANS

^A I. Attached to this in sequence is a certain Menander, who, originating from the Samaritans, became for a time a disciple of this Simon. Likewise he also said that the world was brought into existence by angels; yet he asserted that he himself was a power ^C sent down from above by God. In this, indeed, he devised greater craft than his master before him for the deceiving of men; for he said that he had been sent for the salvation of the human race, and for the gathering of some into his own mystery, in order that they might not be brought under the dominion of the angels, principalities, and powers who had created the world. And weaving together all things similar to his own teacher, he did not cease from those same impostures and sorceries, nor did he dissent from his dogma in any way, except only that he vaunted himself to be greater than the teacher who had been before him.

^B II. But he fell into the same misfortune as that into which his teacher fell, and being convicted by the same words of truth, he will be overthrown. For he is himself subverted, and his great power—he did not call himself the First Power, for he said that this was unknown, but that he had been sent by that power, acting haughtily—will be overthrown as he is apprehended by the same words of the refutation of the truth.

^A For this man was overthrown, and his heresy ceased for the most part. But I shall pass over it [and], advancing again to another, I shall proceed in my narrative.

For in truth the ancients recount a myth, that when many asps were gathered in one earthen vessel, and deposited in the foundations of the four corners of each of the idols built in Egypt, whichever of these was found stronger than the others attacked and devoured the rest. And when one remained alone, and having nothing with which to feed itself, it turned and began to eat itself from the tail ^B, until it had devoured a part of its own body. And thus it remained no longer whole, but remained mutilated by half its body. For this reason they called it an "aspidogorgon," so that we might understand that, while this thing existed in the past, it is no longer found now, but has vanished, as it too has been completely driven away. For it had opposition from us, yet it has been made to vanish through the power of Christ. But having passed over this also, let us proceed to what follows, beloved.

AGAINST THE SATURNILIANS

^C 1. After this man, a certain Saturnilus arose, having himself taken the starting points from there, from Menander, I say, and those before. This man, having taken up residence in Syria, that is, in Antioch near Daphne, brought much art and experience of error into the world. For there were two fellow-disciples, Basilides and Saturnilus. And Basilides indeed, having departed to Egypt, preached there the dark depths of his error; but Saturnilus, dwelling in the aforementioned place, likewise to Menander, proclaimed that the world had been created by angels. And [he said] that there is one unknown Father, who had created Powers, Principalities, and Authorities. And that the angels were separated from the Power above; and that certain seven [angels] created the world, and the things within it; and that the world had been allotted to each angel by division. But he said that these same angels, having come together, took counsel and created man in common, according to the form of the voice that had cast a glance from above. ^D Which, unable to detain as it gazed down, and because it immediately darted back up, they wished to imitate. And indeed man was fashioned by them for no other reason than for such a pretext. For since, he says, that same light from above, having cast a glance down, caused a certain agitation in those same angels, they attempted to make the creature of man out of desire for the likeness from above. For since they fell in love with the light from above, with the desire of...

^A seeing it appear and disappear, they were seized with pleasure, but were unable to be sated with its beauty because its light had taken flight 45 — for this reason, the same impostor says that the angels spoke thus: "Let us make man 47 after our image and after our likeness." He mutilated what was said in Genesis by God, "after our," and left out "our," so that his error might have plausibility, as if others were indeed making him, but they were speaking of being an image of another in the phrase: "Let us make man after image and likeness." And he says that when man was created, because of their incompetence, they were unable to bring him to perfection, and he lay there, kicking on the ground like a crawling worm, unable either to rise up or to do anything else, until that celestial power, looking down upon this and feeling pity on account of its own image and likeness, sent down a spark of its own power; and through it, it raised up the man, and thus gave him life—thereby calling the human soul that spark. And for this reason, he says, it is absolutely necessary that this spark be saved, but that all which is proper to man should perish; this happens when that which has fallen from ^B heaven flies back upward after a set interval of time; and likewise that which is lowest returns to that from which it proceeded. As regards Christ, the dogma of the same impostor is that he came only in the figure and likeness of man, and that all things were performed by him merely in appearance—that is, the being born, the walking, the being seen, the suffering.

II. From this, the sect falsely called Gnostic adds much more to the profound wickedness of this sect, having taken its beginning and occasion from Simon, but adding further empty babbling, as we shall later demonstrate in its refutation. For this man says 49—speaking of the angels—that the God of the Jews is one of them, and that both he and they are separated from his power. He says that the Savior was sent by the Father according to the will of the powers for the destruction of the God of the Jews, and for the salvation of those who believed. And those of this sect are the ones who possess the spark of the Father above. For he says that two ^C men were fashioned from the beginning, one good and one evil, from whom two races of men were likewise sown in the world, the good and the evil. And since the demons were helping the evil ones, for this reason, in the last of the days, as I said before, the Savior came to the aid of the good men, and for the destruction of the wicked and the demons. The same charlatan declares that the taking of wives and the procreation of children are from Satan. Wherefore... ^D

the majority of them abstain from all living things, so that through this affected mode of a holier life they may lead some into their own deception. The same sorcerer claims that the prophecies were partly prophesied by the angels who created the world, and partly by Satan; and he asserts that this Satan himself is an angel who opposes the angels who created the world, and especially the God of the Jews.

^B Γ'. When this brute speaks these things, he will surely, somewhere or other, be shown to be confessing one God and leading everything back to the one unity of a monarchy. For if the angels have made the world, and the angels in turn have obtained the cause of their being from the power above, then they are not the causes of the formation of man, but rather the power above, which created the angels, from whom the formation of man also consists. For the tool is not the cause of those things that are brought about by it, but rather the one who effects the activity through the tool, by which the work is done, as it is written: "Will the saw boast without him who draws it?" and the rest. And thus we see that neither is the sword the cause of murder, but the one who attempts the murder with the sword. Nor can a wax-molding tool make the molded things by itself, but rather the one who worked the tool and the molding. ^C Therefore, the angels are not the causes, but the one who created the angels, even if he had commanded them not to make man. For if he finds fault with the power from above, claiming ignorance and lack of knowledge of future events that were to be performed against his will, the *eudokia* (good pleasure) of having created the angels for the purpose of the construction of man, whom he wanted to build, having created the angels and not having commanded them not to finish the undertaking—that is, the molding of man—as their own mythical artifice contains.

^D Δ'. Must we not, therefore, ask the myth-maker again: Did the power from above know what they were going to do? Yes, he says. Well then, if it knew, it made it, and not they. But if it knew, yet did not want to, and they undertook the enterprise against its will, for what reason did it not stop them? But if it was unable to stop them, it is a primary folly, because it prepared the angels, who were brought into being by itself, for opposition and irritation against itself; and secondly, because, having the power, it did not stop them, but cooperated in the wicked work that was performed by the angels. But if it did not cooperate, and having willed to, could not stop them, there is much weakness in the one that willed but could not; and the band of angels brought into being by it would be stronger than it, even though it is the cause of the angels brought into being by it. Thus, the thesis of the heresy is caught, falling into inconsistency rather than truth. But if it knew, and yet was forced to make them—which it is not right to do against its own will—it will be diminished by another...

content, nor will any completeness concerning its sentiment reside in the celestial power. ^A And that we may once again interrogate him: "Ho there!" I say, "you who have looked in through the windows—that I may thus treat your ravings with mockery—and in looking in, have discerned how the angels were created, and their artifice in fashioning the human creature, and have then watched [them] and searched out the mechanical invention of the power above: did they know what they were fashioning, or were they ignorant? But if they were ignorant, what ^B force compelled them to perform that which was in ignorance?" "No," he says, "they were not ignorant; for they knew what they were about to do." Therefore, did the power above know that they were about to attempt this, or was it ignorant? It was not ignorant. Did it, then, create them so that they might do this, or not? "Not," he says; "for it created them only [as they were]." But these, contrary to the power above, embarked upon [the attempt] to produce a creature. Therefore, these knew [what they were doing], but that power above was ignorant, according to your account, O most foolish of all men! And will the construction ^C and constitution of men be [their work], and the causes of this—the angels—be in knowledge, while the power that created the angels is in ignorance? This would be nonsensical and stupid, [as it makes] the work more perfect than the craftsman, and the craftsman weaker than the angels produced by him, who are the causes of the human constitution. So, therefore, it is necessary by all means that you confess [that] you must trace everything back to the one same Creator and to the one monarchy.

V. For indeed God the Father created man, along with ^D all other things, by his own will and pleasure, and not by the angels, nor did it happen according to the counsel of the angels. For when God said, *Let us make man in our image* (Gen. I, 26), he said it not as to an image alone. For he invited to his own creative work the same Word and Only-Begotten, as the sense of the faithful, which springs from the truth, holds, and which accords most accurately with the truth itself; a matter of which we have elsewhere in many places clearly and at length made our confession, namely, that the Father invites the Son to co-create man, through whom he also created all other things. And I would say he invites not only the Son, but also the Holy Spirit. *For by the word of the Lord the heavens were established, and by the spirit of his mouth all their power* (Ps. XXXII, 6). But whether he wills it or wills it not, I say, Saturnilus, the author of this heresy, will be compelled by all means to confess that one God and Lord is the Creator and Artificer of the universe, and likewise of man himself. Furthermore, he will be ashamed, as a slanderer of those things which he has uttered most wickedly against the prophets and against honorable marriage. For our Lord Jesus Christ himself plainly proclaims in the Gospel and says: *Since he who* through

the prophet has uttered, "Behold, I am present," and again, "My Father works hitherto, and I work." And in order to show what his Father and he himself work, he declared, saying to those who asked him whether it is lawful to put away one's wife for every cause: "How is it written? That God made man, male and female he made them." And again, after other words, "That for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh." And he immediately added, saying: "What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder," that he might everywhere teach that the Creator of all men is God, and that he is His Father. And that marriage is not from Satan, but is from God, first the Lord himself says, "What God," he says, "hath joined together, let not man put asunder"; and again the ^B holy Apostle, "Marriage is honorable, and the bed undefiled." And to those who have widows by nature, he likewise gives instructions, saying through Timothy: "The younger widows refuse. For after they have grown wanton against Christ, they desire to marry"; and after other words, "Let them marry, let them bear children, let them guide the house," imposing an inviolable law concerning marriage, as existing from God and granted to men for the sake of decency.

^C VI. But concerning the notions slandered by him regarding the prophecies of God, as if they were not from God, ten thousand things might be said, as the Only-Begotten himself says, from which he declares his own world. First, that "Abraham your father rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad." And again he says, "If you believed Moses, you would have believed me. For he wrote of me." And who among those of sound mind, and possessing understanding from God, would not refute the deceiver Saturnilus, knowing that the Savior was revealed in glory for the demonstration of the truth, not having shown his own glory otherwise ^D than in the midst of Elijah and Moses, who also themselves were seen with him in their own glory? But all other such things, which are said by the Lord himself and in the whole New Testament, establish the composition of the Law and the Prophets and the whole Old Testament in relation to the New Testament, that both are of one God; as he says: "They shall come into the bosoms of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, and shall rest from the east," and the rest. And again, that which is prophesied concerning him from the person of David, "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand"; and again that which was said by him to the Pharisees: "Did you never read, The stone which the builders rejected"? And as Luke asserts that the Savior, after having risen from the dead, appeared on the way to those who were with Cleopas, and instructed them from the prophets. Since...

it was necessary for Christ to suffer thus and to rise from the dead on the third day. And there is nothing at all discrepant between the Lord’s incarnate presence and the prophecies of the prophets.

VII. But let this suffice regarding the heresy of Saturninus, so that I may not waste time on his foolish questions and become entangled in refuting them. Having passed over this, I shall proceed to set forth the heresy of Basilides, his fellow-student and associate in error. For both are participants in the same dogmas, as if they had mutually borrowed poisons from one another, as the well-known proverb has it: "Like an asp borrowing its venom from a viper." For they are of the same school and sitting together, even though each established his own heresy separately. Therefore, they mutually stoked their own wickedness, yet established disagreement among themselves privately. But ^B whether the former, like a viper, infused into Basilides what he had imbibed from his predecessors, or rather the latter into him—since the venom is lethal and proceeds from such serpents—let us leave it weakened and extinguished by us, as if by an antidote, through the teaching of Christ the Lord. Then, having implored God’s help, we shall advance our discourse to the remaining heresies, most beloved.

AGAINST THE BASILIDIANS,

Which is the fourth, or the twenty-fourth, heresy.

I. Basilides, then, as we have said above, having set out into the land of the Egyptians, made his residence there. Thence he went on to the Prosopitic and Athribitic ^C prefectures; and he was also accustomed to stay in the Saitic territory, in Alexandria, and in the Alexandrian countryside, or "nome." For the Egyptians call the territory, or surrounding region, of each city a "nome." And you, O lover of learning, will find this useful for your own benefit, as it contributes to erudition and to the clarity of certain passages, so that some things which are written in the Holy Scriptures, and which for some, due to ignorance, cast doubt, may be religiously confirmed and explained. For wherever you find written in the holy prophet Isaiah something about the "nomes" of Egyptian cities, such as Taneos, or Memphis, or the nome of Bubastus, it signifies in the Egyptian manner the surrounding territory of that ^D particular city. And we wished to explain this for the sake of learning. In such places, therefore, the aforementioned quack was living; from which it is apparent that this heresy of his, which flourishes even to this day, took its pretext from his teaching. And he begins

^A to preach, going beyond his own teacher, the charlatan who was left behind in Syria, in order that by supposedly relating things beyond him, he might seem to stir up the hearers more, and to be well-pleasing and to gather crowds surpassing his fellow-disciple, Saturnilus. And finally, exceeding certain fantastic myths, he begins thus: but to tell the truth, he did not start his terrible and destructive teachings from his own mind, but having taken his pretexts from Saturnilus and the aforementioned Simon, he wishes to handle them differently and to relate the myths with greater bombast.

^B It would be a piece of madness to believe in this farrago of his drivel. But to those who are discerning, his argument and opinion are easily refuted and nonsensical, considering how he has perverted his own mind into an excessive and infinite malice. For he defines, as if in a certain poetic frenzy, that this wretched little human—being thunderstruck—decreed names for each ruler of the heavens, so that, through the names of which he boasts, he might—by those who do not have a sound mind—be believed, unto the destruction of the souls of the deceived. Nor did the deceiver stop at this, but he also applied himself to magical machinations and prying curiosities. ^D Later he says that this creation came into being from those who are in this heaven of ours and from the power that is in it; of which angels he says that the God of the Jews is one, who alone he said was one, and he sets this one as being in the same number as the angels who are named by him according to a nomenclature. And he says that man was fashioned from him, and that these [angels] shared the world with him according to an apportionment by lot, with the multitude of angels; and that to this [God] the race of the Jews was allotted. Blaspheming, he says, against the Almighty Lord himself, who is truly the only God—and we confess that the same one is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ—this one

I say, he denies and appoints as one of those whom he calls angels, as has been shown to us. Therefore, he maintains that the Jews fell to him by lot, and that he is more audacious than the rest of the angels, and that he liberated the sons of Israel from Egypt by the audacity of his own arm because he was more daring and audacious than the rest. Whence, because of his audacity—as this impostor blasphemes—he says that this same god of theirs decided to subject all other nations to the race of Israel, and for this reason he prepared wars. He also let loose his tongue against the holy God in many other ways, and having lifted up his mouth, the most miserable fellow is not ashamed to speak. For this reason, he says, the other nations fought against this nation and inflicted many evils upon it, because of the envy of the other angels, since, being provoked because they were despised by him, they themselves also set their own nations against the nation of the Israelites 57. For this cause, wars and disturbances were always incited against them.

III. Such is the persuasive discourse of this impostor. He also holds a like opinion concerning Christ, namely that he appeared to mortals only in appearance. Indeed, he maintains that what was seen in him was nothing more than an image, and that he did not truly exist as a man, nor had he taken on flesh. This second mimic-actor presents to us yet another drama in his discourse concerning the cross of Christ, claiming that it was not Jesus who suffered, but Simon of Cyrene. For, since it is written in the sequence of the Gospel that at the time the Lord was led out from Jerusalem, ^C they compelled a certain Simon of Cyrene to carry the cross, he lays hold of this as an opportunity to cavil and weave his own fable: namely that ^D Christ changed Simon into his own form while he was carrying the cross, and changed himself into Simon, and instead of himself, handed over Simon to be crucified. While that man was being crucified, Jesus stood opposite, unseen, mocking those who were crucifying Simon. Then he ascended into the heavenly regions, having handed over Simon to be crucified, and departed impassibly into heaven. But Simon himself was crucified, and not Christ. For Jesus, he says, having flown up into heaven, passed through all the powers until he was restored to his own Father. For this, he says, is that Son of the Father aforementioned, who was sent to the aid of the sons of men, because the Father had perceived a disturbance both among men and among the angels. And this, he says, is our salvation, who came into the world and revealed this truth to us alone. Such are the rhapsodies of this scoundrel's myth-making. But from this point on, as the impurity which had its beginning from Simon makes progress, he permits every practice of evil device and licentiousness

to those who become his disciples, teaching those who have been persuaded by him to commit a certain promiscuous mingling of men with women for a wicked purpose; as the Apostle says: ^A *For on these things and those like them, the wrath of God is revealed, and the righteous judgment upon those who hold the truth in unrighteousness*. For this reason, many fall into the heresy because of their self-indulgence, finding an easy way to satisfy their pleasure in shameful deeds.

IV. He teaches again, and he subverts them, saying that one ought not to be a martyr. For he who plays the martyr will be found without reward, since he who martyrs himself for the sake of the one who created man actually martyrs himself for the sake of the crucified Simon. But whence could there be reward for this man, seeing he dies for Simon the crucified, yet confesses that he does this for Christ, whom he does not know, dying for one whom he does not acknowledge? It is necessary, therefore, to be content ^B (58), and not to die prematurely.

V. Furthermore, this man will be found to be introducing a diabolical power against souls, teaching them to deny; whereas the Lord Himself says: *He who denies me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven*. But the, impostor says: "We," he says, "are the men; but all others are swine and dogs." And for this reason he said: *Do not cast pearls before swine, nor give what is holy to the dogs*. For he hides his own iniquity from those who have understanding; ^C but he reveals it to his own school and to those who have been deceived by him. For since the things spoken and done among them are truly shameful even to speak of, he says that one ought to confess the truth before men. For we, he says, are the men; but the others are in the number of swine and dogs, as I said before. He asserts that one should not reveal [anything] to anyone, except only concerning the Father and his own mystery, but should keep it in silence among themselves; and should reveal it to only one out of a thousand, and to two out of ten thousand. And he instructs his own disciples by saying: "You know all things; but let no one know you." And he himself, and those from him, when questioned, say that they are no longer Jews, nor have they yet become Christians, but must always deny; and that they must keep their faith in silence to themselves, and reveal it to no one, dreading the shame of their own [conduct] on account of the lack of freedom to speak—which arises from the shamefulness of their deeds ^D and their wicked teaching.

VI. The beginning of this evil pretext had its cause from the asking and saying, "Whence does evil come?" But everyone shall be shown by his own practice what sort of person he is. For this man is a merchant of evils.

and not of goods, as the Scripture also said: "Evil shall pursue those who seek evils" (Eccli. vii, 1). For evil never existed, nor has a root of wickedness come to be, nor does evil have any substantial existence. For evil was not at any time; rather, it exists as an adventitious thing on account of the pretext in each of those who do evil. In the act of not doing it, it does not exist, as has been shown in the words above. For the Lord says, after having made all things, "Behold, all things are very good" (Gen. 1, 31), showing that evil is not primitive, nor did it exist from the beginning before it started from man. For it comes to be through us, and through us it does not come to be. Does it not, therefore, follow that in the fact that every person can choose not to do evil, and can also choose to do evil, when he does it, evil exists; but when he does not do it, evil does not exist? Where, then, is the root of evil, the substance of wickedness?

^B 7. VII. This man has fallen into great folly, asserting that Power produced the Mind, the Mind the Word, the Word Prudence, and Prudence power and wisdom, and from power and wisdom authorities and powers and angels came forth. He says that the Power above these is the Source, Abrasax, because the numerical value of the word Abrasax amounts to the number three hundred and sixty-five. And from this he strives to confirm his own tale about the three hundred and sixty-five heavens. He struggles with all his might and study to adapt to these heavens positions and descriptions of places equal to his mathematical calculations. For he himself, and those who are of his discipline, have seized upon the very vain theorems of those others, so that, having fashioned them for their own use, they might transfer them to the cause and origin of their own idol-fashioning and erring, fictitious teaching. And they endeavor to corroborate these things with compared examples of similar calculations: for Abrasax, as I said before, contains the number three hundred and sixty-five. From this, therefore, they assert that the circuit of the year is completed in as many days. ^C But this hollow speech must of necessity collapse by itself. For the year is seen to consist not only of three hundred and sixty-five days, but of three additional hours. The same cause, he says, is why there are three hundred and sixty-five members in a man, so that each of those powers may claim its own member for itself. In which point, indeed, his invented and adulterous dogma collapses no less. For there are not more than three hundred and sixty-four members numbered in a man.

8. VIII. But that blessed successor of the apostles, Irenaeus, disputing more subtly about this matter, has surely refuted his folly compounded with equal ^D weakness.

^A Likewise, the trifles of Basilides, who claims to have descended from above and to have clearly contemplated celestial things—or rather to have fallen from above from the mark of truth—are refuted here. For if this heaven was created by the angels under him, and they in turn by those above them, and those above by others yet higher still, then the power from above, which is also called Abrasax, will be found to be the one who created all things ^B and the cause of all things that exist; and nothing will be found to have come into being without it, since it is proclaimed by them to be the cause and the first archetype for those beings that were supposedly created by someone else, but actually from the first beginning and cause of things that have come to be thereafter. I must ask this same man: By what reasoning do you lead us into such a multitude, my friend, and not rather to the beginning, that is, to the one God, the Almighty? Since, whether you speak thus or otherwise, one must confess a single cause for all things as Lord. ^C But answer me also regarding the doctrine of Christ, O architect of this mythical system. If Simon the Cyrenian was crucified, then our salvation was not brought about through Jesus, but through Simon; and the world can no longer hope to be saved through Jesus Christ, who did not suffer. For Simon, being a mere man and nothing else, cannot save. At the same time, you cast slander upon the only-begotten Son of God if the good Lord violently handed over another in his place to death. And such a thing will be merely a dream, or rather a specimen of malice and trickery, that the Lord, having hidden himself by some sleight of hand, handed over another in his stead; and your foolish babble, slandering the truth yet unable to prevail against it—being refuted by the truth itself—introduces this fabrication without any foundation. ^D IX. For the truth refutes this heresiarch on every side, both in the Old and New Testaments. For it is clear to everyone that Christ came to his passion willingly, and by his own will and that of his own Father, and by the good pleasure of the Holy Spirit, he took on flesh and became man among us, being God in perfection, begotten of the Father from the beginning, without beginning and without time; but in the last days he deigned to be born in the womb of a virgin, and having fashioned a body for himself, was born in truth, and became man in reality, so that in that very flesh he might suffer for us, and give his soul for his own sheep; as he refutes these men, saying: "Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man will be handed over, and will be killed, and on the third day he will rise again." And to the sons of Zebedee he said: "Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?" Just as the apostle Peter also says: "Put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit." And again: "He who suffered for us in the flesh."

And John likewise writes: "If any man does not confess that Christ has come in the flesh, he is an Antichrist." ^A To this the holy Paul says: "He tasted death," and death of the cross. As even Moses, proclaiming it beforehand, said: "You shall see your Life hanging before your eyes upon the wood." But our Life is not Simon the Cyrenian; rather, it is He Himself who suffered for our sakes, so that He might dissolve our sufferings, and, having died in the flesh, might become death to Death, that He might break the sting of death, having descended into the underworld, that He might shatter the gates of adamant. Having accomplished this, He led up the captivity of the souls, and emptied Hades.

X. Thus, it is so far from being the case that Christ caused death to Simon by handing Himself over, that one might ask: What in the world are you saying, O most wretched of all men? Could He not have spoken freely and departed from them, had He not willed to be crucified? But you suggest that the Word of God was a player of games and ^B tricks, and that He handed over another in His own place to die and be crucified—He who says: "I am the truth and the life!" And the Life would not cause death to another; and the Truth would not conceal what truly happened through Him, and point out one thing instead of another. For the truth will no longer be found to be truth if it produces error, and hides its own work, and on the contrary manages its affair through sophistry. And simply put, to avoid spinning out the discourse, "Woe to the world because of scandals, and to those who work iniquity!" How many have found darkness for themselves, and for others also who later were persuaded by their darkness! But to the prudent the truth will be manifest; and the scheming of Basilides and those of his kind will be proved to be a work of error.

And let these things be said by me regarding this heresy and this fable. From here I shall proceed to another heresy. For who will not easily catch such a heresy, being a myth and, like a horned viper hidden in the sand, ^C extending only its horn to bring destruction to those who encounter it? But the Lord has shattered the horn of sinners, and only the horn of the righteous shall be exalted, which is the faith of the truth. Having therefore shattered that doctrine of the truth, come, let us pursue the rest, having first procured as our helper God, to whom be glory and honor and adoration for ever and ever. Amen.

AGAINST THE NICOLAITANS, Which is heresy V, or XXV

^D I. Nicolaus was one of the seven deacons, of those

^A chosen by the apostles together with the holy proto-martyr Stephen, and Prochorus, and Parmenas, and the others. This man, originating from the Antiochenes, became a proselyte. Later, having accepted the word concerning the preaching of Christ, he too was joined to the disciples, being counted among the foremost. Hence he was also numbered among those chosen at that time for the care of the widows. Later, however, the devil insinuated his way into him, and deceived his heart with the same error as those ancients I mentioned, striking him more severely than the former ones. For this man had a wife of elegant appearance, and practiced continence from his wife, as if in imitation of those whom he saw devoted to God, and for a time he endured. He did not, however, maintain to the end the command over his own incontinence; but wishing, like a dog, to return to his own vomit, and searching for some evil excuses for himself to apologize for his own shameful passion, which would be more favorable to him—then, having fallen from his purpose, he was simply joined to his own wife. But this man, ashamed of his own defeat and fearing to be discovered, dared to say that no one can share in eternal life unless he indulges in lust every day. For he was carried from one excuse to another. Seeing that his own wife excelled in beauty but carried herself with humility, he became jealous of her, and judging others by his own debauchery, he first of all treated his own ^B wife with abuse, and brought certain charges against her through his words; in the end, he cast himself down not only into the use of the flesh according to the nature of men, but even into a blasphemous premise, and the harm of evil conduct, and the error of wicked intrusion.

II. And from this source, those of the falsely-named knowledge begin to infest the world evilly; I speak of the Gnostics, and the Phibionites, and those called after Epiphanes, and the Military, and the Levitical, and many others. For each of these, dragging his own heresy toward his own passions, devised myriads of ways of wickedness. For some of them glorify a certain Barbelo, whom they claim to be above, in the eighth heaven. And they say that she was brought forth by the Father. And some say she is the mother of Jaldabaoth ^C and others [the mother] of Sabaoth. And they say that her son has taken possession of the seventh heaven with a certain audacity and tyranny. And he says to those below, "I am," he says, "the first, and I am the one after this, and besides me there is no other God." ^D As for their saying that there is a necessity to misuse the flesh, the origin of this vicious dogma arose, as Clement also says in his *Stromata*; for those who claim to follow Nicolaus, bringing forward a certain note of the man, interpret the necessity to misuse the flesh as a deflection. But that noble man indicated that it was necessary to prune away both pleasures and desires, and by this exercise to wither the urges and attacks of the flesh. But those others, having poured themselves out into pleasure like swine, revel in their bodies as if insulting them.

^A and stealing away the seed from them through pleasure and effusion, so that, as they suppose, she might recover her own power that had been scattered into many places. And thus, from such a premise, she introduced the mystery of her filthiness into the world. And some, as I have said, among those previously mentioned, have taught through much base trickery—things which it is not right to speak of—how to engage in the promiscuous mingling of women and in incurable filthiness, just as the most holy Apostle says elsewhere in these words: "For it is shameful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret." ^B

III. But if anyone desires to see the refutation of this error that proceeded from the Holy Spirit, it can be grasped from the Apocalypse of the holy John, who, writing to one of the Churches in the person of Christ the Lord—that is, to the bishop who had been established there—together with the power of the holy angel who was at the altar, says: "But this you have of good, that you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate." Others, yet again, venerating a certain Prunicus in the same way they do these, and serving their own desires from that dogma of turpitude, say: "We gather the powers of Prunicus from bodies and from effusions"—by which I mean seed and menstrual blood, about which I shall discourse more subtly a little later when we set out to speak of them separately, not so as to defile the minds of those hearing or reading, but so that we may the more vehemently strike into the prudent a hatred of them and a detestation of such wicked deeds. Nor do we slander those wicked men, but we openly lay bare to everyone that which is done by them, just as the matter stands. There are also some among them who especially worship Jaldabaoth, and they proclaim him to be the first-born son of Barbelo; and therefore, they say, he is to be held in honor because he revealed many hidden things. Hence it is that they have certain fictitious books inscribed with the name of Jaldabaoth; and also, as they claim, the countless barbarian names of the princes and powers of each heaven, who are all hostile to the souls of men. Truly, a vast fraud has been prepared for the human race by the error of men of this sort. Others pay the same veneration to a certain Caulaucauch, a name by which they designate one of the princes. By these fearsome, fictitious, and barbarian appellations of words, they attempt to impose upon the unlearned. But for the experienced, and those who by the grace of God have obtained the knowledge of the truth of God concerning each name and proposition, what is easier than to refute those dogmas of fabulist errors confected by them?

IV. For when they name Prunicus ^D (66), the whole thing is pleasure

and the discovery of a heart. For everything called Prunicus indicates the name-sake of lust, and an attempt at destruction. For it suggests those who dance about the body. The word *Eprounikeuse* is a Greek term. Whence those who have written Greek accounts—the deceivers of the Greeks—write it down in their myths, speaking of beauty in this way, that it is "a Prunicus beauty." ^A But who among those who know would not laugh at the "Caulaucauch," that they take these words, well-spoken in Hebrew, clearly interpreted in Greek, and currently obvious to those who read in Greek—having nothing crooked in them—and they themselves, by scattering the error of their delusion into the naive through phantasy, turn them into idol-makings and forms and hypostatic principles, and, so to speak, into the modeling of statues for their own shameful and mythical art? For "Caulaucauch" is written in Isaiah ^B (67), a word found in the twelfth vision, where he says: "Tribulation upon tribulation, hope upon hope. A little while, a little while, wait." For I shall also place here the very Hebrew words themselves, perfectly, in the very syllables as it is written. For the "Saulasa" translates to "tribulation upon tribulation." "Caulacauc," to "hope upon hope." "Zeersam zeersam," to "a little while, a little while, wait." Where, then, is their mythology? Where is the agitation of their phantasiology? Whence did the weeds come into the world? Who forced humans to draw destruction upon themselves? For if they knew what they were doing when they transformed the names into a phantasy of destruction, they have clearly become the cause of their own ruin; but if they were ignorant and spoke of things they did not know, nothing is more wretched than they. For these things are truly foolish; and every person who possesses understanding in God can see it. For they destroyed and are destroying both themselves and those who obey them for the sake of voluptuousness. For it is a spirit of error, like a breath in it, moving each of the foolish in varied motions against the truth. And indeed, the very thing itself—the "Cauch," or "Cauch"—is an imitation of the dragon, through whom the evil one spoke and deceived Eve. From that type, by imitation, the same one to those…

who are deceived and enchanted by it, through a musical instrument, as it were—with its wandering, seductive sounds—was constructed to deceive men. And see the type which the flutist himself makes while playing. For the flute leans upward and inclines downward; it turns to the right and left, just like that one. For the devil uses these gestures to display his contumely against the heavenly ones, and to utterly overturn what is on earth, and to encompass the whole world in the same destruction, while he brings ruin equally to the left and to the right upon those who commit themselves to his fraud and are thus affected by his deceitful speeches as if by a musical instrument. ^B

V. There are also others from the flock of those heretics who fabricate certain empty names, and say: In the beginning there was darkness, and an abyss, and water; and the spirit was set as a boundary between them. But the darkness, excited with anger and fury against the spirit, ran upward and clashed with it. From thence, I know not what matrix was born, which sought the intimacy of that same spirit. From her were produced four Aeons; from these, fourteen others were procreated. Likewise, there was a right and a left, light and darkness. According to all these men, they narrate that a certain shameful Aeon was brought forth, and that he cohabited with that matrix which we mentioned a little before; and from both of them gods and angels, and demons, and seven spirits had their origin. But those histrionic figments are detected with no trouble; for when they define one Father at the beginning, they immediately show many gods, so that they show their error arming its own lies against itself, and overturning itself; while, meanwhile, the truth is transparent from every part. ^C

VI. What, therefore, Nicolaus, shall I oppose to you? What shall I dispute? Whence do you bring in to us that shameful I know not what Aeon, and the root of wickedness, and that fertile matrix, and finally many gods and demons? For as far as the Apostle is concerned, when he uses these words 1: *If there be some that are called gods*, he signifies that they are nowhere. For when he says, *that are called*, he shows them to consist in name only, while in reality they do not exist at all, and he taught them to be nothing other than in the opinion of some. But for us, he says, there is one God—for us, I say, who are endowed with the knowledge of the truth. And he did not add, one who is called God, but one who is God in reality. If there is one God for us, there cannot possibly be many. There also reaches us that saying of ^D Christ in the Gospel: *That they may know thee, the only true God* 2. This is to overthrow the mind of those who tell such mythical tales and think there is a plurality of gods. For one is our God, Father and Son and Holy Spirit—three substances, one lordship, one divinity, one glo...

1 I Cor. viii, 5. 2 Joan. xvii, 3.

glorification and praise for all: therefore, there are by no means many gods. But how, Nicolaus, is that saying of the Savior fulfilled in your case: "There are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are eunuchs who were born so from the womb; and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven"? If, therefore, there are eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, how have you deceived yourself and those who obey you, holding down and teaching the truth of God in unrighteousness through lust and shameful deeds? And where, in your case, is fulfilled the text: "Now concerning the virgins I have no commandment of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who has obtained mercy to be faithful; and again: "The virgin is anxious about the things of the Lord, how she may please the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit"? And how many things there are to be said concerning purity and continence and virginity! For among you, all the filth of impurity is shamelessly established. But let the purpose ^A of exposing this ridiculous sect be set before me here, through these two or three texts.

VII. Proceeding next to the heresy coupled with this one, I shall point out how it is like wild, overgrown vegetation or a forest of thorns gathered from every side, or a pile of dry wood and brush in a field prepared for burning; for by the same sect of the wretched Nicolaus, as if by the grafting of wild scab or leprosy, other bodies are corrupted from others. Thus, those called Gnostics—who are from him and from those before him, I mean Simon and others, having taken the pretexts—are in part joined together, but are altogether condemned ^B because of the wickedness and shameful deeds of their impure practice in these matters. For just as this man was truly one who practiced continence for a while and then abandoned continence—like the creature called ‘water-snake’ that comes up from the waters onto the land, and then turns back into the water—we have struck him and destroyed him with the rod given into the hand of Christ, and let us now proceed to the subsequent heresies.

AGAINST THE SO-CALLED GNOSTICS

I. These Gnostics again, in various ways from this [source] ^C...

^A have sprouted up as men deceived, as if they were fruits born of bitterness, which is manifest to everyone; and that this can be detected for the testing of the truth, I would say not only to the faithful, but perhaps even to the unbelievers, has sprouted up in the world. For to speak of the womb and of filth, and of things of that sort, would it not appear ridiculous to all men, both Greeks and barbarians, both the wise and the foolish? But it is a great calamity indeed, and, if I may say so, a most extreme misery, that the leaders of heresies, those who are condemned and caught in error, should be egged on against us and should rise up like a multitude of creeping things, causing us trouble and foul odors, itchings and importunities, through the deception of their myth-making. And these men, who are shackled to this Nicolaus, born again from him as from the egg of a serpent or an asp, ^B bring in to us certain names of vain babbling, and forge books—calling a certain book "Noria"—and by twisting their own Greek superstition, they turn the mythological rhapsody and fantasy prevalent among those Greeks into something else, and in such a way they weave falsehood into the truth. For they say that this Noria was the wife of Noah. They call her Noria so that, by transforming into barbarian names what had been rhapsodized in a Greek manner by the Greeks, they might produce a fantasy for those deceived by them, in order that they might provide an interpretation for the name of Pyrrha, calling it Noria. For since *nura* ^C signifies fire among the Hebrews—not in the profound tongue, but in the Syriac dialect; for fire is called *esauth* among the Hebrews, not in the profound tongue—it has happened to them by reason of their ignorance and lack of expertise to misuse this name. For neither Pyrrha, as celebrated among the Greeks, nor Noria, as mythologized by them, was the wife of Noah, but rather Barthenos. The Greeks indeed relate that Pyrrha was the wife of Deucalion. Then these same men, who again thrust upon us the mimes of Philistion, provide the reason. For when, they say, in the ark... ^D [The text continues in the next block, omitting the redundant Latin notes and commentary found in the provided OCR].

ilistion, provide the reason. For when, they say, in the ark ^A Noe desired to be, it was never permitted to her, because the prince, the creator of the world, wished to destroy her together with all the others in the deluge. But they say that she would sit upon the chest, and set it on fire, not once or twice, but many times: first, second, and third. Hence it is that the construction of the chest of Noe himself was delayed for many years, because it had been set on fire by her many times. For Noe, they say, was obedient to the prince; but Noria revealed the powers above and Barbelo, who proceeded from them and is contrary to the prince, just as the other powers did. She also pointed out that one must collect what was stolen from the Mother above by the prince who created the world and by the other gods, angels, and demons who are with him, from the power that is in bodies through the effusion of males and females.

^B II. And, to speak in a single word, it wearies me to pursue in speech the whole darkness of their blindness. For I would have to spend a great deal of time if I wished to explain in detail here the whole series of their fabrications, and to set forth item by item the absurd dogmas of their falsely-named knowledge. Others among them, diverging in various ways and imposing on the eyes of those who behold them with illusions, while being themselves deluded, bring forward a certain prophet named Barcabbas, worthy of his name. For *Cabba* in the Syriac tongue signifies whoredom, and in Hebrew it signifies parricide. And it is also interpreted as the fourth part of a measure. ^C Such a name is a subject for mockery and laughter, or rather for lamentation, among those who know the meaning of this name in their own languages. And they bring to us from this "most admirable" prophet a shameful narrative, so that they may persuade us to become accustomed to corrupt bodies and fall away from the hope that is above, not being ashamed to describe the acts of whoredom in the very words of such amorous poems of Cypris. Still others among them introduce a counterfeit poem, ^D to which they have given the name "Gospel of Perfection," claiming this to be the title. And it is truly not a Gospel, but a "Perfection of Mourning." For every perfection of death is contained in such a sowing of the devil. Others are not ashamed to speak of a "Gospel of Eve." For they hypothesize a sowing under her name, supposedly because she found the name of knowledge from the revelation of the serpent that spoke with her. And just as the words of a drunken man, whose mind is unstable and wandering, are inconsistent—some being produced in laughter, others full of weeping—so also is the

^A seed of wickedness of these impostors, risen and propagated, consistent in every way.

[[III]]. They base themselves on foolish testimonies and visions in the Gospel that they proclaim. For they say as follows: "I stood upon a high mountain, and I saw a tall man and another, a stunted one; and I heard a voice like that of thunder, and I drew near to hear, and he spoke to me and said: 'I am you, and you are I; and wherever you are, I am there, and I am scattered in all things. And from wherever you wish, you gather me; but in gathering me, you gather yourself.'" O doctrine sprung from a most wicked demon! From whence did it pervert the minds of humanity, and drag them away from the word of truth into foolish and groundless things? For there is almost no need for one who possesses mind and prudence to use Scripture or examples or any other thing to refute these. For by right reason, the drama of their foolish chatter and the work of adulterers is easily discerned and exposed by itself. These things and such as these are what they, who are the Gnostics united with the sect of Nicolaus, introduce, having fallen away from the truth. They have not only perverted the minds of those persuaded by them, but have also enslaved their bodies and souls alike to adultery and promiscuous intercourse. For they pollute their very assemblies with the vileness of manifold and promiscuous union, feeding and indulging in both human flesh and impurities; so that I would not dare to tell the whole, unless I were compelled by the intensity of the grief deeply wounding my mind, standing astonished at the sheer magnitude and pit of evils into which the enemy of mankind, the devil, leads those who obey him; so that he might stain the mind, and heart, and hands, and mouths, and bodies, and souls of those trapped by him in such great darkness. I fear, however, that if I were to reveal this whole great matter, like the face of a basilisk serpent, it might be more to the corruption of those reading this than to their correction. For the series of blasphemies of such boundless audacity toward the Divine insults the ears themselves; and the mere narrative of the baseness and the muddy, flagitious manner of the most sordid impurity does the same. Hence it is that by some they are cleverly termed Borborians—that is, ^B "muddy" or "mire-like" ^C —while others call them Coddiani. For "codda" in the Syriac dialect means a platter or a bowl ^D; this is because no one can eat common food with them, but food is usually placed separately for those who are defiled, and no one can even eat bread with them on account of their uncleanness. For this reason, considering them cut off, their peers named them Coddiani. These same people in Egypt are called Stratiotici and Phibionitae, as I have mentioned above in part. Some call them Zacchaei.

others Barbelites. ^A However, since I cannot pass over everything, I am compelled to speak out. Since the holy Moses, inspired by the Holy Spirit, writes: "If anyone sees a murder and does not report it, let such a one be accursed," I cannot pass over this great murder and this immense murderous work without disclosing it. For perhaps by disclosing this ruin to the prudent—like the pit of destruction—I shall strike fear and trembling into them, so that the prudent will not only flee, but will also stone that crooked serpent and basilisk in the pit, that no one may dare to approach. And let these things, which have already been said about them—being only a few things among many, and only touched upon in part—be set down as a beginning.

^B IV. I shall now move on to the very seat and abyss of their deadly doctrine. For among them, the corrupt teaching of pleasure is diverse. First, they hold their wives in common. And if any stranger from their sect arrives, a certain sign is given by the men to the women, and by the women to the men; in extending the hand, as it were, for a greeting, they tickle the palm by rubbing it underneath with a certain tingling touch, and by this sign they reveal that the newcomer belongs to their religion. Then, having recognized one another, they turn immediately to a feast. They provide abundant food, meat-eating and wine-drinking, even if they are poor. And after they have feasted and, so to speak, filled their veins to surfeit, they are turned to lust. Then the man, withdrawing from his wife, speaks to his own wife, saying: "Arise, and show charity to the brother." And the wretches are mingled with one another. And in truth, I am ashamed to say the things that are done among them, according to the holy Apostle: "For it is shameful even to speak of the things that are done ^C by them" (Eph. 5:12). However, I will not be ashamed to speak of what they are not ashamed to do, so that I may in every way strike horror into those who hear of the shameful deeds committed by them. For after being united in the passion of fornication, and in addition to this raising their blasphemy to heaven, both the woman and the man receive the emission from the male into their own hands, and they stand with eyes turned toward heaven, holding their uncleanness on their hands. And those who are called Stratiotici and Gnostics pray to the Father of all, as they say, offering that which is on their hands, and they say: "We offer to Thee this gift, the body of Christ." And thus they eat it, partaking of their own uncleanness, and they say: "This is the body of Christ, and this is the Pascha." Therefore our bodies suffer and are compelled to confess the passion of Christ. In the same way, whenever a woman is suffering her menstrual flow, they take that most foul blood...

gathered from her, and in like manner taking it, they eat it in common. And this, they say, is the blood of Christ.

V. Therefore, also reading in the apocrypha, "I saw a tree bearing twelve fruits annually, and it said to me: This is the tree of life," ^A they allegorize it to the female constitution occurring every month. And having intercourse with one another, they forbid the procreation of children. For among them, corruption is not pursued for the sake of procreating offspring, but for the sake of pleasure, the devil mocking such people and ridiculing the creature made by God as having been led astray. They fulfill the pleasure, but they take back to themselves their seeds of impurity; not casting them for procreation, but themselves eating of their own filth. And if any of them is caught having sown the seed of their natural discharge, and the woman becomes pregnant, hear what more terrible things such people dare to do. For having torn the embryo from the womb at whatever time they choose, they take this aborted infant, pound it in a mortar with a pestle, and mixing in honey and pepper and some other aromatics and ointments, so that they might not be nauseated, all those who are of the company of these swine and dogs gather together, and each partakes with his finger of the chopped-up child. And having thus performed their man-eating, they pray thereafter to God, saying: We have not been mocked, they say, by the prince of desire, but we have collected the fall of our brother. And this, forsooth, they reckon to be the perfect Passover; but look at other terrible things that have been dared by them. For when they become frenzied among themselves again, having smeared their hands with the discharge of their own filth, they rise up, and having their own defiled hands, they pray naked with their whole body, as if through such a work they find boldness before God. They groom their bodies by night and by day, women and men alike, anointing themselves, washing, feasting, and indulging in beds and drunkenness. And they curse the one who fasts, saying: One ought not to fast. For fasting belongs to this prince of this world who made the age. But one ought to be nourished so that the bodies may be strong, in order to be able to yield fruit in its season.

VI. Furthermore, they use both the Old and New Testaments, ^C although they disown him who spoke in the Old Testament. And indeed, whenever they find some word that seems able to hold a meaning contrary to their dogma, they declare that this was spoken by the worldly spirit; but if any word can be fashioned into a likeness of their own desire, no longer as the word is, but as their own deceived mind holds it, refashioning this into their own desire, they assert it to have been spoken by the spirit of truth. And this, they say, is what the Lord said concerning John: "What did you go out into the desert to see? A reed shaken by the wind?" ^D

^A For, they say, John was not perfect. For he was breathed upon by many spirits, like a reed moved by every wind. And when the spirit of the ruler came, he would preach Judaism; but when the Holy Spirit arrived, he would speak of Christ. And this, they say, is what is meant by, "The least in the kingdom of heaven" (74). Concerning us, they say, he said that the least among us is greater than he.

VII. But their mouths are immediately closed by the truth itself. For from that which is connected with each phrase, the truth will be clearly shown, and the real meaning of the statement will be revealed. For if John had worn soft clothing and lived in kings' houses, that remark would have been directed at him rightly and would have served directly as a rebuke to him. But since it was, "What did you go out to see? A man clothed in soft garments?" and this was not the case, there is no longer any reason to apply the reproach of this statement to John, who least of all adopted that delicate lifestyle; rather, it applies to those who thought they would find John like that, and to those whom the people who frequent the courts and palaces of princes are often accustomed to flatter out of hypocrisy. ^B For they thought that, by going out, they would receive praise from John and be congratulated for the transgressions they committed every day. But when they did not find this, the Savior spoke to them in refutation, saying: "What did you expect to find? A man conforming to your own passions, like those who wear soft clothing?" Not so. For John is not a reed blown about by the opinions of men, shaken as a reed by the hypocrisy and deceit of every man. And since he said, "Among those born of women there has not arisen one greater than John," lest some suppose that John was greater than the Savior Himself—for the Savior Himself was born of a woman, the ever-virgin Mary, through the Holy Spirit—He instructed us against this error by adding, "The least in the kingdom of heaven," that is, in time (74') of His incarnate presence, "is greater than he." ^C For since the Savior was born six months after the birth of John, He was obviously greater than he. For He always was and is. To whom is this not clear? Thus, all their teachings are in vain, turned from good into evil.

VIII. Furthermore, their books are many. For they circulate certain "Questions of Mary"; others thrust upon us many forged books in the name of Seth, concerning him whom we have called Jaldabaoth. And they speak of other "Revelations of Adam," and other gospels in the name of the disciples. ^D

^A Nor are they ashamed to say of our Savior and Lord Jesus Christ that He Himself revealed this obscenity. For in the "Greater Questions of Mary" (for they have also fabricated lesser ones), they claim that He revealed it to her, having taken her up into a mountain and prayed, and produced a woman from His side, and began to have relations with her; and thus, they allege, by tasting the discharge of His seed, He showed how one must act so that we might live. And they say that Mary was troubled and fell to the ground, and that He raised her up again and said to her: "Why did you doubt, O you of little faith?" And they claim that this is what is said in the Gospel: "If I have told you earthly things, and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?" ^B And the passage: "When you see the Son of man ascending where He was before"—this, they say, means the flowing seed being taken up, whence it also went forth. And the saying: "Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood." And when the disciples were troubled and said, "Who can hear this?" they claim that the discourse was regarding this obscenity; wherefore they were troubled and went back. For they were not yet, they say, established in the fullness. And they also refer to that saying of David: "He shall be like a tree planted by the streams of water, which will yield its fruit in its season." And they assert that in the words "by the streams of water," the man's obscenity is indicated; but that in "which will yield its fruit in its season," he demonstrates the discharge of pleasure; for as to what is added, "And its leaf shall not wither," ^C this, they say, is fulfilled by us when we do not allow it to fall to the ground, but we ourselves consume it.

IX. And lest by bringing forth their testimonies I cause more harm than good, for this reason I shall pass over the greater part in silence. Otherwise, I would recount here everything that is said by them. For as for what we read in Scripture, that Rahab placed a scarlet thread in the window, it was not, they say, scarlet, but the female pudendum; in which the scarlet color signifies the menstrual blood. Indeed, it also relates to that saying: "Drink water from your own vessels." Since they preach that the flesh perishes and is not raised again, and that it pertains to the ruler. But the power ^D which is in the menses and in the seed, they say, is the soul, which we collect and eat. Whence, when we eat meats or herbs, or bread, or anything else, we do a service to the created things, gathering the soul from all of them and carrying it with us into the heavens. Therefore, they partake of all kinds of meat, saying that we should have mercy on our race. They also think that the same soul is in animals and beasts,

and in animals, and in fishes, and in serpents, and that which is in men, and has been dispersed into herbs, and trees, and fruits. Now those among them who are called Phibionites ^A ascribe these execrable rites of lewdness, which have been explained by us, to the three hundred and sixty-five names which they have invented as belonging to the principalities, mocking the poor women and saying, “Come with me, that I may lead you to the prince.” And at each act of intercourse they pronounce some barbarous name of one of those whom they have led astray, one which they have rashly devised, and they pray with this formula, “We offer you to such-and-such a one, that you may offer yourself in turn to such-and-such a one.” And at the next act of intercourse, they set it forth for another in the same way, that he too may present her to yet another. And until they have come—or rather, descended—through three hundred and sixty-five falls of lewdness, at each stage they invoke some name while performing this act. And they begin to descend again through the same, performing the same shameful acts and mocking the women they have deceived. When, therefore, they have reached such a volume of seven hundred and thirty falls—I mean, shameful acts of intercourse—and names invented by them, then at last such a person dares to say, “I am Christ; for I have descended from above through the names of the 365 principalities.”

X. Concerning the greater principalities according to them.

The names of the greater principalities according to them, they say, are these, mentioning many. In the first heaven, they say, is the prince Jao; and in the second they say is the prince of lewdness, Saclan; ^C in the third they place Seth; in the fourth they place Daden—for they posit a fourth heaven, as well as a third; and a fifth other heaven, in which they say is Eloæus, who is also called Adonæus. In the sixth, some say there is Jaldabaoth, while others say Elilæus. And they posit another, a seventh heaven, in which they say is Sabaoth. Others, however, say not so, but that Jaldabaoth is in the seventh; while in the eighth heaven they place that which is called Barbelo, and the Father of all things, and the Lord, the same being self-originated, and another Christ self-begotten. And this Christ, they say, is the one who descended and showed this knowledge to men, and whom they also call Jesus; but they assert that he was not born of Mary, but appeared through Mary; and that he did not take on flesh, but that it was only an appearance. They say that Sabaoth has the form of an ass, some say of a pig. For which reason, they say, he ^D forbade the Jews to eat swine’s flesh. And they say he is the maker of heaven and earth, and of the heavens that follow him, and of his angels. And the soul, when departing from here, passes through these principalities; but it cannot pass through unless it has been in the fullness of the knowledge, or rather, this condemnation, and being filled with it, shall escape the hands of the principalities and powers. And they say that the prince who possesses this world has the form of a dragon, and devours the souls that are not...

go returning again into the world and from there into swine ^A and other animals, and are again carried up through the same vestiges. But if anyone, they say, should attain to this knowledge and gather himself out of the world by means of these monthly periods and through these discharges of desire, he is no longer held here, but ascends past the aforementioned rulers. And they say that he comes before Sabaoth and tramples upon his head—blaspheming with unbridled tongues—and thus ascends into the upper region, where is the Mother of the living, Barbero, who is also called by them Barbelo. And [they claim] that this is the manner of the soul’s attaining salvation.

Furthermore, these unhappy people have added to this fable that Sabaoth himself has hair like a woman’s, because, forsooth, they think that the word "Sabaoth" is the name of some prince; nor do they understand that wherever it is said, "Thus saith the Lord Sabaoth," it is not a proper name of anyone, but is used rather as a term of praise for the Divinity. For Sabaoth is translated from the Hebrew dialect as "Lord of Hosts." For wherever the name Sabaoth is written in the Old Testament, it signifies power. Whence Aquila everywhere translates *Adonai Sabaoth* as "Lord of Hosts." But these people, driven by fury and madness in every way, seek to the injury of their own Lord for him who does not exist, and have lost Him who truly is, or rather, they have lost themselves.

XI. Further Nonsense of the Same People

Concerning whom the Holy Spirit seems to me to be so moved in the apostle ^D Jude—that is, in his Catholic Epistle (for this is that Jude who is called the brother of James and of the Lord)—in which, through the voice of the apostle, the Holy Spirit, I say, demonstrates that those corrupt ones are indeed corruptors, as he speaks in the same place: "But whatever things they do not know, they are captured in them while ignorant; but whatever things they do know, like brute animals they are corrupted." For, like dogs and swine, they perform the corruption of their own uncleanness. For in this manner both dogs and swine, as well as other animals, corrupt themselves and lick up the humor flowing from their bodies. And they truly, dreaming, defile their own flesh, despise Dominion, and blaspheme Majesty. But Michael the archangel, disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not bring a railing accusation [alt-version omitted] but said, "The Lord rebuke you."

^A But as for these men, whatever they do not understand, they naturally blaspheme; for they blaspheme the Holy of Holies which was delivered to us with sanctification, while they themselves turn toward filthiness. And these are the things which they have dared to say against the apostles, as also the blessed Paul says: "As some slanderously affirm that we say, 'Let us do evil, that good may come,' whose condemnation is just." And how many other testimonies might I bring against these blasphemers!

For these men, who commit corruption with their own hands, and not only that, but also those who approach women, having no longer obtained satisfaction from the manifold intercourse with women, burn with lust for one another, men with men (according to that which is written), receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. For these wretched men actually congratulate one another, as though they had taken up some matter to be preferred. ^B But also, deceiving the female race that is persuaded by them, which is "laden with sins, and led away with divers lusts," they repeatedly tell those who have been deceived by them: "So-and-so is a virgin," even though she has been corrupted for so many years, and is being corrupted every day. For with them there is no satiety of lust, but the more a person is a man of shame among them, the more he is praised by them.

And they call those "virgins" who have never been joined in the natural, worldly union of marriage until the emission of seed; but who, while constantly mingling and playing the harlot, yet before the pleasure is completed, deflect the evil-doer who is the corrupter of their communion, and take the aforementioned filthiness for food, just as the perversity of Onan toward Tamar, but have instead seized upon this artifice of virginity: to be corrupted indeed, but not to receive the mingling or the emission of the corruption into themselves. ^C And they blaspheme not only Abraham and Moses and Elijah and the whole choir of the prophets, but also God Himself, who chose them.

XII. But ten thousand other fabricated writings have been dared by them. For they say there is a book titled "The Birth of Mary," in which they suggest some terrible and destructive things. For they say that from this book, Zacharias was killed in the temple because (they say) he had seen a vision, and because of fear, wanting to speak of the vision, his mouth was stopped. For they say that in the hour of incense, he saw a man standing who had the form of a donkey; and when he had gone out, they say, and wanted to say, "Woe to you, to whom do you ^D offer worship?" his mouth was stopped by him who had appeared to him inside the temple, so that he could not...

speak. But when his mouth was opened so that he might speak, then he revealed it to them, and they killed him. And thus, they say, Zacharias died. For this reason, they say, the priest was commanded by that very Lawgiver to wear bells, so that, whenever he entered to perform his priestly duties, by the sound of the bells, he who is worshiped might be alerted to withdraw from the midst, lest he be caught in that phantasmal and foul form of his face. ^B But the whole scheme of their foolishness is easily refuted and is completely worthy of ridicule. For if the one being served was entirely visible, he could not be hidden at all; and if he could be hidden at all, he was no longer visible. And it must be argued against them in another way, that if he were visible, he was surely a body and not a spirit; but if he was a spirit, he is not to be examined among visible things. How then was that which is not examined among visible things provided for by the sound of the bells of his own contraction? For having an invisible nature, he would not be seen unless he wished it. And even if he were seen, he did not appear out of necessity—with nature driving him to be seen—but by favor, and not through fear and anticipation unexpectedly, without the sound, making his own appearance manifest. And thus in every way their false and fabricated story collapses. And there are many other trifles that they say; even though Zacharias was not killed immediately, but remained for days after the birth of John and prophesied concerning John and the coming of the Lord and His incarnation through the Holy Spirit from the blessed Virgin Mary, as he says: “And you, child, shall be called the prophet of the Most High; for you will go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom”, and so on. How many other things can be said to refute their lying claims and their defilement!

XIII. And that we may say something concerning their "Levites," for so they call them; these do not have intercourse with women, but they have intercourse with one another; and these, forsooth, are commended with preeminent dignity and praise among them. ^C Then, truly, they deride all those who have embraced the monastic life, or who profess chastity and virginity, because they impose upon themselves labor and trouble in vain. Furthermore, they circulate a certain gospel under the name of Philip, the most holy disciple of Christ, in which these things are narrated: "The Lord," he says, "revealed to me what words the soul must use when it ascends to heaven, and how it must answer each of the heavenly powers. For I have attained self-knowledge," he says, "and I have gathered myself from all sides, and I have not begotten children ^D for the Ruler, but I have uprooted his roots, and I have gathered the scattered members, and I know who you are. For I," he says, "am from above." And thus, he says, it is released. But if, he says, it is found

^A to have propagated offspring, it is detained below until it can receive its children and draw them to itself. These are their trifles and dreams. Such also are the things which they do not fear to proclaim about the holy Elijah, full of an execrable insult—that when he was taken up into heaven, he was cast back down into this world. For there came, they say, one from the host of female demons, who overcame him. "And where are you going?" she said. "For I have children from you, and you cannot ascend and leave your children here." And to this, they say, he replies, "From where do you have children from me, when I have kept constant chastity?" "Indeed," she says, "when in sleep, as you were dreaming, you were emptied often by the emission of the body, I was the one who received the seed from you and bore you sons." But great is the folly of those who say such things. For how can a demon, being an unclean spirit and bodiless, partake of bodies? If ^B it partakes of bodies and becomes pregnant, it is no longer a spirit, but a body. But being a body, how is it invisible and a spirit? And great is the absurdity of their foolish babbling. For they wish to draw to themselves the testimony against them from the Epistle of Jude, in saying, "And these also, dreaming (78), defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignities." But the blessed Jude, the brother of the Lord, did not speak concerning those dreaming in the flesh. For he immediately adds and shows that he speaks concerning those "dreamers" who utter their own words as if in a dream, and not from the waking sense of a refined mind. For Isaiah also says concerning the teachers in Jerusalem: "All dumb dogs unable to bark, dreaming on their bed," and the rest. And here also, in the Epistle of Jude, he shows this by saying, "Dreaming the bed, speaking things they do not know." And he showed that he does not speak concerning the ^C dreaming of sleep, but concerning their mythical tragedy and babbling, as though spoken through sleep, and not from a sound mind.

XIV. I am truly ashamed to speak of all these things. For it is God’s alone to block the abyss of this filth. And I will pass from this place, having prayed to the all-sovereign God that no one might be mired in this filth, nor my own mind partake of the stench of this uncleanness. For first, the Apostle Paul cuts off every root of their wickedness, commanding concerning younger widows: "Younger widows," he says, "refuse; for when they have waxed wanton against Christ, they desire to marry, ^D having..."

^A judgment, because they have cast off their first faith." Let them marry, then, and beget children, and be mothers of families. Seeing then that the Apostle commands them to beget children and to preside over a family, while these people abhor the begetting of children, this is clearly an evil deed that has proceeded from the poisonous serpent and the worst kind of discipline. For while they succumb to the pleasure of their own lusts, they seek out certain pretexts for themselves to perpetrate their crimes, so that they may satisfy their unbridled desire and wantonness. Indeed, it would have been better not even to mention such things, nor for any record of them to exist in writings, but for them to be cast into the sepulcher like the corpse of a dead person, foul and breathing out a pestilential odor, so that they might not injure even human beings by the very hearing of them. And if such a heresy had completely passed away, and no longer existed in the world, it would have been worth the effort to bury it without any mention of it being made. Now, however, since it truly exists today and is manifested by these very deeds, and you have urged me to speak about everything, I have been compelled to touch upon it in part, so as not to omit the study of truth I have undertaken; but I shall set forth all that I have gathered, partly to deter those who hear it, and partly to put to shame those who perpetrate such things. For what argument could there be by which we might not demonstrate that those monstrous parricides and the crimes which are committed by them, along with the rites and ceremonies of the evil demon, were established by the instigation of that same demon for those raving and witless people?

XV.

has not known a bed in transgression; and the eunuch, who has not wrought iniquity with his hands; so that it might cut away those things which are filthy deeds in their hands according to their myths.

XVI. How many other things can be said! As the Apostle says: ^B *The unmarried woman and the virgin is careful for the things of the Lord, how she may please the Lord* (1 Cor. VII, 34). He says this, to show that purity in truth is not granted from the Holy Spirit in a perfunctory manner. Then, regarding those who have an honorable marriage, he says: *Marriage is honorable, and the bed undefiled: but fornicators and adulterers God will judge* (Hebr. XIII, 4). Moreover, he cries out against them, writing to the Romans, revealing the shame of those who work such evils, saying: *For their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature* (Rom. I, 26). And concerning the men, that *men with men working that which is unseemly* (Rom. I, 27). But also in the Epistle to Timothy concerning these matters he says: ^C *That in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves*, *lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God* (2 Tim. III, 1–4). And again: *Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, having their conscience seared* (1 Tim. IV, 3). Because they forbid marrying with temperance and bearing children, while they are burning in their conscience, indulging in lust and corruption, yet forbidding procreation.

For even that which is called a sacrifice among them, being already something muddy, and from of old indicated by the prophet as being the flesh of the serpent, and not of the Lord, God forbid!—it says thus: *Thou didst crush the heads of the dragon, and gavest him to be meat to the people the Ethiopians* (Ps. LXXIII, 14). For the abominable religion of these people is truly the food of the serpent; and the Ethiopians are those who are blackened by the staining of their sins, who ^D celebrate with religious worship this rite of the one who is now a demon, Jupiter, but who was once a sorcerer, who is also vainly held by some to be God. For all the heresies, having gathered to themselves the error from Greek myths, have cast it down, having transformed it into another, worse interpretation. For the poets (80) introduce Jupiter swallowing Metis, his own daughter. Yet an infant would not be swallowed, as the holy Clement also said, laughing at the indignity of the gods of the Greeks: “That, having swallowed Metis, he could not swallow an infant, but his own seed.”

^A XVII. What else shall I say next? Or how shall I cast off this muddy subject, wishing to speak and yet not wishing to, compelled to do so lest I seem to conceal any of the actual facts; and fearing, lest in revealing their terrible deeds I either defile myself or strike others, and by focusing on this, I might incite those who are led astray by pleasures and desires to investigate it with curiosity? Nevertheless, may I remain innocent, and may the entire hope of the holy Catholic Church, and all who come into contact with this writing, remain whole and inviolate from such sowing and evil machination of the devil. For if I should wish to tell of the other things that are said and done among them, things that are such and so many—and even things greater and lesser than these—and if I should wish to set out as an antidote, a medicinal remedy for healing, against every word, I would drive this treatise into a great mass of text. For I myself, beloved, stumbled upon this heresy. ^B Through the mouth of those attempting it, I was informed of these things naturally and in person. Women so deceived not only put this discourse before us and revealed such things to us, but even after that Egyptian woman, the wife of the chief cook—that ruinous and wretched woman—these women also, with shameless boldness, attempted to drag us down when we were still in the flower of our youth.

But He who then stood by the most holy Joseph stood by us also; and calling upon Him who delivered that man from such danger, though unworthy and unable to attain such a benefaction, ^C we were granted mercy and, having escaped their destructive hands, we were able, as we sang a hymn to the all-holy God, to say ourselves: “Let us sing to the Lord, for He has been gloriously glorified; the horse and his rider He has thrown into the sea.” ^D For we were not saved by any strength of our own righteousness, like that patriarch, but by a groan poured out to God, [note note: see Exodus 15:1] having been shown mercy. For being reproached by these destructive women, I was laughed at, as such women hinted to one another, mocking me, as it were: “That we were not able to save the young man, but we left him to perish in the hands of the prince.” Since whoever among them is more beautiful puts herself forward as a lure, so that through her, they may claim to save those who have been deceived, rather than destroy them. And subsequently, it becomes a reproach to the ugly from those who are more beautiful, that: “I,” she says, “am a chosen vessel able to save those who are deceived, but you were not able.” ^D Now those who were teaching this seductive myth were, in appearance, most fair in the form of their own fall; but in the mind of their wickedness, they possessed all the shapelessness of the devil. But the merciful God delivered us from their wickedness, so that after we read their books and applied our mind to the truth—and were not led away, but escaped and were not ensnared—we then strove to reveal them to the bishops in that place, and to uncover their names kept hidden in the Church, and for them to be driven from the city, names concerning...

about eighty heads, so that the city might be purged of their tares and thorny substance. ^D

XVIII. Therefore, if anyone recalls what we promised in the beginning, perhaps he will approve our design, in that we stated that we learned what pertains to these sects partly through experience and habit, partly through receiving it from writings, and partly through having been thoroughly taught by the narration and testimony of trustworthy men who could point out the truth of the matter. And so, because of the zeal for truth which we profess, we did not want to pass over this place, but showed that this is one of those heresies we have encountered, about which we could bring forward something certain and investigated. Not [from anything] because we ourselves engaged in it—may God avert this from us!—but because we learned it accurately from those who tried in vain to persuade us of it, and who completely abandoned the hope they had conceived of our destruction. Since all the snares and frauds which they themselves, and the devil who is in them, had devised for the ruin of our miserable soul, had turned out vain and empty, we can most aptly use that saying of David: *The arrows of infants have their wounds become* (Ps. LXIII, 8), etc. Then [that other]: *Their labor shall be turned upon their own head, and their iniquity shall descend upon their crown* (Ps. VII, 17). ^B Therefore, just as we ran into their error in such a way that we fled its harm, and, as soon as we read and knew it, we condemned it and passed on safe and sound, so we exhort you, whoever you are who read these things, to pass over what you have read and condemned, so that you do not fall into a sort of venom of this kind of serpent of iniquity. And if at any time you should chance upon someone from this school of serpents, immediately taking up the wood prepared for us by the Lord, upon which our Lord Christ was nailed, against the head of the serpent, you should immediately take it and say: "Christ was hung upon the cross for us, leaving us a pattern of salvation," for He would not have been crucified except that He had flesh. And having flesh, and being crucified, He crucified our sins. I hold to the truth by faith, and I am not led astray by the sloth of the serpent, or by the whispering of his doctrine. ^C

XIX. But now, leaving that heresy behind, I shall proceed, dearly beloved, to other craggy and uneven paths—not that I am to walk along them, but so that I may point them out from afar to those who desire to recognize those asperities, and to flee to that narrow and restricted path which leads to life eternal, and to abandon that other wide and spacious, thorny, and boggy road full of obstacles, and filled with licentiousness and fornication. ^D The likeness of which fornication and licentiousness can be seen in that most terrible serpent, to which the ancients gave the name of "viper." For the nature of such a viper is very similar to the wickedness of these people; for while they seek to complete their shame with males or females, this...

^A creature—having, they say, no experience of birth—is charmed by the passion of desire. The female and the male, having entwined together, the female gapes wide, and the male inserts his head; and then she, seized by passion, bites off his head, and thus, having swallowed the venom that trickles from his mouth, she conceives within herself such a hybrid offspring. This offspring, having grown in the belly and having no exit by which to come into the light, wounds the side of its mother and is thus born, with the result that both its father and mother perish. Wherefore they gave it the name "apeirōdinos" [that which knows no birth-pangs], because it does not experience the pangs of labor. It is indeed more terrible and fearful than all other crawling things, working its own destruction within itself and receiving its filthiness through its mouth. ^B Such is this insane heresy, whose head and body and its offspring we have here crushed with the tree of life, so that we may add a consideration of the others, calling upon God as our helper, to whom be honor and power forever and ever. Amen.

AGAINST THE CARPOCRATIANS

I. Beside these, there arose a certain Carpocrates, who from his own mendacious intellect devised a certain private and nefarious sect, and was worse in the depravity of his morals than all of them. For this heresy blossomed from the errors of all—namely, of Simon, and Menander, of Saturnilus, and Basilides, and Nicolaus, and of Carpocrates himself, and furthermore from the pretext of Valentinus, ^C by whom was propagated that falsely-called knowledge which fastened the name of "Gnostics" upon all his followers; so that those Gnostics, concerning whom we recently disputed, should rather be called "Catagnostics"—that is, "the Condemned."

II. But to return to Carpocrates: he asserts one supreme principle, the same Parent of all, and unknown, and signified by no name, just as the others are wont to assert. He maintains, however, that the world and the things contained in the world were created by angels, who hold a far lower order of dignity than that unknown parent. He posits that these, falling ^D away from the supreme power, fabricated this world. Moreover, he says that our Lord Jesus was begotten by Joseph, just as other mortals are procreated from the seed of a man and a woman. He asserts that he differed in nothing at all from the rest of men, except in his manner of life, and in temperance, and virtue, and justice. But since he was endowed with an anima that was stronger and more vigorous than that of other men, and remembered the things seen by it above, when it was in the revolution of the unknown Father, it had been sent—

powers from the same Father, he says, into his soul, so that, having remembered what it had seen and having been strengthened, it might escape ^A the makers of the wor1d, the angels, by passing through all the things and actions that are carried on among men in the world, and in secret, through strange and unlawful deeds; and so that, by having been set free through all such actions, this same soul of Jesus, he says, might ascend to the same unknown Father who had sent the powers to it from above, in order that, having passed through and been set free from all actions, it might journey up to him. Furthermore, they say that souls that are like it, and have embraced the same things as it, being likewise set free, fly up to the unknown Father, as they have performed all the acts and, having been released from all things, are henceforth set free.

They claim that the soul of Jesus, having been reared in the customs of the Jews, despised them, and that for this reason it received powers, through which it was able to perform the passions that are present in men for their punishment and to surmount the makers of the world. And they say that not only the soul of Jesus was able to do this, but also any soul that is able to pass through the actions and surmount these very angels who are the makers of the world, if it also receives powers and performs ^B the same things as Jesus, as I said before. From this, those who are deceived by the fraud of this impostor have been driven into such great arrogance that they think themselves to be preferred even to Jesus himself. Others of them say that they are not superior to Jesus, but to Peter and Andrew and Paul and the rest of the apostles, due to the magnitude of their knowledge and the abundance of their traversing of various progressions. Still others among them claim to differ in nothing from our Lord Jesus Christ. For they say that souls are all from the same revolution and have likewise performed the same contempt of all things as Jesus. And all souls, they say, have been deemed worthy of the same power as that which Jesus was deemed worthy. Therefore, they say that these also pass through every action, just as the soul of Jesus has also passed through. And if anyone should again be able to despise more than Jesus, he will be more distinguished than him.

III.

^A For the information of their blinded mind, they do this with the intention that—as they have been miserably deceived—they may firmly persuade themselves that through so many and such diverse crimes, they are transcending the power of the angels who are the creators of the world, and of all those who are prostrate and despised in the world, and are transgressing not the power of the world, but rather of those who are the craftsmen of fables; so that they might obtain celestial liberty, and be able to aspire and fly upward. ^B It is Satan who appears to have adorned and set forth this race of men for the disgrace and scandal of the Church of God: for they have taken upon themselves the name of Christians, so that because of them the nations might be scandalized, and turn away from the benefit of the holy Church of God, and reject the announced truth because of their monstrous crimes and incredible wickedness; so that, I say, having observed their frequent villainies, they might persuade themselves that those who are of the holy Church of God are also like them, and thus turn their ears away from the most true doctrine of God, as we have said; or certainly, having observed the wickedness of a few, they might cast the same curses upon all. And this is the final cause why most of the Gentiles, wherever they have discovered men of this sect, do not wish to share with us either in giving and receiving, or in counsel, or in the society of hearing the divine word, and cannot even endure to offer their ears; to such a degree have they been confounded and terrified by their nefarious flagrant acts. ^C IV. Furthermore, these men are constantly occupied in luxury and delights, and they strive for nothing except for the pleasure and gratification of their bodies; nor do they approach us at all, unless perhaps to entice weak minds to their impious dogmas. For they are similar to us in nothing other than that they boast only in the name of Christians, so that by the pretense of this falsely assumed name they might practice their own wickedness. But the legitimate judgment of these men is as it is written, which the apostle Paul delivered. For because of their abominable deeds, a reward consistent with them shall be rendered to them; for when they have allowed their mind to be seized by the impetus and fury of lust, they cast themselves headlong into infinite kinds of pleasures. For they dispute that the things which are judged by men to be evil are not evil at all, but are naturally good. For nothing is evil by nature; but they are judged to be depraved only by men. ^D And if anyone shall have performed all these things in this one present life, his soul is no longer transmigrated into other bodies, that it might be brought forth into this light again; but, having finished every kind of action, it will depart free and immune, since it is no longer bound by any debt of action in this world. But what kind of action they mean, I fear to explain again, lest I open this stinking drain like an open sewer, and give occasion for a pestilential exhalation and stench. But nevertheless, since we are constrained by the truth to disclose the things held by those who have been deceived, it would be more modest to say, and not to [neglect] the truth...

in the slightest. What else, then, do these people commit but that execrable and detestable wickedness which it is not even permitted to express in words—that is, the perverse practice of men with men, or the most lascivious intercourse with women through any part of the body whatsoever—and, in addition to these, magic arts, sorceries, and the worship of idols? They confirm that this is the method for discharging the debts of the body, so that they may no longer be subject to accusation, nor may any work be required of them again; and they do this so that the soul, after its departure from here, may not be turned back and compelled to return to reincarnation and transmigration.

^B V. Such are the writings of these people, that if a wise person were to read them, he would be struck with great astonishment and would scarcely be able to persuade himself that such things could be done by human beings, not only by those of our own kind who live in society, but even by those who live in the midst of wild beasts and cattle, and who are so emboldened as to act almost like dogs and swine. For they say: "It is necessary in any case to make every possible use of these things, so that when the souls have gone forth, if they have left any work undone, they may not, for this reason, be cast back into bodies again in order to perform what they had not performed." And this, they say (85-86), is what Jesus meant in the Gospel by the parable: "Agree with thine adversary, whilst thou art in the way with him, and give diligence to be delivered from him, lest the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge to the minister, and the minister cast thee into ^C prison. Amen, amen, I say unto thee, thou shalt not go out from thence, till thou pay the last farthing" (Matt. v, 25, 26).

They fabricate a certain myth to interpret this parable. They say that the adversary is one of the angels who created the world, and that he has been appointed for this very purpose: to lead the souls that depart from bodies here to the judge, where they are convicted of not having performed every work. And they say that they are delivered by the ruler to the minister. By the minister, they mean an angel who serves the creator-judge by bringing the souls back and sending them down into various bodies. Furthermore, they say that this adversary, whom we mentioned that the Lord spoke of in the Gospel, is one of the world-creating angels, ^D who goes by the name Abolus. For they interpret the prison as the body, and the "last farthing" as the migration of the souls, which must accomplish their final actions through successive arrivals into individual bodies, so that no crime or wickedness remains. For it is necessary, they say, as we have mentioned before, that the soul, having traversed all things and fulfilled every individual act, and being loosened, having overcome the makers of the word and the chief author of this, should ascend to the supreme and unknown

^A realm, having surpassed the makers of the world and the creator of the world. They say again that it is necessary, even if one has not completed the work in a single appearance, that through the process of transmigration, having slowly performed the work of each forbidden deed, one should finally be liberated. They say again that: "We account these things worthy to be explained to those who are deserving, so that they may perform what appear to be evils, though they are not evil by nature, so that having learned, they may be liberated." These people of the faction of Carpocrates place a seal with a burning iron, or by the application of a razor or a needle, onto the right lobe of the ear of those whom they have deceived. ^B 3. A certain Marcellina, having been deceived by them, has already come to our attention, and she ruined a great many people in the times of Anicetus, bishop of Rome, who was in succession to Pius and those before him. For in Rome, [(87)] Peter and Paul were the first to be both apostles and bishops themselves; then Linus; then Cletus; then Clement, who was a contemporary of Peter and Paul, of whom Paul makes mention in his Epistle to the Romans [Philippians]. And let no one wonder that, since this man was a contemporary of Peter and Paul, others received the episcopate from the apostles before him; for this man also was a contemporary of the apostles. Whether, therefore, still ^C living, he received the laying on of hands for the episcopate from Peter, and re- ^D linquished it…

^A (for he says in one of his Epistles: "I depart, I go away into exile, let the people of God remain," advising this to some, for we have found this recorded in certain commentaries), or whether he was appointed by bishop Cletus after the succession of the apostles, we do not know with entire certainty. However, it was possible for other bishops to be appointed while the apostles, I mean those around Peter and Paul, were still living, because the apostles frequently set out for other lands for the sake of the preaching of Christ, and the city of the Romans could not be without a bishop. For Paul even reached Spain (88); and Peter visited Pontus and Bithynia frequently. ^B It is possible that after Clement was appointed, he may have withdrawn (if indeed this was done—for I am stating my opinion, not contending), and later, after the death of Linus and Cletus, who served as bishops for twelve years (89), each succeeding the death of the holy apostles Peter and Paul, which occurred in the twelfth year of Nero (90), he was compelled to take up the episcopate again. Nevertheless, the succession of the bishops in Rome has this order: Peter and Paul, Linus and Cletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Xystus, Telesphorus, Evaristus, Hyginus, Pius, Anicetus, who is the one I previously numbered in the list of bishops.

And let no one be surprised that I have gone through each detail so accurately. For through these things the clear truth is always demonstrated. In the time, then, as we have said (91), of Anicetus, the aforementioned Marcellina, having come to Rome, and vomiting out the poison of the Carpocratian doctrine, corrupted many of those there and brought them to ruin; and from thence came the beginning of the so-called Gnostics. ^C They have painted images in colors, and some even in gold and silver, and other materials, which they claim to be likenesses of Jesus—and these likenesses they say were made by Pontius Pilate when he was dwelling among the human race. They keep such images in secret; and they have also images of certain philosophers, such as Pythagoras, and Plato, and Aristotle, and others; with which philosophers they have joined other images. ^D

^A of Jesus, and having set them up, they worship them,

and they perform the mysteries of the nations.

VII. Wherefore it is necessary to overthrow these men with every effort. For let no one despise the argument, especially when it comes from an impostor. But one might say: “Is it not something easily recognized, and full of foolishness?” Indeed it is. But foolish things are usually convincing to the senseless, and they lead even the prudent off the straight path, unless the mind be present, practiced in the truth.

^B Since, therefore, this magic of Simon and the rest has fallen into our hands, we shall use the same arguments to overthrow this man too. For if that unknown and unnameable power was the cause of other angels, is there ignorance in that same power—that is, in the Father of all—if he did not know what the angels created by him were about to do, being ignorant that they would rebel and perform what he did not himself desire? Or did he create them, knowing that they would do what he does not desire, and it has come to pass through them, and it will be that through his knowledge and good pleasure he himself has created what they have dared to do? If, therefore, as I said before, he knew what they were going to do, but did not want them to do it, for what reason did he create those who created it, to the end of doing what he himself did not desire? But if he himself created the angels so that they might do what is done by them, then surely he wanted it to come to pass, and for that reason he prepared the angels who created it. And if he prepared them for the purpose of doing it, and yet forbids what is done by them, it would be a calumny in the midst of it. ^C But if he allowed them to do it, yet desires what is produced by them—that is, men and souls—to be taken back unto himself against their will, then there will be greed in the midst of it, and nothing else, as the men produced by the angels are snatched by the one above against the will of the former. But it would also be impotence; since, being unable to do it himself, he snatches what was created by those created by him. And it will henceforth be a fable and foolish babbling, that the lower powers should overcome those in the middle, and those in the middle be punished as being the causes of the lower, and those below, over the middle ones, be saved and freed unto the one above—I mean, the souls in this creation. ^D And the one above would be judged weak for not having been able to do it, while those created by him were able to do what he himself did not want and could not do. For that one cannot, as he desires, have evil in him, nor have been created by evil. For if it were evil, it would have to be destroyed. If it were entirely one, in the category of evils to be considered the world, and all things contained in the world. Epiphanius attacks both dogmas. The first, indeed: because the consequence is that God is weaker than the angels. The second, however: that since a certain part of the whole Universe obtains salvation, it cannot be wholly excluded from the category of good things.

are the reasons for retribution, for undergoing punishment, and for the lowest, after the intermediate ones have been overcome, to fly up to the supreme creator of all things and attain liberty; that is, the souls which are contained within this universe of created things. Wherefore that supreme being, who could not have created them, would be accused of weakness. But those whom he himself has produced will appear to be of such a kind that they can do those things which he himself either would not want, or, even if he desired it greatly, could in no way do. For neither can those things be evil which are held by his desire, nor produced from evil things; for if they were evil, they ought to have perished utterly. But if some part of the work is to be saved, evil itself cannot exist, if even any part of it is found to be saved: nor are the artificers themselves evil, who have fabricated him who is to be saved. Furthermore, if the soul were entirely propagated by angels, and, upon being brought into the light, had received some power from heaven, then much more would the angels obtain salvation, since even by them, though they are evil, the soul that has been procreated is preserved. Finally, if the soul can be saved, it will not itself be evil, having had its origin from angels; nor will the angels, from whom it has its origin, be evil.

^B VIII. And whoever is endowed with a firm and constant mind ought to understand that there is nothing more foolish than this whole workshop of charlatans. Whom, indeed, we can convict ignominiously by their own words in this way. For if Jesus Christ was not born of the Virgin Mary, but was propagated from the seed of Joseph and the same Mary, and he attains salvation, then it follows that those who begat him ought also to be saved. And if they were made by that supreme artificer, it is agreed that he is indeed their Creator, and he who fashioned Joseph and Mary, from whom Jesus—who came forth from that unknown Father above—was born, will no longer be ascribed to ^C any deficiency. But if Jesus was also created by angels, and the creator is one of the angels, then all are necessarily led into the one same absurdity, into which the angels themselves have fallen. Nor will their fable stand, filled as it is with a certain lethal poison and pestiferous doctrine. But we, having routed this heresy and turned it to flight, just as if smashing the serpent’s head into the ground with the staff of faith and truth, will endeavor with an advancing step to destroy and overthrow to the depths the other horrible shapes of monsters.

ADVERSUS CERINTHIANOS, Sive Merinthianos, Quae est haeresis VIII, vel XXVIII

I. Cerinthus follows: from whom those called Cerinthians are named, who, procreated from the same savage seed, have poured their own virus into the world. And he asserted almost nothing ^D else than what that Carpocras, mentioned above by us, asserted, and propagated the same lethal poisons into the world with him. For he thinks, with a similar calumny against Christ, that he was born from the seed of Mary and Joseph: and that the world was likewise fabricated by angels. And he introduced a doctrine differing in no other thing from that one, except that he also adopted Jewish rites. But the same man asserts that the law and the prophets were set forth by angels, and that he who brought forth the law is of the number of those angels by whom the world was founded. Furthermore, this Cerinthus, having spent time in Asia, began to spread his doctrine there. Who, as we said before, [beginning from his first...]

the seed of Joseph and Mary—Christ, that is, the Holy Spirit, descended upon him from that supreme God in the form of a dove at the Jordan. And then He revealed to him and through him to those with him the unknown Father. And for this reason, since the Power had come down upon him from above, he performed miracles, but once he had suffered, that which had come from above flew back up from Jesus. Jesus, however, having suffered, was raised again; but Christ, who had come down to him from above, flew up, being impassible—that very thing which had descended in the form of a dove—and thus that Jesus was not Christ.

II. But he also falls into error, no less than all the others, as you all can easily see, whoever of you are held by a love of the truth. For he denies that He by whom the Law was given is good, to whose law he nevertheless seems to submit as if it were good. But how is it consistent that one who is evil would prescribe a good law? For if it is honorable not to commit adultery and honorable not to commit murder, how much better would He be who commanded these things, if He who performed them not is confessed by all to be good! ^B How then will he be accused of doing evil, he who gives good counsel and has prescribed a good law? Indeed, the man is mad and insane who has not feared to boast of such things. And he, dearly beloved (95), was one of those in the time of the Apostles who stirred up that tumult when James and the rest of the Apostles wrote a letter to Antioch with these words: "Forasmuch as we have heard that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, to whom we gave no such commandment," etc. And he is one of those who opposed Saint Peter when he had gone to the holy Cornelius, by whom he had been sent for after an angel had appeared to him in a vision. At that time, when Peter was hesitant, that sheet with the things it contained was cast before him, and he heard from the Lord not to call anything common or unclean. Therefore, Cerinthus stirred up the crowd of circumcised ones in Jerusalem against Peter as he was returning, saying: "He went in to men uncircumcised." ^C This was done by Cerinthus before he preached his doctrine in Asia and cast himself more deeply into the chasm of his own destruction. For since he himself was circumcised, in order to take vengeance on those who were believers while retaining their foreskin, he seized upon the occasion of circumcision.

III. But since the Lord perpetually exercises care for the human race, and is accustomed to establish and confirm a sure and constant faith in those children who love the truth, having given the most holy apostle Peter the capability and the means to refute him, the foolishness of Cerinthus becomes manifest to all. ^D For the holy Peter says: "I was in the city of Joppe: and I saw in the middle of the day about the sixth hour a sheet"

falling from heaven, in which were all quadrupeds, and reptiles. And he said to me: Kill and eat. But I said: By no means, Lord; for nothing common or unclean has ever entered into my mouth. But a voice answered me a second time from heaven: What God has cleansed, do not you call common. And immediately, behold, two men stood at the house. And the Spirit said to me: Go with them, doubting nothing. And he then narrates how these things were spoken to him as in a parable; and how he did not go to teach until the Lord had evidently shown him that which He was teaching him through words and types. For immediately as he began to open his mouth, when he arrived in Caesarea, the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius. And seeing this, Peter said: Can any man prohibit the water from these who have been deemed worthy to receive the Holy Spirit, as we also did from the beginning? And the whole of this was a mystery, and a work of the philanthropy of God, so that both the holy Peter and everyone else might know that the salvation of the Gentiles is not from men, but from God. For God anticipated [the need] to give the gift of the Spirit, and the vision of the angel, and the acceptance of his prayer, and fasts, and good deeds; so that what the apostles, and especially the holy Peter, and the rest of the apostles, had been entrusted with, they might not withhold from him who had been truly called by God.

^B IV. But these things were then administered in this way, being stirred up by the aforementioned false apostle Cerinthus; just as at another time he himself and those with him caused a disturbance in Jerusalem itself, when Paul went up with Titus, as this one also said, that he brought in men with uncircumcision with him, saying regarding this already: He has defiled, he says, the holy place. Wherefore Paul also says: "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Gentile, was compelled to be circumcised: but because of the false brethren who were subintroduced, who crept in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ, to whom we yielded no subjection, no, not for an hour." And exhorting those in uncircumcision, he said: "Be not circumcised; for if you are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing." Circumcision, however, had its time in serving until the greater circumcision arrived, that is, the washing of regeneration, as is clear to everyone, and more clearly shown from the things said by the apostles, especially by the holy Apostle. For he says thus: ^C "To whom we yielded no subjection, no, not for an hour." And it is permitted for anyone who wishes to consider what was then transacted by the apostles to marvel at how the things which were then performed by this heresy, by the instigation of a spirit of deceit, show the character of those who worked these movements among the apostles through these heresies. For when these had departed, and turned into false apostles, and sent other false apostles, as has been said already, first to Antioch, and to other places, saying that, "Unless you are circumcised and ^D

follow the law of Moses, you cannot be saved," a great commotion ^A arose, as has been said. And these are the ones whom Paul calls false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ.

V. For they use the Gospel according to Matthew, but not in its entirety, only in part, certainly on account of the genealogy which belongs to his flesh, and this testimony from the Gospel they bring forward, and again say, "It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master." What then, they say? "Jesus was circumcised: be circumcised yourself also. Christ lived according to the law," they say, "and you do the same." Whence some of these, as if bitten by venomous serpents, are persuaded by their plausible arguments, especially from the fact that Christ also received circumcision. But Paul they utterly reject, because he did not submit to circumcision; and they even cast him out because he said, "As many of you as are justified by the law, you are fallen from grace," and, "If you are circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing."

VI. ^B And this Cerinthus, a foolish man and a teacher of fools, dares to say again that Christ indeed suffered and was crucified, but is not yet risen from the dead; he is, however, to be raised when the general resurrection of the dead takes place. These teachings and thoughts of theirs are therefore inconsistent. Whence also Paul, astonished at those who do not believe in the resurrection of the dead which is to come, says: "If the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen"; and that, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die"; and that, "Do not be deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners." Again, he brings the same rebuke to those who say that Christ is not yet risen, saying: "If Christ is not risen, our preaching is vain, and your faith is also vain: ^C and we are found false witnesses of God, because He raised Christ, whom He did not raise," as if the apostles preached that Christ had been raised, while certain heresies said that Christ had indeed been raised, but the dead were not to be raised. For in this region, I mean Asia, and also in Galatia, the school of these people flourished greatly; wherein also a certain matter of tradition has come down to us: that when some among them died before baptism, others were baptized in their name on their behalf, so that they might not, when raised at the final resurrection, have to pay the penalty for having failed to receive baptism, and thus be subject to the authority of the maker of the world. ^D And on account of this, the tradition which has come down to us says that the same holy Apostle said: "If the dead do not rise at all, why are they then baptized for them?" And others well interpreting the passage, say that those about to die, if they are to be catechized…

are deemed worthy of this hope before the ending of the ^A bath; demonstrating that he who has died shall also rise, and for this reason he requires the forgiveness of sins through the bath. Of these, some proclaim that Christ has not yet been raised, but will rise with everyone; others deny entirely that the dead will ever rise. Wherefore, the Apostle, having struck a middle path toward both these and the other heresies, in one and the same labor accomplishes the refutation concerning the resurrection of the dead, and by the testimonies which he traverses in detail, he establishes the firm certainty of the resurrection of the dead, and of salvation, and of hope, saying: "This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality." And again that, "Christ is risen, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep," so that ^B by refuting the relations of both heresies that are opposed to each other, he might teach the undefiled preaching of the doctrine from the truth to those who wish to know the truth of God and the saving doctrine.

VIII. Cerinthus and those deceived by him are thus to be detected on all sides, the wretches, and those who have been the cause of destruction to others, when the divine Scriptures clearly and in detail describe everything to us.

^A, lest, while wishing to provide a cure for some bites and a remedy and protection against other venomous serpents, I might divert my readers into other evils. Yet, for anyone who possesses discernment ^B, the ridiculous doctrine of these men will be shown to be altogether vain; it is refuted by the apostles, condemned by the wise, and cast out by God and by the preaching of the truth itself.

VIII. But these same men are called Merinthians, as the report that has reached us holds. Whether Cerinthus himself was also called Merinthus by another name, I confess I do not clearly know; or whether some other person named Merinthus existed, a helper and associate of his, that is known to God alone. For we have already said many times that not only did he himself frequently oppose the apostles in Jerusalem, but also those who followed him in Asia. But whether it is he himself, or another helper with him who thought and acted in the same way and equal to him, it makes no difference at all. For the entire depravity of their doctrine has this character, and they are called Cerinthians and Merinthians alike.

Having discussed these matters concerning their terrible and serpent-like wickedness, our discourse must now move on to those that follow. But first, thanks are due because we have crossed this sea of the worst dogmas without harm; and we must humbly petition that, when we encounter the remaining heresies, as if we had been swept into maritime shoals teeming with monsters, we may suffer no injury, but may attain salvation through the truth that will appear to us as we proceed ^C, when we establish its solidity and demonstrate the vanity and error of the contrary heresies. For if anyone wishes to examine them and to outline them with some similitude, this one too, because of its double name, will rightly be compared to a two-headed serpent, and to the so-called sepedon viper, which is covered with reddish hairs all over its body, having the nature and skin not of a goat or a sheep, but of a serpent; and it brings death to all who come its way with a bite, just as that heresy destroys its followers: when it uses the Old Testament and its rites to overturn the New; or when it tries to falsely attack, with fraudulent arguments drawn from the New Testament, the apostles who from circumcision turned to the faith of Christ. And since we have crushed and broken its wasting poison and its teeth with the club of truth, as I said, our discourse hastens and proceeds to refute those which follow ^D.

ADVERSUS NAZARÆOS (AGAINST THE NAZARENES)

I. The Nazarenes follow next in order, who—as Augustine says—while they confessed that Christ is the Son of God, nevertheless observed everything of the Old Law. They also boasted that they possessed the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, as will be said later. Concerning them, see what we said in the first volume regarding the Jewish heresies; for Epiphanius does not altogether convince us that these were different from the former. For the Nazarenes were [those...]

who existed or even before them, or with them, or after them, yet contemporaries; for I cannot say with greater precision who succeeded whom. For as I said, they were contemporaries of one another, and they possess similar modes of thought. For these applied to themselves a name not of Christ, nor the name of Jesus Himself, but of Nazarenes. And all Christians were likewise called Nazarenes at that time. But for a little while they came to be called Jesseans, before the disciples at Antioch began to be called Christians. They were called Jesseans, I suppose, because of Jesse. Since David was from Jesse, and from David by succession of seed came Mary, the divine Scripture being fulfilled according to the Old Testament, where the Lord says to David: "Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne."

^B II. I am cautious, however, in every subject of discourse, as I engage in this record, for fear that the truth might incite me to reveal the theories contained within the text, lest by doing so I cause too great an expansion in the arrangement of the narrative. For since the Lord said to David, "Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne," and "The Lord swore to David, and will not repent," it is clear that the promise of God is irrevocable. And first, what is an oath before God, except that which is said elsewhere: "By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord"? For God does not possess an oath by anything greater, nor does the Divine even swear. But the statement has the power of providing confirmation. For with an oath the Lord swore to David that ^C He would set [someone] from the fruit of his body upon his throne. And the apostles testify that it was necessary for Christ to be born from the seed of David; just as our Lord Jesus Christ was indeed born. But I will pass over the multitude of testimonies, that I may not bring the discourse into a great volume, as I said before. One might perhaps ask: Since Christ was born of the seed of David according to the flesh—that is, from the holy Virgin Mary—by what reasoning does he not sit upon the throne of David? For the Gospel says, "They came to make him a king; and perceiving this, he withdrew and hid himself in Ephraim, a city of the desert." Having reached the place of this text, and being asked ^D concerning this testimony and the subject, namely, by what reasoning the sitting upon the throne of David has not been fulfilled in the Savior according to the flesh—for it seemed to some that this had not been fulfilled—nevertheless, we shall say how it is. For no word of the holy Scripture of God falls away.

[III] For that throne of David and royal seat is nothing else than the priesthood in the holy Church, which the Lord, having joined together in one both royal and high-priestly dignity, has bestowed upon his holy Church, transferring into her that throne of David which shall not fail for ever. For there, by succession [(98)], the throne of David lasted until Christ himself, the rulers from Judah not failing until he came to whom the things were laid up. And he himself, he says, is the expectation of the nations. For the rulers by succession from Judah ceased at the presence of Christ, those who were leading until Christ himself. For the order fell away [(99)], and it stood, from the time he is born in Bethlehem.

[Note: Latin column (98) and (99) omitted as they constitute critical apparatus.] [alt-version omitted]

^A of Judea, under Alexander, who was of the priestly and royal race. From the time of this Alexander, this lot fell away, from the days of himself and Saali-na—who is also called Alexandra—in the times of Herod the king and Augustus the Roman emperor. Who, this Alexander, also set the diadem upon himself, being one of the anointed and the leaders. For when the two tribes were joined, the royal and the priestly—I speak of Judah and Aaron, and the whole of the tribe of Levi—thus they became kings and priests. For not one of the riddles of the Holy Scripture failed. Thenceforth, however, Herod the foreigner was king, and they who were of David no more set the diadem upon themselves; but the royal seat having shifted in Christ to the Church, the royal dignity departed ^B from the house of the carnal Judah and Jerusalem; but the throne is established in the holy Church of God forever, having the dignity from two reasons, the royal and the high-priestly. And the royal [dignity] is from our Lord Jesus Christ in two ways: both because he is from the seed of David the king according to the flesh, and because he is, as he is, a greater king from eternity according to his divinity; but the high-priestly, because he himself is high priest and the ruler of high priests. James, who was called the brother of the Lord and an apostle, having been immediately appointed [as] the first bishop, being by nature the son of Joseph, but called the brother of the Lord in order because of their companionship.

IV ^C. For this James was [the] son of Joseph [from another wife than Mary. The year of the] City 717. Julian Period 4668, 37 years before the common birth of Christ. Wherefore the death of that Alexander preceded the birth of Christ by so many years, indeed [preceded even] the rule of Augustus and Herod, contrary to what Epiphanius wrote. For this massive anachronism can be repaired in some way, if you say that this was dislocated and placed in a foreign context, etc. So that it must be read entirely thus: etc. In this way, indeed, we shall avoid that former error, nor shall we join the death of Alexander with the birth of Christ. But we do not place much confidence in this our conjecture. For in Heresy 50, 1, the same history is repeated almost word-for-word by Epiphanius. ^D Which, even if it appears to need correction at last, this one thing nevertheless will remain, said against the truth of history, that in Alexander that priestly and royal line had ceased; for it is established from Josephus that after Alexander, Hyrcanus, and Aristobulus, from the same lineage, held the high priesthood and the empire for some time. Finally, Josephus at the end of book 14 writes that when Antigonus, the brother of Alexander and son of Aristobulus, was struck by the axe by Antony, the line of the Asamoneans ceased, which happened under the consuls Agrippa and Canidius, in the year of the City 717, long after that former Alexander and Alexandra.

^A His child: a fact mentioned by me in many places and argued more clearly. Moreover, we find him to be of the lineage of David, for he was considered the son of Joseph, having become a Nazarene. For he was the firstborn of Joseph and sanctified. ^B We also find that he served as a priest according to the ancient priesthood. For this reason, he was permitted once a year to enter the Holy of Holies, as the Law commanded the high priests, according to what is written. Many, such as Eusebius, Clement, and others, have recorded this about him before us. Indeed, it was also permitted for him to wear the golden plate (the *petalon*) on his head, just as the aforementioned trustworthy men have testified in their own writings. Therefore, as I have said, our Lord Jesus Christ was a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek, and simultaneously a king according to the higher order, so that he might transfer the priesthood together with the legislation. For since the seed of David, through Mary, sits upon the throne forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end, it was necessary for him now to transfer the order of the kingdom as well. ^C For his kingdom is not of this earth, as he said in the Gospel to Pontius Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world." For since Christ fulfilled all things through enigmas, the hypotheses reached up to a certain measure. He did not come to advance the kingdom of one who is king forever; rather, he bestowed the kingdom upon those established by him, so that it might not be called something small, advancing toward greater things. For his throne remains, and of his kingdom there shall be no end, and he sits upon the throne of David, having transformed the kingdom of David and granted it to his own servants along with the high priesthood—that is, to the high priests of the Catholic Church. And there is much to say concerning this. But since I have reached the place to speak of the reason why they were called Jessaeans [(5)], [I shall do so].

As for the interpretation of the name "Jesus," people generally are wont to find fault, claiming that [Epiphanius] believed it to be of Greek origin, or conceived in the Ionic dialect, because the sense of that name, which signifies "Savior," must be sought from the Hebrew language. But this is not so; Epiphanius has used it not at all absurdly, for *Yeshua*, from which comes *Jesus*, is the same as [he who] cures, which is the same as the healing of the diseases of the body and soul. Wherefore, it is not according to the letter, but as it is permissible to interpret Jesus—who is properly Savior—as Physician and Healer. For he himself "will save his people from their sins," says the angel (Matt. 1:21). And how he accomplished this, Peter declares (Acts 10:38): "Who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil." Add also the Greek word that sits nearby, which does not greatly differ from the Hebrew in either pronunciation or power, from which this derivation of the name emerged. Furthermore, the same things are read in the Catecheses of Cyril. "Jesus," he says, "is therefore, according to the Hebrews, Savior; but according to the Greek language, the Healer; since he is the physician of souls and bodies."

^A For this reason we have said that Jesse became the father of David. And whether they were called Jessaeans from Jesse, or from the name of our Lord Jesus—because, being his disciples, they set out from Jesus—or because of the etymology of the Lord's name; for Jesus is called in the Hebrew dialect a healer, that is, a physician and savior. Nevertheless, before they were called Christians, they possessed this title. But from Antioch, as we have mentioned above, as the argument of the truth holds, the disciples and the whole Church of God began to be called Christians.

^B V. You may find the argument for this, O philologist, by studying the commentaries of Philo in the book inscribed "On the Jessaeans," in which he, detailing their way of life and their praises, and recounting their monasteries in the region surrounding Lake Mareotis, did not narrate this about anyone other than the Christians. For he, having come into that region—the place is commonly called Mareotis—and having been brought to them, was benefited by the monasteries in that area. For, having been there during the days of the Paschal feast, he observed their way of life, and how some continued throughout the holy week of the Pasch fasting, others eating every two days, and others only in the evening. And all these things were treated by the man with a view to the subject of the faith and way of life of the Christians. ^C When, therefore, they were then called Jessaeans, in the short time after the ascension of the Savior and Mark's preaching in the land of Egypt, at that time certain persons [came forth] again, claiming to be followers of the apostles, I mean those indicated to me here, the Nazoraeans, being Jews by race and...

(6) You may find, O philologist, that this is the reason for the tears. Philo the Jew wrote several books about the Essenes, or Essenians, one of which is inscribed: *On the free man who is virtuous*, and *On the contemplative life*, or *On the suppliant virtues*. In these he establishes two kinds of Essenes: one of the practical, for those who institute a social life in cities, abstaining from marriage; the other of the contemplative, for those who have given themselves entirely to contemplation and live far from the urban din in the fields, and especially near Lake Mareotis, in shrines and monasteries. ^D Eusebius, in his *Ecclesiastical History*, Book II, chapter 11, believed these latter to be Christians, and this was the opinion of Jerome and other Fathers, which Epiphanius followed. But he adds this one thing by conjecture: that those Jessaeans were named after Jesse, the father of David. I consider this last point less probable. For I do not think it is written anywhere that the name "Jessaeans" was attributed to Christians, and it is certain that those Essenes—not Jessaeans—were described by Philo. Indeed, if the Jessaeans were ever called Christians, that would contribute much to the confirmation of that received and ancient opinion, which established that those whom Philo described as Essenes were Christians. And indeed, it might well have come about that, whereas the Essenes flourished in Egypt before the rise of the Christian religion with these morals and that way of life which Philo declares in his former book, and were held among the Jews to be most holy; after the Christian race existed under the leadership of Mark—the way of life of which, in those first times, greatly agreed with the discipline of the Essenes—they were called Essenes by the Alexandrian Gentiles. For since they saw everyone who was a Jew, and perceived them embracing that common way of life of the Essenes, and removed from all luxury and ambition—and since, moreover, many from the Jewish faction of the Essenes had joined themselves to the Christians—what other name could they affix to them but that of Essenes? For even long afterwards, all Christians were called Jews by Greeks and Romans and were considered as Jews, so that it is not absurd that those Philonian Essenes were Christians. But what is argued with much clamor and resentment against these things, since it is either trivial or can easily be dissolved, there will be nothing for which we should repent of that most ancient opinion, and the authority and consensus of so many Fathers. See what our most learned Serrarius discusses concerning these matters in his *Trihæresium* against Scaliger and Junius.

》

^B But, just as some, beholding a fire from a watchtower and not understanding for what reason those who lit this pyre have done so—whether for usefulness, or to prepare their necessary food for eating by means of the fire, or for the destruction of some combustible wood or brushwood that is wont to be consumed by fire—in this way, they too, having imitated the act and kindled a fire, have burned themselves. For having heard only the name of Jesus, and having seen the divine signs being performed through the hands of the apostles, they too believe in Jesus. But having known that He was conceived in the womb in Nazareth and was reared in the house of Joseph, and because of this was called in the Gospel "Jesus the Nazarene," as the apostles also say: "Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested by signs and portents," and so on, they apply this name to themselves, to be called Nazarenes, but not Nazirites, which word signifies "those who are sanctified." For this title was indeed a mark of dignity for those among the ancients ^C who were firstborn and dedicated to God—of which number was Samson, and others after him, and many before him. Indeed, even John the Baptist belonged to that same class of men dedicated to God, who did not drink wine or strong drink. For a way of life appropriate to that dignity had been instituted for men of such a kind.

VI. But others call themselves Nasaraeans. For the sect of the Nasaraeans existed before Christ, and it did not know Christ. But even all people called the Christians Nazarenes, as I said before, just as those who accused the apostle Paul say: "We have found this man a plague, and one who stirs up the people, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes." But the holy Apostle does not swear away the name, although he abhorred their heresy, but he gladly accepted the name which had been cast upon him by the malice of his adversaries for the sake of Christ. For he says before the tribunal: "Neither in the temple did they find me disputing with anyone, or making an uproar of a crowd, nor have I done any of the things of which they accuse me. But this I confess to you, that according to the way, which they call a heresy, so I worship, believing all things that are written in the Law and ^D the prophets." And it is no wonder that the Apostle confesses himself a Nazarene, when all men at that time called the Christians by this name on account of the city of Nazareth, there being no other use of the name at that time by which they could identify those who had believed in Christ. Concerning whom it is written: "That he shall be called a Nazarene." For even today all heresies, such as the Manichæans, I mean, and the Marcionites, the Gnostics, and others who are not Christians, are nevertheless wont to be comprehended by everyone under the name of Christians; and each—

^A sect, even if it is called by another name, gladly accepts this for itself, judging it to be an honor and an ornament to itself. For they seem to glory in the name of Christ alone, though not in faith and works. In the same way, the holy disciples of Christ at that time called themselves disciples of Jesus, just as indeed they were; yet when they were called Nazarenes by others, they did not refuse it, considering the purpose of those who called them this, namely that they called them so for Christ's sake; since the Lord Jesus himself was called a Nazarene, as the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles record, because he was reared in the town of Nazareth—which is now a village—in the house of Joseph, after having been born according to the flesh in Bethlehem of the Virgin Mary, who had been betrothed to Joseph, who dwelt then in that same Nazareth, having moved there to dwell in Galilee after he had left Bethlehem.

VII. ^B Now as for those aforementioned heretics, of whom we are here treating, they have put aside the name of Jesus; they neither call themselves Jesseans, nor do they retain the name of Jews, nor do they call themselves Christians, but Nazarenes, derived from the name of the place, Nazareth. Yet they are entirely Jews, and nothing else. They make use not only of the New Testament, but also of the Old, just as the Jews do. For the Law, and the Prophets, and the Writings—called the Books by the Jews—are not forbidden among them, just as they are not among those previously mentioned; nor do they believe anything else, but they profess all their dogmas according to the preaching of the Law and as the Jews do, except that they have,—in name at least—believed in Christ. For among them, too, the resurrection of the dead is confessed, and that all things were created by God. They preach one God, and His Son Jesus Christ. They are ^C very well trained in the Hebrew language; for among them the whole Law, and the Prophets, and the so-called Writings—I mean the Hagiographa (Poetical books), and the Books of Kings, and the Chronicles, and Esther, and all the rest—are read in Hebrew, just as they are indeed also among the Jews. In this one thing, however, they differ from both the Jews and the Christians: they do not agree with the Jews, because they have believed in Christ; and they do not agree with the Christians, because they are still bound by the Law—circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest. Regarding Christ, I cannot say whether they, too, led by the depravity of those aforementioned, Cerinthus and Merinthus, imagine him to be a mere man, or whether, as the truth is, they confess him to have been born of the Virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit. This sect of the Nazarenes ^D thrives mostly in Beroea, near Coele Syria, and in the Decapolis, near the region of Pella, and in Basanitis, in the place commonly called Cocabe, which is called Chocbabe in Hebrew. For from there that movement took its beginning after the departure from Jerusalem, when all the disciples lived in Pella, having been forewarned by Christ to leave the city of Jerusalem and move away, because it was about to be besieged. Because—

of this situation, they inhabited Perea and dwelt there, as I have said. Hence the heresy of the Nazarenes had its origin. ^A

VIII. But these people are none the less in error, since they boast of circumcision; and even now they are bound by a curse, because they cannot keep the law in its entirety. How, indeed, will they be able to observe that commandment of the law: "Three times a year you shall appear before the Lord your God, at the time of the Unleavened Bread, and the Feast of Tabernacles, and Pentecost, in the place of Jerusalem?" For since the law has been closed off, and the things prescribed by it can no longer be performed, it is evident to every man of understanding that Christ came, not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it, and to loose that curse which was established against the sin of violating the law. For after Moses had promulgated the entire law, he came to the end of the volume and concluded everything under a curse, saying: "Cursed be everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in this book, to do them." Christ therefore came, that He might break what was bound by the chains of that dire imprecation. ^B 124 He indeed has granted us, in place of those small things which could not be fulfilled, greater things, in the fulfilling of which there is no conflict, as there was in those former observances. And in almost this same way, in refuting every heresy which prescribed the observance of the Sabbath, or circumcision, or any other rite of this kind, we have endeavored to demonstrate this very thing: that the Lord has bestowed upon us things that are more perfect. What, therefore, will they be able to bring forward in their own defense, who refuse to obey the Holy Spirit—I mean that Spirit who, through the apostles, declared that no burden should be imposed upon those from the Gentiles who had been converted to the Christian religion, other than these necessary things: ^C that they should abstain from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication, and from things offered to idols? And must they not fall from divine grace, when the holy apostle Paul has written thus: "If you receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing; you who boast in the law have fallen from grace"?

IX. Wherefore, this brief discussion of ours will suffice against this heresy as well. For such men can be easily refuted and convicted; they are Jews rather than anything else, even though they are most hostile to the Jews. For not only do the children of the Jews pursue them with deadly hatred, but even ^D in the morning, and at midday, and at eventide—three times a day—when they meet in their synagogues to pray, they devote them to curses and denounce them with a solemn imprecation, saying: "May God curse the Nazarenes." For they are offended at them with a more bitter spirit, because, being from the Jews...

they preach that Jesus is the Christ, which is especially contrary to those who are still Jews and have not received Christ. ^A They possess the Gospel according to Matthew, quite complete, in Hebrew. For with them it is still preserved clearly, just as it was originally written, in Hebrew characters. I do not know, however, whether they have also cut away the genealogies from Abraham unto Christ. But having discovered this heresy to be like some weak and venomous hornet, and having crushed it with the words of truth, let us move on to the next, O beloved, asking for help from God.

AGAINST THE EBIONITES

^B I. Ebion, from whom the Ebionites come, follows in order and holds opinions similar to these people; a multifaceted monster, and, if I may say so, having impressed upon himself the serpentine form of that fabled many-headed hydra, he has risen up again to the destruction of the human race. And although he came forth from their school, he asserted and proposed some things in addition to what is taught by them. For just as one might gather for himself an ornament of various precious stones, and put on a garment of many colors, and apply a certain exquisite elegance, so he, on the contrary, having fetched pernicious and pestiferous dogmas from everywhere, by weaving together from each heresy whatever it asserts that is most horrific and destructive and detestable—shameful, I say, and discordant, and full of absurdity, and odious—he has transferred into himself all their forms and species. For he coveted the impure superstition of the Samaritans. From the Jews, furthermore, he took the name; from the Ossaeans, the Nazarenes, and the Nasareans, their dogmas. Then he strove to usurp the form of the Cerinthians, the wickedness of the Carpocratians, and finally the name of Christians. ^C For he did not express along with this last name the deeds themselves, nor the mind and knowledge, nor the agreement of the Gospels and the Apostles concerning the faith. And since he is, so to speak, in the middle of all of them, he is properly nothing, and in him is fulfilled what is written: "I have almost been in all evil, in the midst of the Church and the Synagogue." Therefore, since he is in reality a Samaritan on account of his execrable wickedness, he nevertheless rejects such an appellation; and when he makes himself a Jew, he acts against the Jews, although he agrees with them in part, as we shall show later, when we come to the proof of this matter and the refutation of heretics of this kind, with God assisting. ^D

^A Ebion was contemporary with these, and originated from them. He said that Christ was born of the sexual intercourse and seed of a man, that is to say, of Joseph, as has been said by us already, that while he agreed in all things with the others, he differed in this one point, in holding to the law of Judaism regarding the Sabbath, circumcision, and all the other things that are performed among the Jews and Samaritans. Moreover, he performs more observances than the Jews, just like the Samaritans. For he added the practice of avoiding contact with any foreigners; and every day, if he happened to have intercourse with a woman and had risen from her, he would bathe himself in water, if there was any available, whether of the sea or other waters. But even if he should encounter someone while coming up from the immersion in the waters and the baptism, he would run back to be baptized again, often even with his clothes on. ^B Now, however, virginity and continence are entirely forbidden among them, just as they are in other heresies similar to this one. For at one time they used to pride themselves on virginity, ostensibly on account of James, the brother of the Lord, and they write their books to elders and virgins. But the beginning of this faction came after the destruction of the city of Jerusalem. Since all those who had believed in Christ were at that time living for the most part in Peraea, in a city called Pella of the Decapolis, which is mentioned in the Gospel, near the country of Batanaea and Bashan, they migrated there and dwelt there, and from this came the excuse for Ebion. And he began to live in a village called Cocabe, in the region of Carnaim, Arnem, and Astaroth, in the land of Bashan, as the knowledge that has come to us contains. Thence begins his evil teaching, from which the lawless Nazarenes are also ostensibly made known. For having become associated with them, and they with him, each imparted his own wickedness to the other. And although they differ from one another in some respect, in their malice they have copied one another. ^C I have already spoken at length in other discourses, and against other heresies, regarding the location of the Cocabae and about Arabia.

III. In the beginning, therefore, Ebion, as I said, affirmed that Christ was born of the seed of a man, that is to say, of Joseph, ^D or of the Virgin as we do, by confessing Christ; or alternatively, that he was not born as other men are. True, it seems that Origen extended the name of the Ebionites more broadly, so as to call those Ebionites who, while otherwise holding the correct view of Christ's divinity, believed that the Mosaic ceremonies were to be embraced along with the Christian religion. Which indeed he seems to signify at the beginning of the first volume. Theodoretus writes of Ebion: "He said the Lord Jesus Christ was born of Joseph and Mary, being a man, but one who was superior to others in virtue and purity, and who lived according to the Mosaic law." I read "they live," and do not think it refers to Christ.

from some time even until today, those who have followed his error, having turned their own minds into absurd and perplexing notions, speak of Christ in different ways. And one may well suspect that from the time when that false prophet Elxai joined them—who existed among those called the Sampsaeans, the Ossenes, and the Elcesaites—they began to blurt out I know not what regarding Christ and the Holy Spirit, as taught by him. For some of them proclaim that Adam was Christ, namely that Adam who was first formed by God and animated by His breath. Others among them say that He exists from above, and that He was created before all things, being a spirit, superior to the angels, and holding dominion over all; and that He is called Christ, and that He is allotted the aeon ^B there. And that He comes hither whenever He wills, just as He came in Adam, and appeared to the patriarchs, clothing Himself in a body; appearing to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the same one came in the last days, and put on the very body of Adam, and was seen as a man, and was crucified, and rose, and ascended into heaven. Yet again, whenever they wish, they say: "Not so, but the Spirit—who is Christ—came into Him, and put on Him who is called Jesus." And there is great darkness among them, as they hypothesize about Him in one way and another. And they do indeed accept the Gospel according to Matthew—for this alone, as do those who follow Cerinthus or Merinthus, they use—and they call it the Gospel according to the Hebrews; for it is true to say that Matthew alone in the New Testament set forth and preached the Gospel in the Hebrew language and with Hebrew letters. And indeed, some have also stated that the Gospel according to John was translated from the Greek language into Hebrew and is kept ^C in the treasuries of the Jews—I mean those in Tiberias—and is stored away in secret places, as some of those who had been converted to the faith from among the Jews explained to us in great detail. Moreover, it is common report that the book of the Acts of the Apostles was likewise translated from the Greek language into Hebrew and is held in the same treasuries, and that those who read them—those from whom we heard these things—took from them the occasion to embrace the Christian faith.

IV. Now there was someone among them named Joseph, not that ancient author and historian, but another from Tiberias who lived in the days of the blessed Constantine, the elder emperor; from whom he received the rank of Comes, with the authority to found churches in honor of Christ in that same city of Tiberias, as well as in Diocaesarea, Capharnaum, and other neighboring towns. ^D This man suffered many things at the hands of the Jews themselves before he was brought to the notice of the Emperor. For this Joseph was of the number of those among them who hold a position of rank—they are those who, after the patriarch, are called apostles, [alt-version omitted]

^A who assist the patriarch and frequently pass the time with him, night and day, for the purpose of advising him and reporting to him on matters concerning the Law. The name of the patriarch at that time was Hillel. (I believe, indeed, that Joseph was accustomed to pronounce his name that way, unless my memory fails me due to the length of time.) He was of the lineage of Gamaliel, who had been patriarch among them. It is possible to think, as others have also supposed, that he was of the lineage of that first [(15)] Gamaliel, who in the time of the Savior gave counsel according to God to refrain from the conspiracy against the apostles. When Hillel was dying, he summoned the bishop of the neighboring region, which was Tiberias, and under the pretext of a medical matter, he received from him the holy bath at the end of his life. For having sent for him through the aforementioned Joseph, acting as if he were a physician, and having ordered everyone else to leave, he besought the bishop, saying: "Bestow upon me the seal in Christ." The latter, having called back those who were in attendance, ordered water to be prepared, as though he were going to provide a remedy by means of water for the patriarch who was suffering severely from a disease. They did what was commanded, for they did not know the truth. But, using piety as a pretext and dismissing everyone, the patriarch was judged worthy of the basin and of the holy mysteries.

V. But Joseph himself related these things to me. For I heard all these things from his own mouth, and not from anyone else, when he was in his old age—at about seventy years or even older. For I was entertained by him at Scythopolis; for having moved from Tiberias, he had acquired notable buildings there at Scythopolis. ^B For in his house the blessed Eusebius, the bishop of the city of Vercellae [(16)] in Italy, who had been exiled by Constantius for the sake of the faith of orthodoxy, was being given hospitality. And for the sake of visiting him, I and certain other brethren, having arrived there, were also entertained by him. And having spent time with Joseph in his house, and inquiring about the things concerning him, and learning that he had been among the prominent men among the Jews, and questioning him about the matter concerning himself, and how he had passed over to Christianity... ^C

^D The mention of these is frequent in the Theodosian Code, book XVI, title 8. And indeed, the apostles are called the patriarchs' assessors according to the common and customary notion of the term, because they were sent by him to exact money from the Synagogues, as is evident from the Theodosian Code, book XIV, concerning the Jews. And since this passage contributes primarily to the illustration of Epiphanius, it must be inscribed here: "It is unworthy of superstition," it says, "that the archisynagogues, or elders of the Jews, or those whom they themselves call apostles, who are dispatched by the patriarch at a certain time to exact gold and silver, should report to him the exact sum collected from the individual Synagogues. Concerning which matter, we trust that everything collected, after the consideration of the time, should be faithfully directed to our treasury. Concerning the rest, we decree that nothing is to be sent to the aforementioned." That the dignity of these patriarchs was obtained not by selection but by succession of birth, and that most were corrupted by luxury and pleasures, as Epiphanius indicates, can be confirmed by the authority of Jerome, who writes thus in his commentary on the second chapter of Isaiah, on these words: "The effeminate shall rule over them": "Let us consider the patriarchs of the Jews, and the youths, or children, and the effeminate and those flowing with delights, and we shall perceive the prophecy to have been fulfilled." Who was a Christian, as is evident from the Acts of the Finding of Saint Stephen. Nor is the statement that he was most tenacious of the Jewish religion and a most bitter hater of the Christian name, from whom Saul learned both—that is, the Jewish Law and the hatred of the Christians—correctly maintained by some: for this conjecture is trivial. For what necessity is there that Saul should have imbibed this latter thing from his teacher, and not rather that he should have taken it up of his own accord, and by the exhortation and example of others?

^A We have learned all these things clearly, and not from the hearsay of another. Whence, considering the circumstances concerning the man to be worthy of memory for the edification of the faithful, on account of the reason for those things translated into Hebrew in the treasuries, we have not perfunctorily set forth the entire cause of the aforementioned Joseph. For the man was not only a Christian, having been deemed worthy to become a believer, but also one who strongly denounced the Arians. For in that city—Scythopolis, I mean—he alone was orthodox, while all others were Arians. And were it not that he was a count, and that the dignity of his rank protected him from the persecution of the Arians, the man would not have been able to remain in the city at all, especially under Patrophilus the Arian bishop, who had great power through his wealth and austerity, and his acquaintance and boldness with Emperor Constantius. ^B There was also another younger man in the city, who had come over from Judaism to Christ and held the sincere faith; and because he dared not do so openly, he came to us secretly. Joseph told us a certain pleasant and amusing story, and I am of the opinion that these things were true. For he said that, upon the death of his wife, he feared lest the Arians might violently seize him and appoint him a clergyman. For having often cajoled him to be persuaded to their heresy, they promised him greater advancements, even to the point of deeming him worthy of a bishopric if necessary. He said that for this reason he had entered into a second marriage, in order that he might free himself from their imposition of hands.

3. But I will return to the narration of the matter concerning the patriarch, and of Joseph himself, ^C making it clear and minute for those desirous to read it through the words spoken to me by him. And already, as he used to describe, when the patriarch was being deemed worthy of baptism, I, said he, peeping in through the joints of the doors, observed all the things that were being performed by the bishop upon the patriarch, and taking them into my mind, I stored them up with myself. And the patriarch himself, having a considerable weight of gold at hand, reaching out his hand, gave it to the bishop, saying, "Offer this on my behalf. For it is written that by the priests of God things are bound and loosened on earth, and these things shall be loosened and bound in heaven." When therefore these things were done, he says, and the doors were opened, the patriarch was asked by those attending him how he fared through the remedy; and he confessed that he was doing very well. For he knew well what he was saying. Then after two or three days, the bishop frequently visiting him under the pretense of being a doctor, the patriarch passed away with a good departure, having committed his own son, being still a young child, to Joseph and to another most honorable man. ^D Therefore, all things were managed by these two, because the patriarch was still a boy in age and almost an infant, and was being brought up in their hands. During this time, the mind of Joseph was troubled by the remembrance of the mystical and secret things he had seen taking place at the baptism; and he was anxiously considering what he should do. Conveniently, there was a certain room of the treasury there that was sealed (the treasury

^A in Hebrew signifies a treasure). As many people were thinking many things about this treasury because of the seal, Josephus secretly dared to open it; and he found no money, but rather books that were more precious than money. While reading through these, as I have already mentioned, he found the Gospel according to John translated from Greek into the Hebrew language, and the Acts of the Apostles. Moreover, having also read from these the Hebrew 18 plant of the genealogy according to Matthew, his mind began to be tormented again; and although he was uneasy about the faith of Christ, and already inwardly pricked by two topics—the reading of the books and the initiation of the patriarch [into Jewish lore]—he nevertheless remained hardened in his heart, as happens to such people. ^B

VII. Meanwhile, as the adolescent son of Hillel, the ward who was being reared in the hope of the patriarchate (for no one else among the Jews snatches the magistracy, but sons succeed their fathers), reached the bloom and vigor of youth, certain idle adolescents, corrupt in their morals, insidiously crept into his intimacy (I believe this patriarch's name was Judas, though I do not recall it very clearly due to the passage of time). These companions led him into many wicked practices: the corruption of women, impious lusts, and certain magical sorceries by which they sought to assist him in satisfying his desires, performing certain seductive spells and, through incantations, forcing free women to be brought ^C to his violation against their will. Josephus and the other old man who was the ward's guardian, being constrained to follow the boy, were naturally very distressed by this, and often reproached him with words and urged him

^A and it happened that a certain free woman was in the bath, excelling in the beauty of her form. The young man, captivated by the habit of his own licentiousness, passing through the air, rubbed his side against the side of the woman. She, however, sealed herself in the name of Christ, being as she was a Christian; for whom there was no necessity to transgress and to bathe in a mixed manner. Such things happen to the simple and uneducated because of the negligence of teachers who do not secure them through instruction. Nevertheless, in order that God might show His own wonders, the young man failed in his attempt—as did the patriarch. For he sent to her and offered gifts, but she treated those who were sent with insults, and was not swayed by the idle work of the unchaste man.

II. ^B From there, his collaborators, learning of the youth's distress which he had bought for himself through the woman, attempt to prepare for him some greater sorcery, as Josephus himself narrated to me with precision. For they lead the wretched boy after sunset to the nearby tombs. In their homeland such caves, hollowed out in the rocks, are called polyandria. Having taken the aforementioned person there, those along with him—sorcerers—performed upon him certain incantations and exorcisms and practices full of impiety, and in the name of the aforementioned woman. But by the will of God ^C, and because the sorcerers had prevailed—for the woman was aided through the seal of Christ and faith—this became the third work of instruction for Josephus, namely that he did not succeed, where the name of Christ and the seal of the cross were, in the power of sorcery. He flees to the cross and [uses] the old medicine, and with this he marks himself against the fears, and makes the one pursued [Christ] an aid, and the rest [is] more frightening: the seal prevailed; the demons are defeated; the fears are loosened. Sending the most violent and cruel of the demons against the virgin, and they were ashamed, and conquered by the type of the cross, and having learned this from those very ones themselves ^D—[the power of] the type of the cross—and supplicating the Virgin Mary to assist the virgin in danger.

^C it came to pass that these things occurred to the other elder, who was with Joseph. Upon recognizing the matter, he communicates everything to Joseph. And first, lamenting his own calamity: "O we wretched ones, brother," he said, "and vessels of perdition! To whom have we been assigned as guards?" Joseph, having inquired what the matter was, learned nothing from him in words before the old man, taking him by the hand, led him to that place where that nefarious gang had gathered together among the tombs of the dead for the purpose of sorcery. Standing outside at the entrance, they listened to everything that was being done by them, and as they were leaving, they slipped away. For even though it was evening, it was not yet late, but, as it was near sunset, one could still discern things with the eyes, albeit dimly. Therefore, after the departure of those most impious men from the tomb, Joseph and his companion entered. And they found other tools of sorcery thrown upon the ground, which, as he said, were sprinkled with human drink and blood; mixed with dust, the sorcerers had left them behind as they departed. Then, indeed, their plots were discovered, and it was known for what woman’s sake these things were being perpetrated by them, and they observed whether they would succeed. Now, as the sorcerers did not succeed (for the woman was aided by the sign of Christ and by faith), they realized that the young man had waited there for three whole nights for the sake of enticing the woman, and that later, because he did not succeed, he had contended with the impostors in a quarrel. This became a third proof of the Christian religion for Joseph, namely, that he discovered that where the name of Christ and the sign of the cross are present, the power of sorcery is of no avail. Yet, he was not persuaded to become a Christian.

IX. ^C Following these things, Christ appears to him in a dream, saying, "I am Jesus, whom your ancestors crucified; therefore, believe in me." But Joseph, even then not persuaded, fell into a severe and desperate illness. Then the Lord appeared to him again, exhorting him to believe in Him, saying that he would be restored to health. Having promised to do this, he suddenly recovered, and again persisted in the same stubbornness of heart. Wherefore, having fallen into a second illness and being similarly despaired of, when the Jews, his kinsmen, believed that his final hour was at hand, the sick man heard that mystery which is always whispered by them. For a certain elder from among the doctors of the law came and whispered into his ears, saying, "Believe in Jesus, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, being the Son of God and born later of Mary, and that He is the Christ of God, and that He has risen from the dead; and that He is coming to judge the living and the dead." These things the same Joseph clearly reported to me in his account, as it is faithfully held among them, [always being whispered as a mystery].

^A And furthermore, I heard this same thing from someone else who was still a Jew at that time, out of fear of the Jews, yet often spent time among Christians and both respected and loved them. He joined me as a traveling companion through the wilderness of Bethel and Ephraim, as I was ascending toward the mountain country from Jericho, and I spoke with him regarding the advent of Christ the Lord, to which he did not object. Being astonished and asking him the reason (for he was also learned in his Law and certainly no stranger to disputation), I asked why he did not object, but rather agreed with me concerning Christ Jesus our Lord, hearing such things. He revealed to me that he, when near to death, had heard from them, whispered in his ear, that "Jesus Christ, who was crucified, the Son of God, will judge you." But let these things suffice for me on this matter, and let them stand here in this account, as I have indeed heard them.

^B X. Now I return to Joseph. While he was still in his sickness, and had heard from the elder, as I said before, among other things, that "Jesus Christ will judge you," he still remained hardened. But the Lord, according to His own love for mankind, again appeared to him in a dream, saying: "Behold, I heal you; but arise and believe." Yet he arose from his sickness and did not believe. When he had recovered, the Lord appeared to him again in a dream, rebuking him for the reason that he had not believed. The Lord promised him, saying: "For the assurance of faith, if you wish to perform a sign in my name, call upon me, and I will do it." ^C There was a certain madman in the city—I mean, in Tiberias—who wandered around the city naked, and who, though he was often clothed, as is the custom for such people, would tear his garments to pieces. Joseph, therefore, desiring to put the vision to the test, yet still hesitating, was held back by shame. At last, he brought him inside, and closing the door, he took water in his hand, and having marked it with the sign of the cross, he sprinkled it upon the possessed man, saying: "In the name of Jesus the Nazarene who was crucified, come out, demon, from this man, and be healthy." The man, having cried out loudly and fallen to the ground, foaming much at the mouth and being convulsed, remained motionless for a long time. ^D Joseph even supposed the man to be dead. But after an hour, having rubbed his face, he arose; and looking upon his own nakedness, he hid himself and placed his hands over his shame, no longer bearing to see his own nakedness. Having been clothed in a garment from Joseph’s own supply, and having arrived at a state of reason and sobriety, and having given great thanks both to the man and to God, knowing that through him he had obtained salvation, he declared the man throughout the city, and this sign became known to the Jews who were there. A great rumor followed in the city, with people saying: "Joseph opened the treasury, and finding the name of God written there, and having read it, he performs great signs." And what was said by them was true, not however in the way they...

suspected that they were being performed. Meanwhile, Joseph remained hardened in his inveterate stubbornness. But the most merciful Lord, who always offers excellent safeguards for salvation to those who love Him, bestows these same things upon those whom He has determined to deem worthy of the felicity of eternal life.

^A XI. At the same time, when the patriarch Judas (for so he was perhaps called) had now reached a robust age, he adorned Joseph with the honor and emoluments of the apostolate (for that is the name of the dignity) as a reward. Then, with letters, he departed for the land of the Cilicians. Having arrived there, he exacted the tithes and first fruits from the provincial Jews of every city of Cilicia. And it happened by chance that he was lodging in a house in some city near the church. Having formed a close acquaintance with the bishop of that place, he secretly asked for and read the book of the Gospels. And because, by reason of the apostolic office he held (for, as we have said, that dignity is so called), he bore the utmost ^B gravity and severity in establishing discipline, for which he had been chosen, and had reduced to order and stripped of their rank many a wicked man—those set over the synagogues, and priests, and elders, and the *Azanitae*, by which name they denote deacons or ministers—he turned the hatred of many against himself. They, wishing to take vengeance on him, were exceedingly eager to investigate and snoop into what was being done by him. For these reasons, therefore, most bitterly hating him, they suddenly made an attack upon his house, and surprised Joseph in the very act of reading the Gospels. Here, having snatched the book from his hands, they seized the man, cast him to the ground, and, crying out and vexing him with the greatest insults, dragged him into the synagogue and beat him with rods. This was his first legitimate struggle undertaken for the faith. The bishop of the city ran to these things and snatched him from their hands. At another time, when they intercepted him on a journey, as he himself used to relate, they cast him into the river Cydnus; and believing that he had been swept away by the force of the current and had perished submerged beneath the waters, they greatly rejoiced. But he, having been saved, was afterwards deemed worthy of the heavenly washing. Hence, having advanced to the court, he arrived at the friendship ^C of the Emperor Constantine, and explained to him everything that had happened to him; how he had held a place of dignity among the Jews; but how, because of the frequency of the signs divinely offered to him, the Lord was inviting him to transfer himself to the most holy lot of faith and knowledge and to his own salvation. But the excellent emperor, being in truth a servant of Christ, and burning with a certain divine zeal among princes after David, Hezekiah, and Josiah, conferred upon him this reward of dignity which we mentioned a little earlier, and made him a Count, commanding him over and above to choose whatever he might wish. He desired nothing else but this one greatest [thing]

^A gift, to obtain from the emperor the permission to build, by imperial decree, churches for Christ in the villages and towns of the Jews. In places where no one had ever been able to build churches, because neither Greek, nor Samaritan, nor Christian dwelt among them. And this is observed by them most especially in Tiberias, and in Diocaesarea, which is also called Sepphoris, and in Nazareth, and in Capharnaum, that no one of another nation should have a dwelling there.

XII. Josephus, having received the letters and authority along with the title, went to Tiberias, carrying with him also letters so that he could draw expenses from the treasury, although he himself also took a salary from the emperor by which he was honored. Thereupon, he begins building in Tiberias. A ^B huge temple had formerly existed in that city; perhaps, I think, they called it an Adrianium. And because this Adrianium remained incomplete, the townspeople were attempting to convert it into public baths. Josephus, having found this, seized upon it as his pretext. And as he had already found it raised to a certain height with square stones of four cubits, he began from that point to make arrangements for the church. There was a need for lime and all other materials. He therefore ordered many kilns to be made outside the city, seven in number, which in the local language they call *phournakas*. But the Jews, reckless and bold for any wicked attempt, did not refrain from the sorcery that is always practiced among them. For the ^C impious Jews labored with various magics and charms to bind the fire; however, they did not succeed to the end. Therefore, the fire stood idle, and did nothing, but was as if estranged from its own nature. But when those who were assigned to throw the combustible material—I mean wood or brush—onto the fire saw that, though they had placed it there, it had no effect, they signaled to Josephus what had occurred. Stung to the heart, then, the man was inflamed with zeal for the Lord and ran outside the city. He ordered water to be brought in a vessel, in a jar I say—which the locals call a ^D *kakoubion* (28)—and taking that same vessel of water...

(27) *He made him a Count.* The rank of Count was usually a bare title without magisterial power or function, as is evident from the Theodosian Code. Constantine granted this to many, as Eusebius reports. The same was conferred by the prince through honorary codicils. Regarding this matter, we disputed at length in *Oration IV of Themistius*, where such codicils are called by Themistius hammered tablets. In that place, the carelessness of an anonymous conjecturer, who recently wrote concerning the suburban ones, is ridiculous, joined with equal impudence. Themistius had written in that same oration IV, page 117 of our edition, that he might enjoy all those comforts, pleasures, and delicacies from the emperor's liberality, which follow those hammered tablets, being content with those common fruits which others would obtain through public vouchers and imperial bounty. In this place, the conjecturer contends that there is nothing else but the grain vouchers. But what can be more absurd than to believe that he could superabound from those grain vouchers? Especially since, as I said, he might oppose those commodities of the vouchers, which he might take in common with others, to those which... But come now; whereas in oration V, page 166, he denies that he had obtained the prefecture of the city, he does not glory in it; but rather [he speaks] of another [title], which is [that of the] emperor's son, whom the parent had committed to his own faith; is it so that the conjecturer here dreams of a grain voucher? To return to Josephus, compare with this place what Eusebius reports in *The Life of Constantine* regarding how much he burned with the desire to establish churches everywhere, and how he wished them to be built at public expense.

(28) *And this is a kakoubion.* It is a *koukoumion*. You have here the notable use and effect of water consecrated by a blessing. Upon which, while I was writing these things, something close and twin-like occurs in Photius, no. 96, from George of Alexandria in the *Acts of Saint Chrysostom*. Where, among other things, he reports the son of a certain Euclia was freed from a most desperate disease by the sprinkling of water upon which the blessed Chrysostom had impressed the sign of the cross.

^A And so, a multitude of Jews had gathered for the spectacle, eager to see what would happen and what Josephus would attempt to do. The man, in a loud voice, having made the sign of the cross upon the vessel with his own finger and calling upon the name of Jesus, said: "In the name of Jesus the Nazarene, whom my ancestors and the ancestors of all these who stand around here nailed to a cross, may power be in this water to extinguish all the magical arts and sorceries which these men have prepared, and may its own power be restored to the fire by this same water, so that the house of the Lord may be set free." Having said these things, he sprinkled the water upon each of the furnaces. Thus, the conjurer's tricks being dissolved before everyone, the fire blazed up. The crowds present, moved by this miracle, shouted with great voices: "One is God, who helps the Christians," and then they departed. And after the Jews had often harassed the man, he eventually built ^B a portion of the old temple in Tiberias and, having finished a small church there, he departed thereafter. Coming to Scythopolis, he remained there. He also built churches perfectly in Diocaesarea and in certain other towns. We had digressed to relate these things in passing, on account of the books which are found translated among the Jews, such as the Gospel of John and the Acts of the Apostles converted into Hebrew. But let this be enough concerning this historical account.

XIII. Now I return to the account of the Ebionites that was begun.

a baptism of repentance in the river Jordan," and so on. He who was said to be of the lineage of Aaron the priest, the son of Zacharias and Elisabeth, and everyone went out to him. And after saying many things, he adds: "When the people had been baptized, Jesus also came and was baptized by John. And as he came up from the water, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Holy Spirit of God in the form of a dove descending and entering into him. And a voice came from heaven, saying: 'You are my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.' And again: 'Today I have begotten you.' And immediately a great light shone about the place." He says that John, seeing this, said to him: "Who are you, Lord?" And again, a voice from heaven to him: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." ^B And then, he says, John fell at his feet and said: "I beseech you, Lord, you yourself baptize me." But he prevented him, saying: "Let it be, for thus it is fitting that all things be fulfilled."

XIV. Against Cerinthus and Carpocrates, who claim Christ was born of Mary and Joseph.

XIV. Observe how their doctrine, corrupted on every side, is altogether lame and distorted, containing nothing sound. For Cerinthus and Carpocrates, relying upon the same Gospel of Matthew—as they indeed claim—endeavor to prove from its beginning and the genealogy of Christ that Christ was procreated from the seed of Joseph and Mary. But these men imagine something else entirely. For having cut away the genealogies in Matthew, they begin as I said before, saying: "It happened, he says, in the days of Herod, king of Judea, while Caiaphas was high priest, that there came one John by name, baptizing a baptism of repentance in the river Jordan," and the rest. ^C For since they wish Jesus to be a mere man, as I have already said, and that Christ—who descended in the form of a dove, and whom we find united to him in other heresies—came to be in him, and that he, the Christ, was born from the seed of man and woman. But then they deny that he is a man based upon this saying of the Savior, when it was announced to him: "Behold, your mother and your brothers stand outside," and he replied: "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" And stretching out his hand to his disciples, he said: "These are my brothers and my mother, who do the will of my Father." Hence, as I said, being full of all deception, the Ebionite reveals himself through many forms, so that he appears as a monster of the kind I have already pointed out.

XV. ^D They also use certain other books, namely the "Travels" (Periodoi) called "of Peter," which were written by Clement; they have adulterated the contents of these, leaving only a few things that are true, just as Clement himself refutes them in every respect in the things he wrote, the Epis-

^Atolic travels read in the holy churches. From these it is clear that his faith and his discourse were far removed from those things which exist under his name in those spurious *Circuits*. For Clement teaches virginity, but they reject it; he praises Elijah, David, Samson, and all the prophets, whom these men loathe. Therefore, in those *Circuits*, they have adjusted everything to suit their own purpose, and have fabricated many lies about Peter; such as that he bathed daily for the sake of purification, as they themselves are accustomed to do. Furthermore, they say that he abstained from all living things and from meat, and from everything that consists of flesh, just as they too and all Ebionites, both then and now, abhor these things. And when you ask one of them why in the world he refrains from living things, having nothing to say, they answer foolishly and say, "We do not partake of them because they are produced from copulation and the union of bodies"; thus implying that they themselves, being born from the same congress of man and woman, are detestable, according to the foolish and ridiculous things their own mouths have vomited forth.

^B XVI. Furthermore, they receive a baptism in addition to those into which they are initiated daily; and, by way of imitating the mysteries of the Christian Church, they celebrate certain mysteries annually with unleavened bread, and for the other part of the mystery they use water alone. They assert, as I have said, that two beings have been appointed by God: Christ and the devil. They say that to the former has been entrusted the inheritance of the age to come, while to the latter has been entrusted this present age, and that this was done by the command of the Almighty, according to the petition of each of them. For this reason they claim that Jesus was produced from male seed and was chosen, and thus, by election, was called the Son of God, because Christ came down upon him from above in the likeness of a dove. But they deny that he was begotten by God ^C the Father; rather, they say he was created as one of the archangels, but that he is greater than them, and that he rules over both the angels and all things created by the Almighty; and that he came and taught, as that so-called *Gospel* of theirs contains: "I have come to do away with sacrifices, and if you do not cease from sacrificing, the wrath of God will not cease from you." Such, then, are their rites. Besides these, they circulate other *Acts* of the Apostles, in which there are very many traces of their impiety; and it is mainly by the authority of this book that they arm themselves for the purpose of attacking the truth. For they have laid down certain "Ascents" [gradus] within it, and in them they explain certain narratives of James, wherein he is introduced declaiming against the temple, the sacrifices, and the fire upon the altar.

^D There are also many other things, far more foolish, such as the fact that they did not blush to accuse Paul himself there with certain most mendacious discourses, which the error and wickedness of the false apostles of that sect invented. For they call him a Tarsian, as he himself confesses and does not deny,

^A indeed, he openly professes it. They add that he was born of Gentiles, because of a certain place where he ingenuously states the facts. "I am a Tarsian," he says, "and a citizen of no obscure city." From this, they conclude he was a Gentile and born of Gentile parents on both sides. And they say that when he had come up to Jerusalem and remained there for some time, he desired to marry the daughter of the high priest; that for this reason he became a proselyte and was circumcised. Then, when he did not obtain the girl, he became angry and wrote against circumcision, the Sabbath, and the Law.

XVII. But that cunning ^B serpent, being mendicant in mind, constructs an open calumny. For the Hebrew word Ebion signifies "beggar" in the Greek language. And the heretic himself is truly a beggar in mind, in hope, and in deeds, inasmuch as he considers Christ to be a mere man, and thus bestows his hope concerning Him in a certain beggary of faith. But they glory in this matter, boastfully calling themselves "Ebionites" (that is, beggars), for they say that in the time of the apostles it was the custom to sell their possessions and lay them at the feet of the apostles. Therefore, they say, following their example, they have been reduced to beggary and have renounced all goods, and are thus commonly called beggars. But this is a fiction devised by them from their own imagination; for this was the proper name of Ebion, not, however, without some prophecy, by which the beggar and the wretched one was signaled, since he had received that name from his parents. But how many other terrible and falsified things, full of wickedness, are practiced among them! For whenever any one of them falls into ^C illness, or is bitten by a serpent, he goes down to the waters and invokes all the appellations of which Elxai spoke—that is, of heaven and earth, of salt and water, of the winds and the, as they call them, angels of righteousness, and of bread and oil. And he begins to say, "Help me, and dispel this pain from me."

Now it has already been declared by me above that Ebion knew nothing of these things, but that after some time those who were joined to him with Elxai adopted from Ebion circumcision and the Sabbath and their customs; but from Elxai they received that dream, so that they imagined Christ to be a certain manifestation in human form, invisible to men, ninety-six miles in length—which is to say, twenty-four schoeni—and six schoeni in width, that is, twenty-four miles; and ^D they attribute a different measure to his thickness. And they say that the Holy Spirit stands beside him in a female form, though in such a way that she cannot be seen, and is of the same stature. Ask where they received these measurements. "We observed them," they say, "from the mountains, whose summits their heads reached; wherefore, having measured the height of the mountains, we discovered the size of Christ and the Holy Spirit." But we have already discussed these matters in the heresy of the Ossenes. I have touched upon these things now only in passing, lest, if what is found in one nation and sect were also to be discerned in others, you might think it had been mentioned in an inappropriate place through forgetfulness.

XVIII. Of the Ebionites

XIX. But the Ebionite is refuted from every side...

by the ^A Lord, explicitly and, as it were, in summary, by one saying which refutes his entire deceptive teaching, when he says: "John came in the way of righteousness, neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He has a demon. The Son of man came eating and drinking." And this is not at all to be taken as if John ate nothing at all, or as if the Savior ate everything, so that one might suppose he even ate forbidden things. But the Scripture reveals the force of the truth, that "eating and drinking" is nothing other than eating meat and drinking wine; and that "neither eating nor drinking" means that John partook of no meat or wine, but only of locusts and honey, and, it is clear, of water. And who does not know that the Lord, after being ^B raised from the dead, ate? Just as the holy Gospels of truth contain: that "there was offered to him bread and a piece of broiled fish; and taking it, he ate, and gave to his disciples," even as he also did at the sea of Tiberias, having eaten and distributed. And many things can be said about this. But I must proceed to refute and overturn, one by one, those rotten and worthless discourses that are preached by them.

XX. And first, concerning Christ, it must be said that he is not a mere man. For he who was born as a man in every respect cannot be given to the world as a sign; as the holy Spirit foretold concerning him when he spoke to Achaz: "Ask for yourself a sign." And when he did not ask, the ^C prophet then said: "The Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall be with child." But a woman who has been joined to a man and who has been married is not called a virgin; rather, she is properly called a virgin who has truly had the conception of the divine Word without a man. Even as Isaiah himself also says in another place: "The voice of a cry from the city, the voice from the temple, the voice of the Lord of retribution, rendering to his enemies. Before the one travailing could be delivered, before the pain of the travailing came, she escaped and brought forth a man-child. Who has heard such a thing? Or who has seen the like? Did the earth travail in one day; or did it bring forth a nation at once? For Zion travailed and brought forth her children. And I have given this expectation, ^D and they did not remember, says the Lord." What, then, is that expectation? Who

^A else could it be, except that the Virgin brought forth without the pains of labor, a thing that had never occurred anywhere before? And that he who was the cause of this, John, was born of Elizabeth by divine promise, even though the mother had already gone through the pains of labor before she gave birth to him? With what face, then, do they dare assert that the Savior was a mere man? If this were true, would he not be able to be comprehended by knowledge, contrary to what Jeremiah testifies concerning him? "He is man," he says, "and who shall know him?" For the prophet, speaking of him, uses this expression: "Who shall know him?" But if he were speaking of a mere man, surely his father would have known him, and his mother, and all his kinsfolk and neighbors, and his tent-mates and fellow-citizens.

But since his birth was indeed from Mary, ^B yet the Word of God came from above—not from the seed of a man, but begotten of a heavenly Father, without time and without any beginning—and in the last days deigned to be in the womb of a Virgin, and to fashion for himself flesh from her: for this reason, he says, "He is man, but who shall know him?" because the Word, the only-begotten God, came down from above. Great is the misery of these wanderers from the truth, who have left behind the testimonies of the prophets and angels, and have chosen to adhere to the heretic Ebion, the deluded man who wished to satisfy his own lusts and took up Jewish practices, while yet alienating himself from the Jews. ^C For when Gabriel was bringing his message to the Virgin, and she responded, "How shall this be, since I know not a man?" to ensure her peace of mind he added: "The Spirit of the Lord shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee; and therefore that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." For by saying "that which shall be born," he indicated the flesh from her, and all the rest of the incarnation, while he attributed the power of the Most High and the Holy Spirit coming down from above from the heavens to overshadow the holy Virgin, and the only-begotten Word of God, who is God, having descended from above, and how he became man, and how he was born of her in truth. How many other such testimonies there are! But as I promised, I am not accustomed to wander too widely, lest I be compelled to make this work too long.

XXI. I come now to the things they invent about Peter and the other apostles. ^D Peter, they say, used to wash himself daily before he would partake of bread. Behold the unbelievable calumny of these charlatans, and the crafty scheme within the discipline they present. For since they are frequently defiled, and commit many sins in their lives through lasciviousness, they use water lavishly to gain for themselves a certain hope and confidence, so that they may deceive themselves while they trust that they can be pure through these repeated washings. And these things...

they do not blush to transfer the greatest reproach onto the apostles. Yet the Lord clearly refuted their wickedness when, upon approaching to wash Peter’s feet, and at his saying, “You shall never wash my feet,” He immediately replied: “If I do not wash your feet, you have no part with me.” And to Peter responding, “Not only my feet, but also my head,” the Lord added: “He who has bathed once has no need to wash his head, but only his feet,” for he is entirely clean. By these words He declared that such washings and superfluous rites, and the commands and doctrines of men, are of no avail. Consonant with this are the things said by a certain prophet: “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines, the commandments of men.” For upon what grounds did He rebuke the Pharisees and scribes, who used the washings of pitchers and cups and other things of that sort, and who washed their hands constantly, when He finally pronounces: “To eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man”? Wherefore He not only condemned their washings, but also showed that it is superfluous to wash one's hands, and that it is no sin for anyone if he should refuse to wash his hands.

^B XXII. Now as for the use of meats, will not their madness be immediately refuted? First, that the Lord ate the Passover of the Jews; for the Passover of the Jews was a lamb and unleavened bread, with the meat of the lamb eaten roasted by fire, as even His disciples say: “Where do you want us to prepare for you to eat the Passover?” And the Lord Himself says: “Go into the city, and you will find a man carrying a jar of water; follow him wherever he goes, and say to the master of the house: ‘Where is the guest room where I may keep the Passover with my disciples?’ And he will show you a large upper room furnished; ^C there prepare.” Again, the Lord Himself says: “With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you.” And He did not say simply "Passover," but "this Passover," so that no one might craftily twist that saying to his own opinion. And the Passover was, as I said, meat roasted with fire, along with some other things. But they, having cast away from themselves the sequence of truth, altered the text, which is clear to all from the connected words. And they make the disciples saying: “Where do you want us to prepare for you to eat the Passover?” ^D and Him, supposedly, saying: “Did I with desire desire to eat this meat, this Passover with you?” But how could their trickery not be exposed, when the sequence itself cries out that the mu and the eta are added? For instead of saying, “With desire I have desired,” they added the particle "num." But He truly said, “With desire I have desired this Passover to eat…”

with you.” But they, by writing in "meat," have led themselves astray, acting deceptively and saying, “Did I with desire desire to eat this Passover meat with you?” But it is clearly shown that He both celebrated the Passover and ate meat, as I said before. Nay, they shall also be refuted by the vision that was revealed to holy Peter through the sheet, which contained in it all sorts of wild beasts and cattle, and creeping things and birds, and the voice of the Lord saying, “Rise, kill, and eat.” And when Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for nothing common or unclean hath entered into my mouth,” the Lord saith, “What God hath cleansed, do not thou call common.” ^B For the establishment of the truth shall be found in two ways. For if they claim that the word to holy Peter applied to all kinds of food, and that he meant that nothing is ever common or unclean—as though even oxen and goats and sheep and birds were called common by him—they shall immediately be refuted by his former manner of life. For after he had married and had children and a mother-in-law, he encountered the Savior while hailing from the Jews. But the Jews also eat meat, and the eating of meat among them is neither abominable nor prohibited. Since, therefore, he used meat from the beginning, at least up to the time when he happened upon Christ the Lord, it is manifest that he did not regard anything that was not common as common—for he did not group all foods under the term "common and unclean," but only those which the Law itself had defined as such. Since, therefore, it is certain that Peter was not speaking about every kind of meat, as if all were common, but about those which the Law had declared common and unclean, God, in prescribing the mark and form for the holy Church of Christ, told him not to consider anything common. For all things are clean, if they are received with thanksgiving and the blessing of God. But the vision also contained the enigma concerning the calling of the gentiles, so that he would not deem those in uncircumcision common or unclean. Nevertheless, the underlying thought of Peter did not have ^C an opinion regarding man, but regarding those things forbidden in the Law, as would be clear to everyone; and their nonsensical argument collapsed from every side.

XXIII. The same men, in order to more easily entice their followers, admit to the names of the apostles under a pretense, and they even write out books they have fabricated and attribute them to the names of those, as if they had been published by James, Matthew, and the other disciples. Among these names they also slip in the name of the apostle John, so that their folly may be exposed from every side. For not only does he ^D refute them in every way by saying, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” but also because he accurately sets forth the testimonies of the holy prophets, in which, being moved by the Holy Spirit, he well expounds what was said by the Savior regarding each subject of the

testimonies from which these men have alienated themselves. And he immediately shows how John the Baptist answers those sent to him by the Pharisees, saying: “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness: Make straight the way of the Lord,” as the prophet Isaiah said. And again, John himself speaks these same things, having taken the testimony from the prophets—I mean from David—when the Lord overturned the tables of the money-changers and said: “Do not make my Father’s house a house of merchandise.” For he says the apostles remembered that it was written: “The zeal of your house has eaten me.” And again, John himself says that Isaiah saw, being in the Holy Spirit. ^B

XXIV. Furthermore, when the same holy John was dwelling in Asia preaching the word of God, it is recorded that he did a wondrous thing for the sake of setting an example of the truth. For having a most admirable manner of life, one entirely consistent with the dignity of his apostleship, and never washing at all, he was compelled by the Holy Spirit to go forth to the bath, saying: “Get me things necessary for the bath.” And while those who accompanied him marveled, he came to that washing place. And having come to the one accustomed to receive the garments of those bathing, he asked who was inside the bath. But the bath-attendant (an overseer of garments, for in the gymnasia some provide this service for the sake of daily bread) told the holy John that Ebion was inside. Now John, immediately perceiving the guidance of the Holy Spirit—for what reason He had urged him to come to the bath, as I said, for the sake of leaving us a record of the truth, that we might discern who are the servants of Christ, the apostles, and children of the same truth; and what are the instruments of the evil one, and the gates of hell that do not prevail against the rock ^C and the holy Church of God built upon it—immediately stirred himself, and sighing softly so that he could be heard by all, as a testimony of the presence of uncorrupted doctrine, he said: “Hurry, brothers, let us leave here, lest the bath collapse, and we perish along with Ebion, who is inside the bath, because of his impiety.” And let no one marvel at hearing that Ebion met John. For the blessed John, having remained for a great length of time in life, lasted until the reign of Trajan. And that all the apostles reject the faith of Ebion, and deemed it foreign to their own proclamation and apostolic character, is clear to everyone.

XXV. Regarding blessed Paul, how those who blaspheme

^A him speak! How much have I to say? For in the first place, they say that he was a Greek and born of the nations, and that he later became a proselyte. How then does he himself speak concerning himself: *A Hebrew of the Hebrews, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin, as touching the law a Pharisee, being more exceedingly zealous of my paternal traditions?* And in another place he says: *They are Israelites, and I am; they are the seed of Abraham, and I am*; and he says: *Circumcision the eighth day*, and *brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, and a Hebrew of the Hebrews*. Alas for the deadly groans, the dragon-like hisses, and the poisonous slanders of these empty-voiced men! Whose testimony should I most accept? That of Ebion and his faction, or that of holy Peter who says: *As our brother Paul wrote to you, which are hard and difficult to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable pervert to their own destruction*? Again, holy Paul himself also bears witness to those around Peter, saying: *And James, and John, and Cephas, who seemed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship*. For even if he calls himself a Tarsian, an opportunity is not thereby given to those who catch at words for their own destruction and that of those who are persuaded by them. For he also says that Barnabas—formerly called Joseph, but later renamed Barnabas, which is interpreted as *son of consolation*—was a Levite, a Cypriot by birth. Yet because he was a Cypriot, it does not mean he was not of the tribe of Levi; ^B just as the holy apostle Paul, even if he came from Tarsus, was not alien to the Israelite people. For when many were scattered in the times of Antiochus Epiphanes, and in other times, whenever war happened to break out, and they were taken captive and put under siege, the captives remained in certain places, while those who had fled for that reason settled wherever each had happened to arrive, even as holy Jeremiah said concerning the people of Israel—just as this same thing often happened to them, to flee from the face of the enemy—that: *And if thou shouldst go even to the Kittim, neither there shalt thou have rest*.

Now, it is clear to everyone that the island of the Cypriots is called Kition. For the Kittim are the Cypriots and the Rhodians. But the race of the Cypriots and Rhodians also dwelt in Macedonia. Whence also Alexander the Macedonian is said to have sprung. And for this reason it is recorded in the books of the Maccabees ^D that there came forth a seed from the land of the Kittim.

^A But since the opportunity to recount this history has again been offered me, I have been led into it by chance. The point of this was to show that, in that migration, many who were derived from the Israelite race by succession occupied various habitations; and they were accustomed to be called by the name of the region where they dwelt. Just as when the daughters of Jethro reported to their father the help brought to them by Moses, and how, after having driven off the shepherds, he had watered their flocks—in short, when they had returned home and told their father this, and he asked, as is natural: "Why have you come [faster] than usual today?" they replied: "An Egyptian man delivered us from the hands of the shepherds, and moreover he drew water and gave drink to our sheep." And he immediately said to them: "Why did you not bring him here, so that he might eat bread?" Now who does not know that Moses was born to Amram and Jochabed, and that Amram was the son of Caath, and Caath of Levi, and this one of Jacob, whose father was Isaac, and Isaac's father was Abraham? And yet, ^B because Moses was called an Egyptian, the series of that nobility and seed was not thereby extinguished. In this same way, therefore, the disciples of Ebion, like those wandering and astray, have committed themselves to various ambages, flexuosities, and abrupt paths.

XXVI. Atenim they make a show of circumcision; and they pride themselves greatly upon it, inasmuch as they think it to have been the mark and sign of the patriarchs and other just men who lived during the time of the Law; by which name they also judge themselves to be equal to them, and so they adapt the example of Christ himself to prove it, just as the Cerinthians do. For they and these men use that most ineptly adapted maxim according to their foolish discourse: "It is enough for the disciple to be as his master." For Christ, they say, was circumcised: therefore you should be circumcised. And that the seeds of error might be put to rout with great shame to them, just as locks and gates—a mass of sand ^C placed by God as a barrier to restrain the sea—with a commandment of this kind: "Hitherto you shall come, and shall not proceed further; but there your waves shall be broken" (as Scripture says), so also will they be consumed, having fallen back upon themselves. Although this is the difference, that there the limit was set by divine command to restrain the seas; whereas here, vice of its own accord, and the error of a blinded mind—abhorring the sense of piety—has stirred up, as it were, those most unhappy dogmas which we have set forth before, and as it were excited waves within itself, and dashed them against contrary waves, and, turned back upon itself and broken, has dissipated itself. Or as a deadly serpent, destroying itself and twisting back from the tail, ^D eats its own body and consumes it. For this is what they say happened at the time when, [in the case of the] asp...

^A enclosed in jars, each having consumed the other, the fiercer and more cruel one remained alone, left behind; and having come to hunger, starting from its own tail it began to eat itself, as some naturalists in the region of the Egyptians recount. Whence they also fittingly imposed upon it the name, on account of the head of the Gorgon, calling it Aspidogorgon. Thus also the foolish Ebion and those around him anticipated by cutting themselves up and destroying from the beginning those things in which they even boast. For Christ did not circumcise himself; for he was an infant. But glory to the merciful God, that Ebion has so struck at himself, in order that he might not confess the truth, so that it might even become a refutation for him. For if he had said that he was God, having come down from heaven, and was circumcised on the eighth day by Mary, then—being God and permitting this according to his own good pleasure—he would have afforded ^B to that charlatan some plausibility for circumcision; but since he brings in that he was a mere man and was circumcised by men, the child is no longer the cause, even if he was circumcised on the eighth day circumcision. For he did not circumcise himself, but was circumcised by men. And indeed, children do not circumcise themselves, and they are not the causes of their own circumcision, but their parents are. For those, being small, are infants and ignorant, and do not even know what is being done to them by their parents.

XXVII. But we say that that same God came down from heaven, and remained in the womb of the Virgin Mary for the time that other infants are accustomed to be carried, until he should perfectly from the virginal womb complete for himself the incarnate humanization and economy, in which he was truly circumcised, and not in mere appearance, on the eighth day ^C. For he came to fulfill the law and the prophets, and not to abolish them; and not to declare the law as foreign, but as having been given by him, and having remained in types until him, so that in him and through him that which was lacking in the law might be fulfilled again, so that the types, having come to spiritual perfection in truth, might be preached by him and his apostles, no longer being types, but truth. For at this, that which was spoken in the law was being fulfilled, lasting until the time of him himself, and in him departing, and being transferred into fullness, which Sephora said: ^D "The blood of the circumcision of my child stood." And she did not say, "I circumcised my child." For the angel who was sent was not administering it so that a circumcision might take place; nor did he stand back fearing the blood of the circumcision; but for the sake of a reminder of the coming child, he causes the blood of the circumcision to stand; which having heard and having…

performed, he withdrew himself from the midst. But hear who that future infant was. For he was the one of whom the prophet spoke: *And they shall desire to be burnt with fire. For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us.* ^A By these words he first demonstrated that he was truly born a little child, so that he might signify the nature of man truly assumed by him. Then he added, "a son is given to us," in order to show that the same being is the Word of God descended from heaven, and declared to be the Son of God, and born in the womb, and made man, so that he contained a double nature in himself, namely, that of God and of man, and consequently that he was equally God and man, and the same son divinely given, and the child born. Upon this then stood the blood of the circumcision, as he also says in the Gospel: *When the Greeks came wishing to see him; and came to Philip, and say to him, Show us Jesus; and Philip said to Andrew, and Andrew to Jesus, that "certain Greeks wish to see thee."* And immediately the Lord answers, saying: *Now the glory of God has arrived;* in order to show that the circumcision of the flesh had now passed away, and had served the figure for a certain time, and that the foreskin in the flesh, now endowed with a spiritual and more excellent circumcision, ought to contemplate Christ, ^B and become effectively observant of him.

XXVIII. But if those men desire to say, "Why then was Christ circumcised?" they shall hear from us: Already, O men led by false opinion! we have shown you the cause why he was circumcised. For he endured it for many reasons. First, that he might show that he had truly taken on flesh, on account of the Manichaean and others who taught that he had appeared only in a likeness and semblance. Then, that he might show that his body was not consubstantial with his divinity, as Apollinaris thinks; nor had it descended from heaven to earth, which was the error of Valentinus. Then, that he might rightly confirm that the circumcision of which he had once been the author had been observed until his own coming, and that he might take away every excuse from the Jews. For if he had not been circumcised, they could have offered this for their own vindication: "We could not accept Christ as one endowed with a foreskin." ^C Moreover, it was necessary that he who had issued the command of circumcision to Abraham, in order to adumbrate the image of the truth which was fleeing from sight, should himself bear that visible sign and confirm it by his own circumcision. For that external circumcision was imposed upon Abraham on account of his hesitation; when the holy and just man, as if doubting, ^D said: *Shall a son be born to a man of a hundred years? and shall Sarah the woman of advanced age bear a son?* And immediately the Lord said: *Take for me a heifer of three years old, and a she-goat, and a ram, and the rest.* And about the setting of the sun, when he saw the lamps

of fire and the furnace, etc., God, for the purpose of correcting him, declared: *Thy seed shall be a sojourner in a land not their own, and they shall enslave him for four hundred years*, for the sake of security on account of the doubt through which he said: *Shall a son be born to a hundred-year-old man?* That the seed, having been enslaved by the idolatrous and unbelieving Egyptians, might not forget the God of his fathers, He imposed upon him and upon them the circumcision of the flesh, that seeing it they might be reminded, and might be put to shame, and might not deny Him. And this endured until Christ; and for this reason He, too, was pleased to be circumcised. And He became man in truth, the Word of God who had descended from the Father from above, and not by putting off His divinity; but having truly worn flesh, and having a perfect incarnation, ^A He arranged all things in truth, so that the Jews, as I have said, being inexcusable, and the Manichaeans, and others might be confuted, and so that, being circumcised, He might reasonably abolish circumcision and show another greater one—not as though He did not have it and were fashioning it for Himself, but while having it, showing that there is no longer need of this, but of the greater one.

XXIX. That, however, He was God immediately upon being born, and not a mere man, the Magi clearly show.

Jesus stayed behind, and they sought Him on the road and among their relatives, but could not find Him. For Mary had family connections. Returning later and finding Him, she said to Him: "Son, why have You done this to us? Behold, I and Your father were searching for You in sorrow." For Joseph held the position of a father to Him; he was not His father by nature. Then the Lord said to her: "Why is it that you were searching for Me? Did you not know that I must be in My Father's house?"—signifying that the temple was built in the name of God the Father. If, therefore, from infancy He knew the temple and the Father, then Jesus who was born is not a mere man, nor was He called Son and Christ only after His thirtieth year, after the appearance of the dove came upon Him, but He taught from the very beginning that He must be in the things of His Father. And that Joseph was not His father, but rather in the position of a father, hear the same evangelist who wrote, from the lips of Mary, "I and Your father were searching for You in sorrow." Yet again, how does he write when he says: "And Jesus himself was beginning to be about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph"? In saying, "as was supposed," he showed that He was not his son, but was only supposed to be so.

^{B D} XXX. Time will fail me if I wish to dispute at length to demonstrate the truth and to refute the folly of Ebion and his school of madmen. For who does not easily understand that Joseph was not His parent, but was held in the position of a parent? "For behold," he says, "the virgin shall conceive and bear a son." He did not say: "Behold, the woman." And again in another place it says: "And the heifer will bring forth, and they will say: She has not brought forth." For since some of the Manichaeans and Marcionites say that He was not brought into the light by birth, for this reason it says, "will bring forth, and they will say: She has not brought forth," because Mary did not bring forth from the seed of a man. But these madmen falsely insist that she brought Him forth from man's seed. Therefore, the heifer indeed brought forth God and man in truth. And that the Virgin is called a heifer, and that her remains were a purification for those who were defiled, hear the law saying: "Take for me a red heifer," so that it might show the chosen vessel of Mary, on account of the fire-like quality of the Savior's divinity contained in the Virgin. "For God," he says, "is a consuming fire." And the law says "a red heifer, upon which a yoke has not been placed upon the neck," to show the Virgin to be the heifer who had not known the yoke of a man's marriage. But why need I dispute at such length? As Isaiah said again, from the person of the Lord: "Take for yourself a large, new volume of a scroll"; the volume, because while the Virgin was from the seed of man, she was cut off from the mingling of men, and cut off from the nature and custom of human beings.

For all men are born from the seed of a man. But the birth of Christ, while according to nature it had its incarnation from the woman, the Virgin Mary, yet beyond nature it was cut off ^A from the succession of humanity; as also Jacob says concerning Him: "From a shoot, my son, you have ascended," and he did not say, "From seed you have ascended." And on account of this the holy prophet Isaiah says—or rather, the Lord says to him: "Take for yourself a volume of a scroll," pointing to the nature of the custom in which all the sons of men write, as also in the one hundred and thirty-eighth psalm He says: "In Your book all shall be written; they shall be fashioned day by day, and none shall be among them." For by the book he likened the womb. Therefore David says: "Your eyes saw my unformed substance," that is, "You knew me before I was fashioned, before I was sown."

XXXI. Now the Hebrew word signifies this in a wonderful way. For they called the unformed substance *Golme* ^B, which is translated as groats, or a grain of fine flour—that which has not yet come together into bread and been kneaded, but as a grain of wheat crushed, a groat or "grits," or a small pebble, which is made from fine flour. Thus, in the sowing, He precisely demonstrated the likeness of the species that is cut off from man, and says—the word being translated into the Greek dialect—"the unformed," that is, "still unfashioned in the womb," which "Your eyes saw before the womb." For God knows all things before they come to be, as it is written. Nevertheless, the book and the volume is the womb that is signified. And He did not say, "Take for yourself a book," or "Take for yourself a scroll," but a "volume," because of the unique difference from the custom of men. "Scroll," because of the writing-nature of the womb. "New," because of the newness of the Virgin, and [because she is] undefiled. For great as in truth is Mary the holy Virgin before God and men. For how should we ^C not call her great, who contained the Uncontainable, whom heaven and earth cannot contain? But He, being uncontainable, by His own choice and good pleasure allowed Himself to be contained, and not by necessity. Therefore the volume is great and new: great because of the miracle; new, because she is a virgin. And, "Write," He says, "in it with the pen of a man." And He did not say, "Someone shall write in it with the pen of a man," nor did He say, "A man shall write in it," so that the Ebionite might not find an excuse. For if He had said, "A man shall write in it," he could have said that the man Joseph sowed it, and that Christ was born from the seed of a man. But to Isaiah, seven hundred and fifty-three years before ^D [the event], more or less, He said: "Write," so that from the time of the interval all...

might be certain of the truth of the affair; ^A because no one could have propagated [the news] that he who was to be born [would come] before those 753 years. Did the Prophet therefore say "Write" in vain? By no means. But so that the same Holy Spirit, who was in the prophet, might show that He Himself was the true author and agent of the generation of Christ, insofar as He existed in the flesh. For "the Holy Spirit shall come upon thee," the angel Gabriel says to Mary, and so forth. And "with the stylus of a man" means in the image of a man. For the man is Christ Jesus, the mediator between God and men, since the Word of God came from above, but from Mary [He became] man, not born from the seed of a man. And for this reason the Prophet says immediately: "And he went in to the prophetess," in order to show that Mary is the prophetess ^B (50), and not the wife of Ahaz, as some who are led astray imagine, saying this because of Hezekiah. For Hezekiah had already been born for eleven years. For in the ninth year (51) of his father's reign, the word was prophesied: "Behold the virgin shall have [a child] in her womb." And after the death of Ahaz, who reigned for fourteen years, and [after he] had died, the Scripture immediately says: "And Hezekiah reigned, and he was twenty years old when he began to reign." How then, under the reign of his father, during whose fourteen years of rule the Emmanuel born of a Virgin was prophesied, could Hezekiah have been born, he who began to reign at twenty years of age after his father? And will it not appear more evident to those who are discerning that he was already born when the prophet prophesied the word during the reign of Ahaz, the father of Hezekiah? Especially since the wife of Ahaz was not even a prophetess, as is plain to everyone. But Mary is she who spoke and prophesied that, "From henceforth all generations of the earth ^C shall call me blessed." To whom Gabriel entered, and brought her the good news that the Spirit—the one who spoke in Isaiah—shall come into her, and that she shall bring forth a son, our Lord Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit and not from the seed of a man, as those senseless and errant men blaspheme.

(50) "In order to show Mary." Certain Hebrews, such as Aben Ezra and David Kimchi, interpret that prophetess in this passage as the wife of Isaiah, who is called a prophetess because she had a prophet for a husband. Jerome understands the Holy Spirit in part through the prophetess, and in part the Blessed Virgin, which Basil and others also follow.

(51) "In the ninth year." Many things have been confused here regarding the meaning of the times and the Scripture, either through the fault of the copyists, or because the author himself was preoccupied with something else. [He] thinks that that prophecy of Isaiah was delivered in the ninth year of Ahaz. Furthermore, [he thinks] that he reigned for fourteen years, and that Hezekiah was twenty when Isaiah prophesied. ^D If this were true, Hezekiah would have had to be two years old when his father began his reign. But even if he reigned only fourteen years, Hezekiah was no more than sixteen, whom, however, he writes a little later was twenty years old when he began to reign. But in reality he was twenty-five, IV Kings XVIII and II Par. XXIX. Wherefore the latter [point] clearly conflicts with the Scripture. As does that which he asserts, that Ahaz reigned fourteen years, to whom Scripture attributes sixteen, IV Kings ch. XVI, 2. Nor indeed are the other things any less false. For this oracle, which is read in Isaiah VII: "Behold a virgin shall conceive," etc., was pronounced at the time when Rasin, king of Syria, and Phacee, son of Romelia, king of Israel, led an army against Ahaz. Now truly, Ahaz began to reign in the seventeenth year of Phacee, IV Kings XV, 2. Therefore Phacee died in the fourth year of Ahaz; who is called Joatham in chapter XV, that is, from the beginning of the reign of Joatham: who reigned sixteen years, in the same chapter, verse 33. But a little while after that prophecy, Teglathphalasar, king of the Assyrians, whose aid Ahaz had sought, having devastated Syria, killed Rasin, chapter XVI. Therefore, long before the ninth year of Ahaz that was predicted by Isaiah; and, as is credible, at the beginning of his reign, or at least a year or two after.

^A XXXII. The worship of that most foolish man, his circumcision, and his daily usage of baptism are likewise refuted. For Christ is seen to have been especially eager to heal most sick people on the Sabbath days; nor did He merely heal them, but He accomplished this in a twofold manner. For He ordered those whom He had healed on the Sabbath to take up their bed and walk. Moreover, on the same day, by mixing ^B clay, He anointed the eyes of the blind man. Now, the tempering of such clay is a work. Whence also the apostles, knowing from His company and discipline that the law of the Sabbath had been abrogated, crushed ears of grain on the Sabbath, and ate them. And it was then the second-first Sabbath, as the text has it.

(52) The question is what the "second-first Sabbath" is, concerning which there are various and discrepant opinions among the holy Fathers: but primarily in Isidore of Pelusium, Epistle 110, book III, in Chrysostom, Homily 39 on Matthew, and in Epiphanius, both in this place and in Heresy LI, number 31. Opinions which, while they are in one way or another agreeable to the truth of the matter, have been expressed rather unfaithfully by certain more recent writers. For to begin with Isidore, in the Ecclesiastical Annals for the year of Christ 32, number 2, this opinion of Isidore is cited and approved: that the *sabbaton deuteroprōton* was that day which follows immediately after the first day of the Unleavened Bread; and thus the Sabbath was called "second-first," or "Sabbath from the Sabbath"; and furthermore, because the same day had fallen upon a weekly Sabbath, it was called the "Sabbath of Sabbaths" due to the conjunction of two feasts. He adds later that this is also the opinion of Epiphanius, and indeed of Suidas, when he says it was the second day of the Passover, which he nevertheless names the first day of the Unleavened Bread. But in these words two things from Isidore have been brought forward contrary to the mind and text of Isidore. The first: that the second-first Sabbath is called the day which follows immediately after the first day of the Unleavened Bread. For Isidore clearly says the first day of the Unleavened Bread itself is the *deuteroprōton*, which is called a Sabbath because the Jews were accustomed to include all feasts under the name of Sabbath. It is called *deuteroprōton*, however, because it is the second from the Passover, and the first of the Unleavened Bread. Isidore’s words are: "He clearly names the first day of the Unleavened Bread itself *deuteroprōton*, namely that one, before the evening of which the Passover was sacrificed, not the second and next day after it." Suidas has copied Isidore’s words in his own manner. The other thing, which I said to be at variance with Isidore’s opinion, is this: that on that same day, because a legitimate Sabbath and a weekly one had coincided, it was called the Sabbath of Sabbaths. But nothing of the sort is said by Isidore. One thing alone, to provide a reason for why that first day of the Unleavened Bread is called a Sabbath, he subjoined: that every feast day is called a Sabbath by the Jews; and thence that way of speaking originated, since it happened at times that the beginning or end of some feast would fall upon a weekly Sabbath: just as among Christians, the birthday of Christ, that is, the Epiphany, falls on a Sunday. ^C Wherefore he does not write that the concurrence occurred in that year which Luke commemorates; but that it could have happened at another time, when they might call it a Sabbath of Sabbaths. Isidore’s passage must necessarily be ascribed [to the text]. Do not be surprised that it is called a Sabbath. For they call every feast a Sabbath, and for this reason it has been said, "Sabbath of Sabbaths," since there is a time when either the beginning or the end of the festival coincides with the weekly Sabbath. [alt-version omitted] ^D

^A Since the Law has defined various kinds of Sabbaths, that which revolves by the cycle of the week is properly called "Sabbath." 159 But there is another which is proclaimed either upon the arrival of the new moons or for the sake of other feast days, such as the days of Tabernacles or the Passover holidays, during which it is legitimate to slaughter the lamb and eat unleavened bread. In addition to these, they observe a certain solemn fast annually, which they know not how to recognize, worshipping angels and archangels, the month, and the moon; and if the moon does not appear, they do not celebrate the Sabbath which is called "first," nor do they celebrate the new moon, nor the Unleavened Bread, nor the feast, nor the "great day." Casaubon, in his *Exercit. xiv, n. 4*, asks what the "first" Sabbath is, and confesses that it seems obscure to him. In this, he silently refutes the interpretation of Scaliger, who in his book *Isag. can., p. 225*, by striking out these words, had written that the "first" Sabbath in this passage was used for the new moon, wherein they become new, and therefore for all festive days. This is absurd. For that Sabbath which is called "first" must be something other than ordinary Sabbaths and New Moons. Indeed, I suspect that this "first" Sabbath is the New Moon of Tisri, which was celebrated with greater cult and religious observance than all other New Moons. ^B Indeed, the New Moons of the months were all solemn and festive, but only in such a way that they performed certain special sacred rites and ceremonies there, not that they were set free from work. Only the New Moon of Tisri, which is also called the Feast of Trumpets and of the sounding, 17, is explicitly exempted from servile work in Leviticus xxiii, 24: "In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, shall be a Sabbath to you, a memorial of those sounding the trumpets, and it shall be called holy. You shall do no servile work in it, and you shall offer a burnt offering to the Lord." Wherefore the rule for that day was the same as that of the first and second days of the Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles, on which, indeed, it was not permitted to do any servile work, although it was lawful to prepare those things which were necessary for sustenance. Regarding the feast of Unleavened Bread, it is expressly cautioned in Exodus xii, 16: "The first day shall be holy and solemn, and the seventh day the same, worthy of veneration with a festival. You shall do no work in them, except those things which pertain to eating." But on Sabbaths, it was not even lawful to prepare those things which pertained to sustenance, as is gathered from Exodus chapter xii, v. 29, and xxxv, 3. See the Treatise 110, 1, 2, in 1 Par. Jad Rambam. It is therefore surprising that Tertullian, in his book *Against the Jews, chapter 4*, conceives the commandment concerning the observance of the Sabbath, which is decreed in Exodus xx and Deuteronomy v, in this way: "Remember the day of the Sabbaths to sanctify it. You shall do no servile work in it, except what pertains to the soul." But he inadvisedly conflated that first observation concerning the first day of the Unleavened Bread with the other concerning the Sabbath. ^C (54) There are twenty-six identified in the Hebrew calendar. But these were neither feasts nor times free from work, nor were they Sabbaths, except for the 10th of Tisri, the day on which the feast of 17, or expiation, is celebrated with fasting; Leviticus xxvi, 31. And this is the "great fast," which Epiphanius numbers among the Sabbaths. For on that day they did nothing of work: v. 29. Regarding the lesser fast, I have not yet been able to explain with certainty its rationale. In the Hebrew calendar which Sigonius and Torniellus published, the fast of Esther coincides with the feast of Mardochai, which was Phurim, that is, the lesser Lot, on the 14th day of Adar. Which fast could therefore be considered less significant. However, this fast must be moved to the 12th of Adar, as was done by Munster and Genebrard: which is also confirmed by the authority of Scripture. For in Esther chapter ix, 22, the 14th and 15th of the month of Adar are established among the feast days of the Jews, so that those days might be days of feasting and gladness. Therefore, they did not fast on the 14th day. Wherefore, regarding that lesser fast, which is at once both a feast and a Sabbath, it seems that there is further inquiry to be sought.

^A They call these days—whether on the second day after the Sabbath, or the third, or the fourth—a Sabbath themselves. Therefore, after the day of Unleavened Bread had passed and the day of the Sabbath had been strictly defined, and the Sabbath—which in its nature is reckoned as the Sabbath following the day of Unleavened Bread—was established, they were found passing through the grain fields, and plucking ears of grain, and rubbing them, and eating, showing that the bond which is defined in the Sabbath has been loosed, the great Sabbath having come, that is, Christ, who granted us rest from our sins. Of him, Noah was once a figure; when his father saw that he was born, by a certain prophetic impulse he wished him to be called Noah, saying: "For he shall give us rest from our sins," that is, from our laborious works. Yet Noah did not bring rest from sins; but Lamech prophesied concerning Christ through the prophecy given to Noah, interpreting it in truth. For "Noah" is interpreted as "rest," ^B and "Sebeth," which word expresses both that very thing and "Sabbath," is interpreted as "Christ," in whom the Father rests, and His Holy Spirit, and all holy men have rested in Him, having ceased from sins. This is the great and eternal Sabbath, of which that small Sabbath was an exemplar, employed until His arrival, established by Him according to the Law, and in Him loosed, and finally fulfilled in the Gospel. For thus He said: "The Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath." From this it followed that the disciples boldly loosened the Sabbath, especially since the priests before them also did the same by sacrificing and offering, lest that constant and daily sacrifice should be interrupted. And it was not only the priests who, by this very fact—that they were not idle even on the Sabbath—foretold long before that it would be abolished; but circumcision itself also used to break the Sabbath. For when a child was often born on a Sabbath, circumcision would remove the religion of that day; and thus the abrogation of the Sabbath seemed to be signified beforehand by these two things. ^C For it is evident that those who would circumcise a boy born on a Sabbath, if they wished to observe the eighth day accurately, since it fell on a Sabbath, and would circumcise him, performed work and broke the Sabbath. But if they put it off for fear of breaking the Sabbath, they would finally perform the circumcision on the ninth day; and thus they broke the commandment of circumcision and the regulation concerning the eight-day count.

XXXIII.

^A For if it were for the sake of cleanliness and for the sake of the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven, then was Sarah deprived of the kingdom, and Rebecca, and Leah, and Rachel, and Jochabed, and Mary the sister of Moses, and all the holy women? And will they be unable to inherit the kingdom of heaven, not having been able to possess the circumcision which God bestowed upon Abraham, according to the argument of these people? But if they are not deprived of the kingdom of heaven, even though they did not partake of circumcision, then the present circumcision of the flesh is of no avail. And why does Ebion boast of circumcision, since even the idolaters ^B and the defiled ones among the Egyptians also possess circumcision? But the Saracens, too, and the Israelites possess circumcision, as do the Samaritans, the Jews, and the Idumaeans, and the Homerites. And the majority of these do not do this because of any law, but by a certain irrational custom.

But I would waste much time being worn out on his ravings, because he leans in vain upon the saying which the Savior spoke: *It is sufficient for the disciple to be as his master*; so that he himself might boast of his own circumcision because of the circumcision of Christ which he has supposedly well-circumcised in himself. Nevertheless, since the beastly fellow wishes to take this saying for the sake of imitation of Christ, I will not hesitate to point out that it was not spoken for this reason. For the Lord immediately explains, saying that He did not speak it for this intended reason, but because of persecutions, and the ^C insolence of the Jews toward Him. For He says: *If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they hated me, they will hate you.* Do you not call me Lord and Master? And you say well; for I am. *If therefore they called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more his domestics?* And, *The servant cannot be above his master, nor the disciple above his teacher.* But let the disciple be perfected in all things, *as his master*, that is, let him be ready for persecution, and for slander, and for whatever else is brought against him. Whence also the holy Paul [says]: *Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ.* And it is not that he imitated his Master as he should not. For he did not say that "I am God," or "I am the Son of God," or "I am the Word, God." For he says: *I am the least of the apostles*; and, *As to one born out of due time, he appeared also to me.*

^D XXXIV. But if you, Ebion, take this saying for the imitation of Christ and, because of the circumcision of which you vainly boast, you wish to be like the teacher—or rather, like the Lord—do not be like Him in circumcision; for it will not profit you. For the Lord Himself brought its time to an end, as He clearly showed through many witnesses.

For He came and fulfilled ^A the perfect circumcision through the mysteries concerning Himself, not sealing only one member, but the whole body, and circumcising it from sin. And He saves not one part of the people—that is, men only—but the whole people of the Christians in truth, sealing men and women alike, and for the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven abundantly and not in deficiency, providing the seal not to one rank of men only according to weakness, but to the whole perfect people, revealing the kingdom of heaven through the seal and the commandments and good instruction. But if you, O Ebion, wish to be as the Lord, that is, as the Teacher, you are greatly deceived. Do not represent yourself ^B by circumcision. But call Lazarus from the tomb, or raise another dead man, cleanse lepers, or grant sight to the blind, or heal a paralytic, if you are able. But you are not able, because you act in opposition, held fast by unbelief and by the bonds of the flesh and by the unfulfillable observances of the Law. And if you could perform these things—which you cannot because of your wicked belief—I do not say as Christ (for you cannot be compared to God, being a corruptible and deceived man), but neither can you call upon the name of Christ for the sake of miracles; or even if you call upon Him, you will not perform them. And if you were somehow to succeed in raising a paralytic, he who rose through the name of Jesus would be able to receive understanding from Him, so that he would not endure your keeping of the Sabbath, but would learn through the name of Him who healed him, saying: "Take up your stretcher, and go to your house on the ^C Sabbath."

It has already been said by me how each of them proposes various things about Christ: at one time the same Ebion saying that He was begotten as mere man from human intercourse; at other times those who are called Ebionites from him [saying] that He possessed a power from God above as the Son, and that He put on and put off Adam at various times. We have overthrown their various opinions by the power of God. And why should I continue to linger in these harborless and tidal places, which are at one time flooded and at another time dried up, from which many fish are often cast out, and which harm the feet of those walking along the banks of these places from among the fish, some of which are venomous?—I speak of stingrays, and weever-fish, ^D and sharks, and moray eels, as has already been said. I will therefore pass by this place again, giving thanks to God, that even this heresy

we have turned backwards, not cursorily, but having refuted them ^A diligently. Let us now turn our attention, beloved, to other matters in sequence, beseeching God for His aid, that He may bring to completion through us the fullness of the promise undertaken in this work.

AGAINST THE VALENTINIANS, OR GNOSTICS, Which is Heresy XXXI.

^B 1. Having run through the wickedness and depravity of the Ebionites, and having promised to set forth the shapes of other serpents and the poisons which they contain — whose bites are fatal, as can be seen from their dogmas as if from a yawning chasm, and which are born like a fierce, fire-breathing snake or basilisk — I shall now proceed to the heresy of the Valentinians, refuting it to the best of my ability, for they also bestow upon themselves the name of "Gnostics." There are ten differences in this single blow of their dream-filled speculation regarding ^C pairs and ogdoads and male-female aeons, which are struck in a balanced manner against one another. I no longer arrange the organization by chronology of succession, but rather move from one to the next by way of addition, for all of them sprang up from the earth in one era like mushrooms, and like harmful and foul-smelling botanical sprouts, and thorny grass, and like a nest of many scorpions, all of them blossomed forth into life at the same time. As I said before, like mushrooms, they appeared in their deformity at a single touch, just as the most holy Irenæus has already stated concerning them. For they are all contemporary; each one borrowed the evil pretext from the next, ^D and desiring to display more than another, sketched out for himself a difference of evil invention. And all of them called themselves "Gnostics"—Valentinus, I mean, and the Gnostics before him; but also Basilides, and Saturnilus, and Colorbasus, and Ptolemaeus, and Secundus, and Carpocrates, and many others. But having named them all here because of the connection of their emergence at one time and the evil intent of each one's spawn, I shall describe each in particular. But for now, we shall come to the heresiarch and tragedian set before us; I mean Valentinus and his teaching, which stems from this great Gnostic promise, but which is found to be a diagnostic trifle, as it is judged and mocked by those who are wise. Valentiniana dogmata, which have gone forth from that specious profession of the "Gnostics," may be called, as the wise have rightly condemned them, catagnostic trifles—that is, condemned and worthy of derision.

2. This Valentinus, then, is later in time than those previously mentioned, namely Basilides and Saturnilus, Ebion and Cerinthus and Merinthus, and their associates. For all of them sprouted up wickedly in life at one time, though those around Cerinthus, Merinthus, and Ebion were somewhat earlier. For they sprang up together with those I have already set forth before them.

^A Most people do not know his homeland or where he originated, for no writer has cared to indicate the place of this man. Yet a certain report has reached us by hearsay; I do not think it should be passed over, nor that his homeland should be entirely concealed, even if the truth seems to be in doubt. We shall put forward whatever we have received on the matter. There are those who make him a native of a certain coastline of Egypt, the Phrebonite district; from there he traveled to Alexandria and was instructed in the learning of the Greeks. Hence, forming in his own mind a pattern from Hesiod’s Theogony—the thirty gods mentioned in that work—and the fables of the pagans, and having gained the suspicion of it from those who, both in his time and before him, had fallen away from the truth, he himself transferred the same things as Hesiod to different names and wished to present [a new] vision of the world. For he too desires to introduce thirty gods, or aeons, and as many heavenly spheres; the first of these is Bythos, as this madman himself says, just as the author and founder of his opinion, Hesiod, said that Chaos was the first of all the gods. And who is there who does not know that Chaos and Bythos mean exactly the same thing? ^B Observe the tragical myth-making and wicked teaching of this vagabond. For he desires to set forth thirty aeons, as I have said, whom he also calls gods, saying there are fifteen males and as many females. He and his disciples say that every aeon is male-female, and a pair. They say there are fifteen dualities, which they call syzygies, that is, associations of two; the number of the aeons is thirty, and each female brings forth the next aeons from her male. These are, as set out below, in opposition to each other, with each male name placed directly opposite the female name. It is: Ampsiu, Auraan; Bucua, Thartuu; Ubucua, Thardeadie; Merexa, Atarbaba; Udua, Cesten; Xida, Vae; Eslen, Amphain; Essumen, Vanauin; Lamer, Tarde; Athames, Susin; Allora, Buciatha; Danaddaria, Allora; Dammo, Oren; Lanaphech, Audamphech; Emphibochebaud; Assiovache, Belin; Dexariche, Masemo. This is their order, while they are reckoned through the marriages of males and females. ^C Otherwise, their series according to succession is as follows: Ampsiu, Auraan, Bucua, Tharduu, Ubucua, Thardeadie, Meresa, Autabarba, Udua, Cesten, Uduna, Eslen, Amphaim, Essumen, Vanauin, Lamertade, Athamessumnin, Allora, Cubiatha, Tlamodan, Saddarias, Oren, Lanaphecudaphech, Emphiboche, Bara, Asi, Ucbabe, Belin, Dexariche, Masemom. The interpretations of the names are these: Bythos, Sige.

Nus and Veritas: Logos and Vita: Homo, Ecclesia: Paracletus, Fides: Paternus, Spes: Maternus, Charitas: Ainus, Synesis: Theletus, which is also called Lumen, Beatitudo: Ecclesiasticus, Sapientia: Bythius, Mixis: Ageratus, Unio: Autophyes, Temperatio: Unigenita, Unitas: Immobilis, Voluptas.

If you wish to enumerate them in the order of their succession, from the supreme and ineffable Father, whom they call Bythos, down to the final heaven, the number of thirty is collected in this way: Bythos, Sige, Nus, Veritas, Logos, Vita, Homo, Ecclesia, Paracletus, Fides, Paternus, Spes, Maternus, Charitas, Ainus, Synesis, Theletus, or Lumen, Beatitudo, Ecclesiasticus, Sapientia, Bythius, Mixis, Ageratus, ^B Unio, Autophyes, Temperatio, Unigenita, Unitas, Immobilis, Voluptas.

III. Such is that celebrated fable concerning the thirty Aeons, and the most empty jargon of what they call the spiritual Pleroma. If anyone were to compare this with the fables of Hesiod, Stesichorus, and other Greek poets, he would find that it is thoroughly the same as those, and does not differ from them in anything whatever; and he would recognize that there is nothing else worthy of admiration in what these founders of miraculous heresies confess to possess among themselves as if they were secret and mysterious things. ^C For there is nothing else that they have copied but the fictitious notions of Greek Gentile error and teaching, having changed nothing, except for the barbarous terminology which they have corrupted. For so do those who follow Hesiod say: First of all, Chaos comes into existence, for which they substitute Bythos; then Nox, Erebus, Terra, Aether, Dies, Amor, Consilium, Fatum, Aerumna, Casus, Nemesis, Momus, Amicitia, Mors, Licentia, Senectus, Ate, Desiderium, Oblivio, Somnus, Pugna, Lysimeles, Contumelia, Euphronios, Aegle, Curarum solatium, Fraus, Hedymeles, Lis. And this is that number which, according to a series of male and female, makes up the thirty. But if anyone wishes to see how these men, in their fashioning, ^D join one to the other, he would find them joined and paired among themselves in this way, just as we read it has been determined by the poets: as when they affirm that from the conjunction of Bythos with Nox and Sige, the Earth was born; or, as others say, the Heaven, which they also call Hyperion. And they say that the same, being united with the Earth, gave birth to males and females, and so on in order for the rest of their entire creation, just as the endless, nonsensical babbling of Bythos holds. You would find that they can be joined and paired among themselves in this way: Chaos, Nox, Erebus, Terra, Aether, Dies, Amor, Consilium, Fatum, Aerumna, Casus, Nemesis, Momus, Concubitus, Mors, Licentia, Senectus, Ate, Desiderium, ...

Oblivio, Somnus, Pugna, Lysimeles, Contumelia, ^A Euphronios, Splendor, Curarum solatium, Fraus, Hedymeles, Lis. And whoever shall have applied his mind to these fables, and shall have wished to know them, just as they are [derived] from worldly and Greek poems, from which these men were thunderstruck—vainly raving about things they should not, and falling into futile labor and useless toil—he will find them to be all the more led astray.

IV. From these beginnings, searching still higher, they supposed—in their own demon-possessed intellect—that they had discovered another genus which they call Hysterema, that is, defect or penury, which they also call Omnipotent, and Opificer, and Creator of natures; from whom, they assert, a later ogdoad was created after the seven orbs of heaven, modeled upon the former ogdoad; while he himself is counted in the ogdoad, and has produced seven other orbs after ^B himself. To this same Hysterema they attempt to join an unknown pure Aeon, exempt from the inferior sex; who attained to such a completion that he sought the soul which had descended from above from the mother, Sophia. Moreover, they have also invented the name Achamoth, whom they also call Savior, and Boundary, and Cross, and Finitor, and Transductor, and Jesus, who passed through Mary as through a pipe or a conduit. This [they claim] to be the light diffused from the Christ above, and for this reason he is called Light by his father’s name on account of that heavenly light, and Christ on account of the Christ above, and Word on account of the Word above, and likewise he is called Mind and Savior. ^C And he is said to transcend his own parent, that is, the Creator; and to raise those who have faith in him up with himself to those highest colleges of the Pleroma. O, the trifles and old wives’ tales of these men! Nevertheless, as I have promised, I shall set them forth; and [how] they have accommodated their madness more closely to the commentaries of the poets and the gentiles. Besides these, according to that Tricenarius, they have thought up a single, middle name, solitary and without the consort of a female; then, again, another Ogdoad produced by the Creator, and likewise arranged in pairs. Its names are these: first, Exepaphus, Porphyrio, Clotho, Rhuaces, Lachesis, Epiphaon, Atropos, Hyperion, Asterope. Such is the stage of those poets, ^D which contains many other appellations of those they call gods, both male and female, which being understood differently by different people reach to the number 365. Furthermore, to propagate the origins of other heresies which take upon themselves a tragic display of this kind, they have added certain new dreams.

For after those aforementioned names, Hesiod, Orpheus, and Stesichorus say that Heaven and Tartarus, Saturn and Rhea, Jupiter and Juno, Apollo, Neptune, and Pluto, and countless others—whom they recount one by one—were born. For their error is fertile and manifold, which, parturating and devising I know not what absurd monsters of names, has poured forth an infinite crop of fables. And this is

the thing that deludes the minds of those wretched men with a false appearance.

But to those whose mind is illuminated by divine light, these things at once appear absurd and ridiculous. Leaving these aside, I shall now set forth at this place what is contained in their books, just as it is written word for word. They are of this kind:

From the book of Valentinus.

V. ^A These things are for the wise; but for the animal, for the carnal, for the worldly, and for the Magnitude, may the Nous—he who never ceases, greeting those who never cease—be present. I am making mention of things unnamable and supercelestial to you, which can be comprehended neither by principalities, nor by powers, nor by subordinations, nor by anything at all, but are revealed only by the conception of the Immutable. For at ^B the beginning, the Autopator (the Self-Father) contained all things within himself in ignorance; whom some call the Aion, ageless, eternal, ever-youthful, male-female, who always contains all things and is not contained. Then the Ennoia (Thought) that was in him—(she whom some called Ennoia, others Grace, because she had bestowed the treasures of the Magnitude upon those who were from the Magnitude; those, however, who spoke accurately called her Silence, because the Magnitude perfected all things through thought without speech)—as I said, the incorruptible ion, wishing to break her bonds, feminized the Magnitude in the desire for his own rest. And she, being mingled with him, revealed the Father of Truth, whom the perfect ones properly called Man, because he was an antitype of the pre-existent Unbegotten. After this, Sige (Silence), having brought forth a natural unity of light together with Man (for their union was the act of willing), also reveals Truth. And ^C Truth was properly named by the perfect ones because she was truly like her mother, Sige—Sige willing this, that she should be equal from the divisions of the lights, both of the male and of the female, so that through themselves and in themselves the light in them might be manifested to those from him, being divided into sensible lights. After this, Truth, having brought forth a maternal Prunicus, feminized her own father into herself; and they came together in an incorruptible union and an ageless mixture. And she reveals a spiritual tetrad, male-female, an antitype of the pre-existent Tetrad, ^D which was Bythus, Sige, Pater, Aletheia.

^A This tetrad, born of the Father and of Sige, is Homo, Ecclesia, Sermo, Vita. Then, by the will of Bythus who contains all things, Homo and Ecclesia, mindful of their paternal discourses, came together and manifest a Dodecad of Prunicus, male-female. The males are these: Paracletus, Paternus, Maternus, Ainus, Theletus, which is to say Phos [Light], and Ecclesiasticus. The females are Pistis, Elpis, Agape, Synesis, Macaria, Sophia. After this, Sermo and Vita—also fashioning for themselves the gift of praise—were joined together with each other. This union was accomplished by will alone. Therefore, having commingled with one another, they generated a Decad of Prunicus, consisting equally of males and females. The males of this group are: Bythius, Ageratus, Autophyes, Monogenes, Akinetos. These took to themselves the appellation of the glory of Him who contains all things. The females are Mistio, Enosis, Syngkrasis, Enotes, Hedone; these likewise assumed for themselves the appellation to the glory of Sige.

^B VI. When, therefore, the Tricenarius of the Father of Truth was thus completed—which unlearned men on earth count, and when they arrive at it, finding no further number, they cycle back and count it again—this is what it is: Bythus, Sige, Pater, Veritas, Homo, Ecclesia, Sermo, Vita, Paternus, Maternus, Paracletus, Ainus, Theletus, Ecclesiasticus, Fides, Spes, Charitas, Intelligentia, Fortunata, Sapientia, Bythius, Ageratus, Autophyes, Unigena, Immobilis, Mistio, Cognitio, Temperatio, Unitas, Voluptas. Then He who contains all things with unsurpassable wisdom, having decreed that another Ogdoad be called into existence in place of the pre-existent authentic Ogdoad, which remains in the number of the Tricenarius (for the spirit of Magnitude did not allow itself to be confined by any number), substituted for the males other males: the First, the Third, the Fifth, the Seventh; and as many females: the Binary, the Ternary, the Senary, the Octonary. ^C This is that Ogdoad which transferred to itself the name of the superior Ogdoad: of Bythus, of Pater, of Homo, of Sermo, and of Sige, of Veritas, of Ecclesia, of Vita. This was joined to the Lights, and the complete Tricenarius resulted, and the prior Octonarius remained at rest, when also Bythus went forth by the support of Magnitude to be joined with the Tricenarius. For in truth the Father of Truth was united with Ecclesia, and Maternus received Vita, and Paracletus received Unitas, and Unitas was joined with the Parent of Truth, and with Sige he was the Parent of Truth. But the spiritual Sermo was communicating with Pneuma, and making ^D by an incorruptible mixture

^A his own rest, which knows no division. The Triad, therefore, having perfected the deep mysteries, showed forth lights that were perfectly unwedded [alt-version omitted] in incorruptible states, which were named Unitas, children that are also uncharacterized. They were resting, therefore, almost without being placed outside of Understanding, without Ennoia. For concerning that which one does, if one does not understand it universally, one does not do it. When the lights had come to be, whose multitude it is not necessary to relate by number, but to consider—for each has received its own name for the knowledge of ineffable mysteries—Sige, then, wishing to propel everyone into the choice of knowledge, gathered them with the second opposing Ogdoad in an incorruptible mixture, but with an intellectual will. And her intellectual will was the Holy Spirit, which resides in the midst of the holy Churches. Having sent this, therefore, into the second Ogdoad, she persuaded it also to be united with it. ^B Therefore, a marriage was being perfected in the parts of the Ogdoad, as the Holy Spirit was united with the Monad, and the Dyad with the Third, and the Third with the Hexad, and the Ogdoad with the Seventh, and the Seventh with the Dyad, and the Hexad with the Fifth. The whole Ogdoad came together with the pleasure of an ageless and incorruptible mixture. For there was no separation of one from another; but there was a tempering with undefiled pleasure, and it showed forth a Pentad of Prunicus-beings that are female-less, whose names are these: Carpistes, Horothetes, Charisterius, Aphetus, Methagogeus. These have been called sons of the Mediocrity. But I wish you to know [these names]: Ampsiu, Auran, Cucua, Thardus, Ubucua, Thardeddin, Merexa, Atar, Barba, Uduca, Cesten, Uduach, Eslen, Amphe, Naisoumen, Ouananin, Lametarde, Athamessumen, Allora, Coubiatha, Naddaria, Damma, Oren, Lanapech, Oudanpech, Enphoithiboche, Barra, Assiouache, Belim, Dexarichem, Masem. ^C What is from the Valentinians is completed.

VII. And these things, indeed, having been set forth from their books as far as this point, let them be said by me. But this man also made his proclamation in Egypt, from which place even now, as the relics of viperous bones, his seed is left over in Egypt, both in the Athribite, and the Prosopite, and the Arsenoite, and in the Thebaid, and in the lower parts of the seacoast, and in the Alexandrian territory. But he even went up to Rome and proclaimed it. Having come to Cyprus, however, as having suffered a shipwreck by material nature, he departed from the faith and his mind was perverted. For he was thought before this to have a part of piety and right faith in the aforementioned places. But in Cyprus he finally slid into the extreme of impiety, and he deepened himself in this depravity proclaimed by him. He himself says, as I have said, and his [followers] say that our Lord Jesus Christ, and Savior, and Christ, ^D

and the Word, and the Cross, and the Deliverer, and the Definer, and the Limit are one and the same. They claim that he brought his body down from above, and passed through the Virgin Mary as water through a pipe, and that he took nothing from the virginal womb, but that he had his body from above, as I said before. They hold that he is neither the primary Word, nor the Christ who is after the Word, who dwells above in the upper aeons. They claim that this one was projected for no other reason than to come down and deliver ^A the spiritual race that derives its origin from above. They deny the resurrection of the dead, weaving a certain ridiculous and nonsensical fable: that this body does not rise, but another emerges from it, which they call "spiritual"; and that this is true only of those whom they call spiritual, and also those they call animal, provided that the animal ones conduct themselves justly and honestly. They maintain that the others, who are called material, corporeal, and earthly, perish utterly, and are not saved at all. They say that each essence returns to its own projectors: the material is rendered to matter, and that which is compacted of flesh and earth returns to the earth. For they posit that there are three orders of men: ^B spiritual, animal, and carnal. They say that the spiritual order is themselves—as do the Gnostics—who have no need of labor, except only for knowledge and the invocation of their own mysteries. They maintain that each of them may do anything whatever with impunity, and has no concern for anything. For they say that their order, being spiritual, will absolutely be saved. But the other order of men in the world, which they call animal, they say cannot be saved by itself, unless it saves itself through labor and just actions. But the material order of men in the world, they say, is neither capable of knowledge nor able to receive it, even if someone of that sort should wish to; accordingly, he perishes completely, both soul and body. As for their own company, since it is spiritual, they believe it is saved together with another sort of interior body, which they in their empty persuasion call a "spiritual body." But they say that the animals, after long exercise, when they have transcended the Creator, are lifted up and assigned to the angels who are with Christ, taking none of their bodies with them, but only their souls, which have attained to the perfect state of knowledge and have surpassed the Creator, and are bestowed as brides upon the angels who are with Christ.

Ⅷ. Such is the tragedy according to them; ^D though it is woven together with many other trifles besides. I have, however, proposed only those matters which I deemed necessary to bring into the light, of which knowledge has reached us: namely, whence this man originated, at what time he lived, from whom he drew his arguments for error, what his doctrine is, and in what way such a great evil sprouted in the world. But as regards his doctrine, as I have said, we have only declared it in part; the rest I did not wish to set forth in greater detail myself, having found against him the work [written] by the most holy Irenaeus the ancient.

^A Regarding the few things mentioned by me up to this point, I shall weave together the remainder from the work of that very same servant of God, Irenaeus, I say; and I shall submit the very words of Irenaeus, without changing even a syllable. They are of this kind:

From the holy Irenaeus.

IX. Since many, having treated the truth with contempt, bring forward false narrations and empty genealogies, which provide questions rather than the edification of God which is in faith, as the Apostle says; and since those same men deceive the minds of the more inexperienced by a crafty and artificial discourse, and carry them off as if they were captives; while they both pervert the divine oracles and interpret correctly-spoken things perversely: then, in truth, they draw away very many from God, the maker and disposer of this universe, being abducted by a certain false appearance of knowledge, and drag them into destruction; ^B as if they could demonstrate something more sublime and greater than he who created heaven and earth and all that is contained within them: so that they most pleasantly allure simple and by no means wicked men into the investigation of truth with beguiling words, nor yet do they pleasantly impel them into ruin, while they cast into them an impious mind prone to speak evil against the maker of all things, because they are unable to discern what is true from what is false. For falsehood is not proposed naked and simple, lest it be easily detected once its coverings are unfolded; but smoothed over with wonderful artifice by specious wrappings, so that it may subject itself—with external pomp and refinement—to the eyes of the more unlearned as being, in a certain way, truer than truth itself. ^C As it has been stated by one greater than us concerning such matters, that when a vitreous stone is fashioned by art to imitate a precious and valuable emerald, at a time when there is no one present who has the power to test it, and by his art to expose the one craftily made; or when brass is mixed into silver, who will easily be able to test it purely?

Because of this, therefore, so that some may not be snatched away through our fault, as sheep by wolves—not knowing them because of their treachery in wearing sheep’s clothing, whom the Lord has commanded us to guard against, as they speak things that are similar but think things that are dissimilar—I thought it necessary, having happened upon the commentaries of the disciples of Valentinus (as they call them), ^D and having also conferred with some of them and grasped their meaning, to disclose to you, beloved, those monstrous and deep mysteries, which not everyone can contain, since not everyone has spilled out their brains, so that you too, having learned them, may make them manifest to all who are with you, and exhort them to guard against the abyss of foolishness and that blasphemy against Christ; and, as far as lies in our power, [to disclose] the opinion of those who are currently teaching—I mean those around Ptolemaeus, being a flowering [of the sect] of Valentinus

^A I shall set it forth accurately and briefly, and I shall suggest arguments suitable for refuting it according to the slightness of my capacity. By these it will be demonstrated that the things said by them are most absurd and not at all consistent with the truth, although I am neither accustomed to elaborate anything in writing, nor have I acquired any facility in speaking through exercise. But charity urges me to make manifest to you and yours the dogmas that have been hidden until this day, but which now, through the grace of God, have come out into the open. For there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed, and hidden that shall not be known.

X. Indeed, there will be no reason why you should demand oratorical faculty from us, who live among the Gauls and are mostly occupied with the study of a barbarian language—an art which we have never learned; nor skill in writing, to which we have never applied ourselves; nor the adornment and paint of rhetoric, of which we are utterly ignorant. But rather, you will receive in charity those things which are written to you by us in charity, simply, truthfully, and in common speech; and as one more fit to perform this task, you will receive them from us as if they were certain seeds and starting points. You will make them richer by a new addition within yourself, and, having stored away in the spacious bosom of your mind those things which have been touched upon by me in few words, you will recompense them with a more abundant fruit. And finally, whatever may have been explained by me with little vigor, you shall argue with strength and courage among your own people. And as I, for your sake, desiring to learn their opinion, have studied not only to declare it, but have also brought forward suitable safeguards for refuting it; so you, in accordance with the grace that has been communicated to you by God, will serve the reasons and utility of others, so that in the future no one may be entrapped by their persuasive speech. Their discourse is as follows:

They say that in those heights, which can neither be perceived by sight nor grasped by any name, there exists a perfect Aeon, whom they call the first Parent and Bythus (the Depth). They assert that he, being uncontained and invisible, eternal and unbegotten, remained in peace and great quietude for infinite ages of years. That Ennoea (Thought) co-existed with him, whom they also call Grace and Sige (Silence); and that at one time Bythus conceived the desire to project from himself the beginning of all things, and, as if it were a seed, to cast this projection which he had conceived into Sige, who co-existed with him, as into a womb. She, having received this seed and having become pregnant, brought forth Nous (Mind), who was similar and equal to the one who projected him, and the only one capable of containing the greatness of the Father. This Nous they also call the Only-Begotten, and Father, and Beginning of all things; and with him Truth was also projected. And this is that first and principal Pythagorean tetrad, which they also call the root of all. For it is Bythus and Sige, then Nous and Truth. And the Only-Begotten, having perceived the reasons for which he had been projected, also projected Logos.

and Life as the father of all who were to come after him, and as the beginning and formation of the entire Pleroma. Thus from Logos and Life were projected, by union, Anthropos and Ecclesia. And this, they say, is the primordial Ogdoad, the root and substance of all things, being called by them by four names: Bythus, and Nous, and Logos, and Anthropos. For each of them, they say, is hermaphroditic, in this way: first, the Propatôr is united in union with his own Ennoia; and the Monogenes—that is, the Nous—with Truth; and the Logos with Life; and the Anthropos with Ecclesia. And these Aeons, ^A having been projected for the glory of the Father, and wishing also themselves to glorify the Father through their own, projected further projections in union; Logos and Life ^B—after the projection of Anthropos and Ecclesia—projected ten other Aeons, whose names they say are these: Bythios and Mixis, Ageratos and Henosis, Autophyes and Hedone, Akinitos and Syncrasis, Monogenes and Macaria. These are the ten Aeons which they claim were projected from Logos and Life. And Anthropos, together with Ecclesia, himself projected twelve Aeons, to whom the following names are given: Paracletus and Pistis, Patricus and Elpis, Metricus and Agape, Ainous and Synesis, and Ecclesiasticus and Macariotes, Theletus and Sophia.

These are the thirty Aeons of their error, which lay in silence and obscurity. This is that invisible and spiritual Pleroma according to them, divided threefold into the Ogdoad, the Decad, and the Dodecad. ^C And for this reason, they say, the Savior (for they do not wish to call him Lord) did nothing openly for thirty years, demonstrating the mystery of these Aeons. But they also say that the thirty Aeons are most clearly signified in the parable of the laborers sent into the vineyard. For some are sent about the first hour, others about the third, others about the sixth, others about the ninth, and others about the eleventh. When these aforementioned hours are added together, they make up the number of thirty. For one, and three, and six, and nine, and eleven make thirty. And through these ^D hours they believe that just as many Aeons are indicated; and that these are, in the end, those great and admi-

admirable and secret mysteries, which they produce as their own fruit; and if there is anything mentioned in the multitude of the Scriptures that could be adjusted and likened to their fabrication. ^A XI. They declare that their Progenitor is known only by the Only-Begotten who was born from him, that is, the Nous, but that he remains invisible and incomprehensible to all the others. The Nous alone, according to them, delighted in beholding the Father, and, perceiving his immeasurable greatness, rejoiced, and conceived of sharing the greatness of the Father with the other Aeons, how great he was and how much he existed, and how he was without beginning, and uncontained, and impossible to perceive by sight. But Sige held him back by the will of the Father, because it was his desire to bring them all into an understanding and desire to seek their aforementioned Progenitor. While the other Aeons likewise were quietly desiring to see the progenitor of their seed, and to investigate the root without beginning, the last and youngest Aeon of the Dodecad, who had been projected by Anthropos and Ecclesia, that is, Sophia, advanced far ahead. And she suffered a passion without the conjunction of the consort Theletos; ^B a passion which indeed had its beginning in the realms of Nous and Truth, but which fell upon this one who had swerved aside, with love as its pretext, but with audacity because she had not been united with the perfect Father, as the Nous had. And the passion was the seeking of the Father. For she desired, as they say, to comprehend his greatness; then she was unable, because she had set upon an impossible task, and having come into a very great struggle—both because of the greatness of the depth and the unsearchableness of the Father, and because of the affection toward him, always being extended forward ^C by his sweetness—she was at last on the point of being swallowed up and dissolved into the whole substance, had she not encountered the power that stabilizes and keeps all things outside the inexpressible greatness. This power they call Horos, by whom she was held back and stabilized, and with difficulty having turned back into herself and having been persuaded that the Father is incomprehensible, she put aside her former conception along with the passion that had arisen from that overwhelming wonder. ^D XII. But how do some of them involve in what trifles the perturbation of Sophia and her restoration? Namely, because she had desired something that surpassed her power and knowledge, she had brought forth a certain formless and unordered substance, and had given birth, as they say, to a female of the same nature as herself. As she perceived this, she was first pained on account of the imperfection of the birth; then she feared that it, too, might not have existence.

^A Since she was remaining in that former agitation, she turned herself about and strove to flee back to the Parent. When she had struggled for some time, she finally gave way and threw herself down in supplication before the Parent; and the rest of the Aeons, and especially Mind, were present as advocates for her. From this, they say, taking the first beginning, that essence proceeded from ignorance, and from pain, and from fear, and from astonishment.

Now the Parent, because of these things, produces through the Monogenes the aforementioned Limit ^B as an image of his own—without consort, without female nature. For they desire the Parent to be sometimes with the consort Silence, and at other times to be above both male and female. This Limit they call Redeemer, and Carpistes, and Horothetes, and Transporter. Through this Limit, they say, Sophia was purified and strengthened, and restored to her consort. For when the Enthymesis had been separated from her along with the Passion that had befallen her, she herself remained within the Pleroma, but her Enthymesis, with the Passion, was set apart and excluded by the Limit; ^C and having come to be outside, it was indeed a spiritual essence, being a certain natural impulse of an Aeon, yet formless and shapeless because it had attained nothing. And for this reason, they say this fruit is weak and female.

XIII. But after this had been thrust out from the Pleroma of the Aeons, and the Mother had returned at last to her own consort, they say that then, by the counsel of the Parent, that no such thing might ever again befall any Aeon, Christ and the Holy Spirit were produced by the Monogenes to support and strengthen the Pleroma, through whom the Aeons were set in order and established. ^D For Christ, they say, taught them the nature of consortship—that those who know of the apprehension of the Unbegotten are sufficient—and proclaimed among them the knowledge of the Parent: that he is uncontainable and incomprehensible, and that he can neither be seen nor heard, nor is he known except through the Monogenes alone. And that which first exists in the Parent—that which cannot be comprehended—is the cause of the others remaining for all eternity; but that which can be comprehended in him is the cause of their birth and formation, and this is the Son. These are the things which Christ, having been newly produced among them, wrought. But the Holy Spirit taught them all, having been reduced to equality, to give thanks, and pointed out true rest. And so they say that the Aeons were established equal in form and intellect, all becoming Minds, and all Logoi, and all Anthrōpoi, and all Christs; and likewise all the females became, to an equal degree, Truths, and all Lives, and Spirits, and Churches.

^A And, having ceased entirely, he says that they praised the Propatōr with great joy, having shared in much gladness. And for this beneficence, by one counsel and purpose, the whole Pleroma of the Aeons—with the approval of Christ and the Spirit, and the Father of them all setting his seal upon it—brought together and gathered up that which each of the Aeons had in itself that was most beautiful and most flourishing; and having woven these together harmoniously and united them melodiously, they brought forth ^B projections—as a tribute of honor and glory to the Bythos—the most perfect beauty and the star of the Pleroma, the perfect fruit, Jesus, who was also named Savior, and Christ, and Logos, patronymically, and in all respects, because he was from all, and together with him were also projected his attendants, of the same lineage, the angels.

XIV. This, then, is the dispensation said by them to be within the Pleroma, and the calamity of the Aeon who suffered and shortly after perished—being dispersed, as it were, into much matter in the seeking of the Father—and the six-fold structure of the Horos, and Stylos, and Lytrōtēs, and Karpistēs, and Horothetēs, and Metagōgeus, and the generation of the first Christ together with the Holy Spirit—which is later than the Aeons, and which came to be through the repentance of their Father—and the construction of the second Christ, whom they also call Savior, composed of a collection of contributions. They claim that these things were not stated openly, because not all are capable of receiving this knowledge, but were signified cryptically by the Savior through parables to those able to understand, in this way: ^C For the thirty Aeons, they say, were signified by the thirty years, as we said before, during which they claim the Savior did nothing openly, and by the parable of the laborers in the vineyard. And they say that Paul most clearly named these same Aeons many times, and moreover that he observed their order, saying: "To all the generations of the aeons of the aeon." Furthermore, when we in the Eucharist say, "To the aeons of the aeons," they claim that it signifies those very Aeons. And wherever "Aeon" or "Aeons" are named, they wish for the reference to be directed to them. But the projection of the decad of the Aeons they claim is signified by the Lord being twelve years of age ^D when he conversed with the teachers of the law, and by the choice of the apostles. For there were twelve apostles. And the remaining eighteen Aeons are shown, they say, by the fact that he is said to have stayed with his disciples for eighteen months after his resurrection from the dead. Indeed, they even claim that the eighteen Aeons are clearly signified by the two letters that come first in his name, the iōta and the ēta. And that the ten Aeons are likewise signified by the letter iōta [as a numeral], which leads his name; they claim that it is said—

^A “One iōta, or one single point, shall in no wise pass away, until all things come to pass.”

They claim that the suffering which occurred in the twelfth Aeon is signified by the apostasy of Judas, who was the twelfth of the apostles, and that it is shown by the betrayal which took place; and that he suffered in the twelfth month. For they maintain that he preached the gospel for only one year after his baptism. Furthermore, they say that this is most clearly revealed in the case of the woman with the issue of blood; for having suffered for twelve years, she was healed by the presence of the Savior, upon touching his garment’s hem. And that for this reason the Savior said, “Who touched me?”—teaching his disciples the mystery of what had occurred among the Aeons, namely, the healing of the suffering Aeon. For that woman who had suffered for twelve years was that very Power, extending herself and flowing out infinitely in her substance, as they say; had she not touched his garment—that is, the Truth of the first Tetrad, which is signified by the hem—she would have dissolved into her own substance. But she stood firm and ceased from the suffering. For the Power that went forth from him—which they wish to be the Horus—healed her and separated the suffering from her.

They also claim that the Savior, being the One who is from all things and who is the All, is revealed by the Word, “Every male that opens the womb.” For he, being the All, opened the womb of the Enthymesis, of the suffering Aeon that was exiled outside of the Pleroma, which they also call the second Ogdoad, concerning which we shall speak shortly. And they claim that Paul also clearly referred to this when he said, “And he is all things,” and again, “All things [are] into him, and from him [are] all things,” and again, “In him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead,” and interpreted the passage, “To gather together all things in Christ through God,” and any other such things, as being said with this meaning in mind.

^B XV. Furthermore, regarding their Horus, whom they call by many names, they declare that he has two functions—the stabilizing and the dividing function; and insofar as he establishes and supports, he is the Cross, but insofar as he separates and determines, he is the Horus—that is, the Terminus. They proclaim that the functions of this being are signified by the Savior in this way: for they state that the power of stabilizing and supporting is demonstrated by the image of the cross, when it is said, “Whoever does not bear his own cross and follow me cannot be my disciple,” and, “Taking up his own cross and following me.” And they say the dividing function is signified when he says, “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” And they claim that John also signified this very same thing ^C by saying, “The winnowing fan…”

winning ^A fan is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, and he will gather the wheat into his barns; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.” And through this they claim to have signified the function of the "Horos." For they interpret that winnowing fan to be the cross, which consumes everything material as fire consumes stubble; but it cleanses those who are being saved as the fan cleanses the grain. They say that the Apostle Paul also mentions this same cross, speaking thus: “For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God”; and again: “But God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of Jesus, by whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.” Such are the things that they all commonly transmit regarding their Pleroma and their fabrication, violently forcing ^B and compelling well-spoken words to fit their own poorly contrived inventions. And they attempt to draw proofs not only from the Evangelical and Apostolic writings—whose interpretations they distort and whose meanings they adulterate—seeking out reasons and arguments; but they also summon them from the Law and the Prophets, since their books are filled with parables and allegories, the ambiguous and double-edged meaning of which can be derived to different ends through exposition. Meanwhile, others cunningly and craftily abuse these very same passages in defense of their own nonsense, and they turn away those who do not hold fast a stable and firm faith in one God the Father Almighty, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, leading them away from the truth as if they were captives.

XVI.

and desired that it should not contend further, and constrained Horos ^A to utter the name; from which the origin of the word proceeded. Since, therefore, she could not break through Horos, because she was held fast, implicated in the perturbation, and had remained alone outside, she succumbed to all parts of this perturbation, which was manifold and various; and first she was affected with grief, because she had attained nothing; then with fear, lest, as the light had departed from her, so also her life should fail; then with lack of counsel, and finally she was deeply immersed in ignorance. For they say that she did not labor, as her first mother, that Wisdom from the college of the Aeons, merely from the diversity of the movements of others, but from the dissension of contraries. Furthermore, they say that a new affection beyond this came upon her, namely of conversion toward Him who had bestowed life upon her. ^B And they say that this mass and substance of matter, out of which this world has coalesced, became its constitution. For they say that from this very conversion, the soul of the world and of the Creator, and indeed all other soul, was generated; but that the rest took their beginning from fear and grief. For from her tears all moist substance was generated; from her laughter, the luminous; and from her grief and consternation, the corporeal elements of the world. For sometimes she would weep and grieve, as they say, because she was left alone in the darkness and the emptiness; at other times, when she came to the thought of the light that had left her, she would relax and laugh; at other times again she would fear; and at other times she would be in doubt and beside herself.

XVII. What follows, then? They create henceforth great tragedies for her, ^C and each one of them, with great arrogance, argues in one way or another on his own authority as to from what perturbation, or from what element, her nature proceeded. To whom it seems to me they justly do not wish to entrust their teaching openly to all, but only to those who can present a handsome reward for such great mysteries. For these things of theirs are not similar to those of which the Lord has spoken: "Freely ye have received, freely give" (Matt. X, 8); but they are remote from all sense, and are prodigious and profound mysteries, which are acquired with great toil by the lovers of falsehood. For who would not willingly spend all his goods, to learn how, from the tears of the Enthymesis of that afflicted Aeon, seas, and fountains, and rivers, and all moist substance flowed forth; ^D and similarly how, from the laughter, came the light; and from the consternation and the failure of mind, the corporeal elements of the world were produced? I would indeed wish to contribute something of my own to their findings. Since I see some waters to be sweet, such as fountains, and rivers, and rains, and the like, while others are salty, like those found in the seas, I might suspect that not all have sprung from her tears, because tears are in their quality salty, and therefore only the salty waters were born from her tears. While, in the meantime, it is consistent that she, being possessed with vehement anguish of soul and lack of counsel, should have sweat

^A waters and springs, and if any other sweet waters exist, it should not be supposed that they took their origin from her tears. For it is implausible that, while the quality of tears is one and simple, both salty and sweet waters should proceed from them. But this is more plausible: that some are from tears, and others from sweat. Since there are also hot and pungent waters in the world, you must understand what she did, and from what part she emitted these. For such fruits are appropriate for their hypotheses.

They say that their Mother, having traversed every passion and ^B having with difficulty looked upward, turned to supplication of the light that had abandoned her—that is, Christ. He, having ascended into the Pleroma—being himself, it is likely, reluctant to descend a second time—sent down to her the Paraclete, that is, the Savior, having handed over to him all the power of the Father, and having delivered everything under his authority, and needing the Æons, so that in him all things might be created, things visible and invisible, thrones, divinities, dominions. He is sent to her with his peers, the angels. They say that Achamoth, feeling shame before him, first put a veil over her head out of modesty, but afterwards, beholding him with all his produce, ran to him, having received power from his manifestation. ^C And he fashioned her with a formation according to knowledge, and brought about the healing of her passions. He separated them from her, yet did not neglect them—for it was not possible for them to be utterly destroyed, as were those of the former one, because they had already become habitual and had gained strength—but, having separated them so as not to commingle or solidify, and having converted them from an incorporeal passion into incorporeal, he then instilled into them a capability and nature, so that they might come into compositions and bodies, and thus there came to be two substances: the evil one of the passions, and the one of the conversion, which is passionate. And for this reason they declare that the Savior, by his power, performed the creation; and they teach that Achamoth, having become free from passion and having conceived the contemplation of the lights that were with him—that is, the angels with him—in his joy, and having embraced them, brought forth fruits according to the image, a spiritual offspring having come to be in the likeness ^D of the bodyguards of the Savior.

XVIII. Since these three substances had thus been established by them—the first, which came from passion, which was matter; the second, from the conversion, which was the animal [or psychic]; the third, the spiritual, which she brought forth last—she then finally turned herself to the fashioning of these. Although the spiritual one, being of the same nature as herself, she could not shape. Whence she turned to the polishing of the animate substance, which had proceeded from her own conversion.

^A and they say she translated the documents which were handed down by the Savior. And first, they narrate that the Father and King of all was formed from the animate substance, as well as those things that are of the same essence as him—that is, the animate ones, which they call "right"—and those from the passion and matter, which they call "left." For they claim that all things according to him were shaped, moved secretly by the Mother, whence they also call him Metropator, and Apator, and Creator, and Father. They call him father of the things on the right, that is, of the animate ones, and creator of those on the left, that is, of the material ones, and king of all. For they say that this Enthymesis, desiring to make all things for the honor of the Aeons, had fashioned images of them, or rather that the Savior had done so through her, and that she herself had remained in the image of the invisible Father, not being known by the Creator, while he remained in the image of the only-begotten Son, and the archangels and angels who came to be from them came to be in the likeness of the other Aeons.^B

Therefore, they say that he became the Father and God of those outside the Pleroma, being the maker of all animate and material things. For having separated the two substances that had been mingled, and having fashioned them from incorporeal into corporeal, he became the creator of both celestial and earthly things, and became the maker of material and animate things, of right and left, of light and heavy, of those that tend upward and those that tend downward. For they say he constructed seven heavens, above which they say the Creator is; and for this reason they call him the Hebdomad, while they call the mother Achamoth the Ogdoad, preserving the number of the primogenial [Aeon], and before the Ogdoad of the Pleroma. But they say that the seven heavens are not intelligible. They posit that they are angels, and that the Creator himself is also an angel resembling God; just as they also say that Paradise, being above the third heaven, exists by a fourth angelic power, and that from this, Adam received something while he dwelt in it. They claim that the Creator thought he was constructing these things by his own power, but that he had made them while Achamoth was projecting them; that he had made a heaven, not knowing the heaven; and had formed a man, not knowing the man; and had shown a earth, not understanding the earth. And they say that in all things he was ignorant of the Ideas of the things he was making, and even of the Mother herself.^C But he himself thought that he alone was all things. They claim that the Mother was the cause to him of this ignorance, having so willed to bring him forth, as the head and beginning of her own substance, and lord of the whole enterprise. Moreover, they call this Mother the Ogdoad, and Wisdom, and Earth, and Jerusalem, and Holy Spirit, and in the masculine, Lord. And they say that she possesses the place of the middle, and is above the Creator, but below or outside the Pleroma until the consummation.^D

^A Therefore, since they assert that that nature which consists of matter is contained by a triple perturbation: fear, grief, and deprivation of mind; they compose all animals from fear and turning. For from the turning, they maintain that the Creator was born, and from the fear, all the rest of the animal substance, such as are the souls of irrational beasts, of wild animals, and of humans. For this reason, since he is too weak to know any spiritual things, they maintain that he considered himself alone to be God, and spoke through the prophets: "I am God, and there is no other besides me." ^B And they teach that the spiritual things of wickedness were generated from the remainder of the perturbations: whence they hold that the devil, whom they call the ruler of the world, along with the demons and the angels, and every spiritual substance of wickedness, had their birth. But they say that the Creator is the son of their Mother, while the ruler of the world is a work of the Creator. And they contend that the ruler of the world understands the things above him, inasmuch as he is a spirit of wickedness, but that the Creator is ignorant of them, inasmuch as he is of an animal nature. They say that their mother dwells in the supercelestial place, that is, in the middle. The Creator, however, dwells in the supercelestial—that is, in the hebdomad—and the ruler of the world in this world of ours. ^C And from the stupefaction and perplexity—as if from the baser part—they say that the corporeal elements of the world were produced, as we said before: the earth from the state of the stupefaction, water from the movement of the fear (the tears), and air from the coagulation of grief. And they teach that fire was innate in them all as death and destruction, just as ignorance was hidden in the three passions.

^D Furthermore, they hold that when the world was finished, the Creator fashioned the clay man, not indeed from that dry soil, but taking from a substance that eludes the sight, from a diffused and fluid part of matter, and that he breathed the animal man into him. And they maintain that this is the one who was fashioned in the image and likeness: for he was fashioned in the "image," which consists of matter, and is so similar to God that he does not at all share the same nature with Him; but he was fashioned "in the likeness" as animal—whence also his substance is called the breath of life, being derived from a spiritual flowing. Later they say that the tunic of skin was put upon him. This, they say, is the perceptible flesh that we see.

But as regards that other fetus of the Mother Achamoth, which she brought forth from the contemplation of the angels who accompany the Savior, and which is spiritual and of the same nature as the Mother, they think that this, too, was unknown to the Creator, and was sent down into him secretly and without his knowledge, so that through him it might be sown into the soul that proceeded from him and the body that was concreted with matter, and, being carried and nourished in them as if in a womb, it might be rendered suitable for receiving the perfect. Thus, they say, the spiritual man, who was sown together with his breath by Sophia, escaped the Creator through an ineffable providence. As for she who was ignorant of the mother, since she was an animal son.

^A, they call her the Church, an antitype of the Church above. And they claim that the man who is within them is such that they have their soul from the Creator, their body from the dust, their flesh from matter, but the spiritual man from the mother, Achamoth.

^B XX. Since there are three, they say that the material element, which they also call "the left," necessarily perishes, inasmuch as it can receive no breath of immortality; but the animal element, which they also call "the right," since it is the middle between the spiritual and the material, moves to that place toward which it makes its inclination. They say that the spiritual element was sent forth so that, being joined to the animal element here below, it might be formed and educated together with it in its conduct. And they say that this is the salt and the light of the world. For the animal nature had need of external sensory instruction. On account of this, they say that the world was constructed, and that the Savior came down for the sake of this animal nature, since it also possesses free will, so that he might save it. For they claim that of those things which he intended to save, he took the first fruits: from Achamoth, the spiritual; from the Creator, he put on the animal Christ; and for the sake of the economy, he was clothed with a body possessing an animal substance, constructed by an ineffable art, so that it might even be visible, and tangible, and subject to passion. And they say that he took nothing at all from the material, for they claim that matter is not capable of salvation. ^C And they say that the completion will be when all that is spiritual has been formed and perfected by knowledge, that is to say, the spiritual men who possess the perfect knowledge concerning God and Achamoth. They suppose that these are those initiated into the mysteries. For the animal men were instructed, those who are established through works and simple faith, and do not possess the perfect knowledge. They say that we belong to this group from the Church; wherefore they declare that good action is necessary for us, since otherwise it is impossible to be saved; but they dogmatize that they themselves will be saved in every way and altogether, not through action, but because they are by nature spiritual. For, just as the earthy is impossible to share in salvation—for they say the material is not capable of it—so again they claim that the spiritual is impossible to admit corruption, even if it is involved in any kind of actions. For just as gold cast into mud does not lose its beauty, but preserves its own nature, with the mud ^D unable to harm the gold; so they say that they themselves, even if they be involved in whatever material actions, are in no way harmed, nor do they lose their spiritual substance.

^A XXI. Therefore, those among them who are considered most perfect licentiously commit all illicit things, and things forbidden by the laws, concerning which the Holy Scriptures testify that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God (Rom. I, 32). For they eat things sacrificed to idols without any distinction, thinking that no contagion from that matter is derived upon themselves; and they are the first of all to run to all the festivals of the pagans which have been instituted for the worship of idols: so that some of them do not even refrain from the spectacle of those who fight with beasts, or those foul and, to God and men alike, execrable and parricide-filled spectacles of the gladiators. Others, while they are assiduously wallowing in the pleasures of the body and in lusts, profess to render carnal things to the carnal, and spiritual things to the spiritual. Wherefore some secretly commit acts of lechery with women who are disciples of this instruction of theirs, a thing which very many, having been formerly deceived by them and lastly returned to the Church of God, have very often confessed among other errors. There are also those who, having laid aside all shame, take whatever women they may have loved, having abducted them from their husbands, and have them as their legitimate wives. But others, who at first had pretended to keep them more honestly in the place of sisters, were little by little detected, and at last a sister was found pregnant from the cohabitation of a brother. It cannot be said how impious and detestable are the other scandals they commit; and while they do these things, they mock us, who indeed, through the fear of God, strive not to admit any crime even in thought or speech, as if we were ignorant and unskilled, while they miraculously boast of themselves, and call themselves perfect men and an elect race. For they affirm that we receive grace, as it were, for use, and that therefore we shall be despoiled of it; that they, as it were, possess a peculiar possession which has descended into them from the ineffable and unspeakable union, ^B and that for this reason it shall be added to them.

Therefore, they say that it is necessary at all times and in every way for them to practice that mystery of the union; and they persuade the foolish to this by using these words: "Whoever, having been born into the world, has not loved a woman so as to be mastered by her, is not from the truth, and will not enter into the truth. But he who is born into the world, and has not been mastered by a woman, will not enter into the truth, because he has not been mastered by the desire of a woman." For this reason, therefore, they call us "animal" men, and say that we are of the world, and that continence and good action are necessary for us, so that by this we may be carried to the place of the middle, but that for them, who are called spiritual and perfect, they are by no means necessary. For action does not lead into the Fullness (*pleroma*), but the seed itself, which is sent forth from there as an infant, is perfected here among us. And when all the seed has been perfected, they say that their Mother, Achamoth, must depart from that place of the middle and enter within the Fullness, and receive her spouse, that Savior who was born from all, so that there may be a union of the Savior and of the Sophia Achamoth. And this, they say, is the bridegroom and the bride, and the bridal chamber is the whole Fullness. But the spiritual ones,

^A after they have put off their souls and have become intelligent spirits, having entered uncontrollably and invisibly into the Fullness, shall be given in marriage to the angels who are with the Savior. As for the Creator, he also shall pass over into the place of the Mother Sophia, that is, into the intermediate [region]. The souls of the righteous, moreover, shall rest in the place of the intermediate [region]; for nothing of a psychic nature can enter into the Fullness.

XXII. These things being done in this way, they teach that the fire which lies hidden in the world will erupt and burst into flame, and having consumed all matter, will be consumed together with it, and will pass into non-existence. They assert that the Creator knew nothing of these things before the coming of the Savior. There are some, however, who say that he brought forth also a peculiar Son, Christ, but he was psychic, of whom [the Scripture] has spoken through the prophets; and that this is he who passed through Mary, just as water flows through a conduit; and that into him, at the time of his baptism, there descended that Savior from the Fullness, who is composed of all, in the form of a dove. ^B And they say that in him there was also the spiritual seed of Achamoth. Therefore, they claim that our Lord was composite, being formed of these four [elements], thus preserving the pattern of the primordial and first Tetrad: from the spiritual, which was from Achamoth; and from the psychic, which was from the Creator; and from the dispensation, which was constructed by an ineffable art; and from the Savior, who had descended upon him as a dove. And this [the Savior] remained impassible, for it was not possible for him to suffer, being impalpable and invisible. And for this reason, when he was being brought to Pilate, the Spirit of Christ, which had been put into him, flew away. But they say that not even the seed from the Mother did suffer; for that, too, is impassible, being spiritual, and is not even visible to the Creator himself. It remains, therefore, in their opinion, that the psychic Christ suffered, and likewise the one who was constructed from the dispensation, which was accomplished not without mystery, that the Mother might exhibit through him the likeness of that Christ above—the one who was extended upon the Cross and fashioned the formation of Achamoth according to substance; ^C for they say that all these things are types of those [higher] realities. They say that the souls that have received the seed of Achamoth have become better than the others; wherefore they are loved more by the Creator, who does not know the cause, but calculates that they are of such a nature from himself.

Wherefore, they say, he appointed them as prophets, and priests, and kings; and they interpret many things as having been spoken by this seed through the prophets, inasmuch as they possessed a higher nature. They say also that the Mother spake much concerning the things above, but also through him and the souls that came into being through him. And finally they divide the prophecies, wishing some to have been spoken by the Mother, and some from the seed ^D

or from the Creator. ^A And likewise concerning Jesus, they say that some things were spoken by the Savior, some by the Mother, and some by the Creator, as we shall show as our discourse proceeds. They claim that the Creator, being ignorant of the things above him, was moved by the things that were being said, while he nevertheless despised them, having thought at different times of different causes—either the Spirit possessed of prophetic inspiration moving by its own peculiar motion, or man, or the entanglement of the hands. And that he remained in this ignorance until the coming of the Lord. But they say that when the Savior came, he learned everything from him, and gladly joined him with all his power, and that he is the centurion in the Gospel saying to the Savior: "For I also have soldiers and servants under my authority, and whatever I command, they do." And they say he will fulfill the stewardship ^B of the world until the proper time, especially for the sake of the care of the Church, but also for the sake of the knowledge of the reward prepared for him, namely, that he will advance to the place of the Mother.

XXIII. Furthermore, they establish three kinds of men: the spiritual, the earthly, and the animal, which are seen in Cain, Abel, and Seth. And from these the same number of natures are propagated, not now in individuals, but by kinds. And they say that the earthly is dissolved by corruption; but the animal, if it gives itself to better things, rests in the place of the middle, but if it chooses worse things, it too will pass to things like them. But the spiritual, which Achamoth may have sown, from that time to the present have been educated and raised here by pious souls, because they were sent as infants; ^C later, when they have attained perfection, they are destined to be given as brides to the angels of the Savior, while their souls of necessity rest in the middle place, entirely with the Creator. And they subdivide the animal souls themselves again, saying that some are by nature good and others by nature evil; and that those are good which become capable of receiving the seed, while those that are by nature evil can in no way receive that seed.

XXIV. Such is their doctrine, which neither prophets preached, nor the Lord taught, nor apostles delivered, which they boast of knowing more than others regarding the nature of the universe. They have snatched it up from hearing, so that—as the proverb says ^D "they endeavor to weave a rope out of sand"—they attempt to adapt it credibly to the things they have mentioned, that is, to the Lord’s parables, or prophetic utterances, or apostolic words, so that their fabrication might not appear to lack witness, while they disturb the order and sequence of the Scriptures, and as far as in them lies, dissolve, so to speak, the members of the truth. For they transfer and shift most things, and creating one thing out of another, they deceive many with the ill-constructed wisdom of the applied Lordly words. Just as if someone were to royal...

image, which had been beautifully constructed from tesserae by a skilled artisan, take apart the existing human figure, shift those tesserae, and rearrange them, and make the form of a dog or a fox—and one that was poorly constructed—and then hold forth and claim that this is that beautiful image of the king which the wise artisan had built, demonstrating the tesserae that were well assembled by the first artisan into the image of the king, but which were well shifted by the latter into the form of a dog, and through the illusion of the tesserae tricked those who were more simple, who did not grasp the royal form, and persuaded them that this rotten image of a fox is that beautiful image of the king—in the same way, these men too, having stitched together old-wives' tales, then rip out sentences and expressions and parables from here and there, wishing to apply the words of God to their own myths. And we have already spoken about those things which they apply to the Pleroma. ^B

XXV. As for those things which they attempt to appropriate from the Scriptures outside the Pleroma, they are as follows. They say that the Lord came in the last times of the world for the sake of the passion, in order to demonstrate the passion that occurred in the last of the Aeons, and through that very end to indicate the end of the undertaking concerning the Aeons. And they tell that the twelve-year-old virgin, that daughter of the ruler of the synagogue whom the Lord, upon arriving, raised from the dead, is a type of Achamoth, whom Christ, having extended himself, ^C formed, and brought to a perception of the light that had abandoned her. And, because the Savior appeared to her while she was outside the Pleroma as a kind of abortion, they say that Paul spoke [of this] in the Epistle to the Corinthians: "And last of all, as to one born out of due time, he appeared also to me." And they similarly claim that he manifested his presence with the consort of the Savior to Achamoth in that same Epistle when he said: "The woman ought to have a veil upon her head because of the angels." And [they say] that, when the Savior came to her, out of modesty Achamoth put on a veil, which, they say, was made manifest by Moses, who placed a veil over his face. They also assert that the Lord indicated her passions, which she suffered, ^D on the cross. For when he said, "My God, why have you forsaken me?" he signified that Sophia was abandoned by the light and was hindered by Horos from her forward impulse. And [they interpret] her sorrow by his saying, "My soul is sorrowful even unto death"; and her fear, by his saying, "Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me"; and her perplexity likewise by his saying, "And what I shall say I do not know." And thus they teach that he indicated the three kinds of men: the material, when he replied to the man who asked, "I will follow

you," [but said]—"the Son of man has nowhere to lay his head"; the animal, in his saying to the one who said, "I will follow you; but suffer me first to bid farewell to those who are in my house": "No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God." For they say that this man is of the middle condition. And likewise that other man who confessed that he had fulfilled most of the parts of righteousness, but then did not wish to follow, but instead, being defeated by the love of riches, did not wish to become perfect—they also want this man to be of the animal kind. And the spiritual kind [is indicated] in the saying: "Let the dead bury their dead; but go thou and preach the kingdom of God"; and when, in the case of Zacchaeus the publican, he said, "Make haste and come down, for this day I must abide in thy house"—for they proclaim that these were of the spiritual kind. ^B And they say that the parable of the leaven, which the woman is said to have hidden in three measures of meal, indicates those three kinds. For they teach that the woman is Wisdom; the measures of meal are the three kinds of men: spiritual, animal, and material. And they teach that by the name of leaven, the Savior himself is meant; and that Paul expressly spoke of material, animal, and spiritual men, where he says, "Such as the material man is, such are the material," and where he says, "But the animal man receives not the things of the Spirit," and where he says, "The spiritual man judges all things." And they say that the statement, "The animal man receives not the things of the Spirit," was spoken regarding the Creator: that he, being animal, has known neither the Mother, who is spiritual, nor her seed, nor the Aeons who are contained within the Pleroma. And because the Savior was about to save them when he saw them, he took up the first-fruits, which is what Paul says: "And if the first-fruits be holy, the lump is also holy"—teaching that by the first-fruits is meant the spiritual [part], and by the lump, us, that is, the animal Church, whose lump they say he took up and contracted within himself, since he himself was the leaven.

XXVI.

^A and gave thanks to the Bythos. And through the prophetess who is proclaimed in the Gospel—who is said to have lived with a husband for seven years, and to have spent all the rest of her time in widowhood, until she saw the Savior, recognized him, and spoke of him to all—they decree that Achamoth is most clearly signified. They say that she, having briefly seen the Savior with his contemporaries, remained for the whole of the following time in the middle region, waiting for him to return again and restore her to her own consort. They contend that her name is also indicated by the Savior in his statement: "And wisdom is justified by her children." And likewise by Paul, in these words: "We speak wisdom among the perfect." ^B They also claim that Paul mentioned the consorts within the Pleroma while indicating this in a single instance; for, writing about the marital consortship, he said: "This mystery is great; but I speak of Christ and the Church."

XXVII

^A of men, by saying "Man" just now, he indicates the Church homonymously with Man, so that through the one name he might declare the communion of the marriage. For from the Word and the Life, Man and Church are born.

And he called the Life the light of men, because they are illuminated by it, which is the same as being fashioned and made manifest. And Paul also says this: "For everything that is made manifest is light" [Ephes. v. 13]. Since, therefore, the Life made manifest and gave birth to both Man and the Church, it is said to be their light. John has therefore clearly declared by these words both other things and the second quaternion: Word and Life, Man and Church. ^B But indeed, he also indicated the first quaternion. For discoursing about the Savior, and saying that all things outside the Pleroma were fashioned through him, he shows him to be the fruit of the whole Pleroma. For he indeed called him the light shining in darkness, and not understood by it; because, having composed all things that had their origin from the passion, he was by no means recognized by them. But he also calls him Son, and Truth, and Life, and the Word made flesh. "Of whom," he says, "we beheld the glory; and his glory was as that of the Only-begotten given to him by the Father, full of grace and truth." ^C For in this way he writes: "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of the Only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." In which place he very accurately described the first quaternion, when he named the Father, and Grace, and the Only-begotten, and Truth. Thus clearly has John spoken concerning the first and mother of all Aeons, the Ogdoad. For he conceived them by name: Father, Grace, Only-begotten, Truth, Word, Life, Man, Church.

XXVIII.

^A Clearly, therefore, this interpretation is a fabrication.

For when John proclaims one God Almighty and one only-begotten Christ Jesus, through whom he confirms all things were made—this one being the Son of God, this one the Only-Begotten, this one the Creator of all, this one the true light that lightens every man, this one the maker of the world, this one who came into his own, this one who himself became flesh and dwelt among us—they, by twisting the interpretation with plausible-sounding arguments, wish the Only-Begotten to be one thing ^B according to the "projection" (which they actually call the Principle), and they wish the Savior to be another, and the Word, the Son of the Only-Begotten, to be another, and the Christ, who was projected for the restoration of the Pleroma, to be yet another. And having taken each of these things mentioned and removed it from the truth, and abusing the names, they have transferred them to their own hypothesis. So that, according to them, John in all these words makes not even the slightest mention of the Lord Jesus Christ. For if he named the Father, and Grace, and the Only-Begotten, and Truth, and the Word, and Life, and Man, and the Church, according to their hypothesis, he has spoken concerning the first Ogdoad, ^C in which neither Jesus nor Christ, the teacher of John, is contained.

But that the Apostle did not speak concerning their "syzygies," but concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, whom he also knows to be the Word of God, he himself has made clear. For, recapitulating what he had said above at the beginning of his discourse, he explains further: *And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.* But according to their hypothesis, it is not the Word that became flesh—for he never even came outside the Pleroma—but the Savior, who is later in order than the Word for the sake of the economy.

XXIX.

^A Savior, and Christ, and Son of God, and that He Himself for our sake put on flesh, that whole fable of the Ogdoad collapses and falls to pieces. Once this is refuted, it is necessary that their entire structure of dogmas, which they fashion for themselves as if in a dream, should likewise collapse, as they pervert the Holy Scriptures while striving to adapt them to their own theory. Then, gathering together scattered expressions and words found here and there, they transfer them—as we have said—from their natural and proper meaning to an alien one. They act just like those who, having any given subject proposed to them, take verses from Homer and so treat and polish them as to persuade the inexperienced that Homer composed those lines with that recent theory of theirs in mind; and the very sequence and context of the verses deceives many, as if these had been arranged by Homer in that way.

In this manner, I know not whom, who described in Homeric verses Hercules sent by Eurystheus to drag the hound from Hades (for nothing prevents us from mentioning these for the sake of example, as the attempt involved is quite the same for both parties):

Thus he spoke, and from the heights he sent forth the heavy-groaning Hero, Heracles, wise in great deeds, Eurystheus, son of Sthenelus, of the race of Perseus, To lead up the hound of hateful Hades from Erebos. He set out to go, like a mountain-reared lion relying on his strength, Swiftly through the city, and all his friends followed ^B Nymphs and youths, and much-suffering elders, Lamenting piteously, as if he were going to his death. Hermes and bright-eyed Athena sent him forth, For in his heart he knew how his brother was laboring.

Who among the simple-minded would not be deceived by these verses, and believe that Homer had composed them for this particular theme? But one who is practiced in the reading of Homer will easily distinguish these things; he will not be ignorant that some of these phrases were said regarding Ulysses, others regarding Hercules himself, others regarding Priam, and others regarding Menelaus and Agamemnon. By transferring them thence and restoring them to their own proper place, he will dissolve that entire construction. Just so, he who holds within himself the upright rule of truth, which he received through baptism, will recognize the words, expressions, and comparisons taken from the Holy Scriptures, but will not recognize this blasphemous theory. For even if he recognizes the individual stones, he will not accept the fox in place of the imperial image ^C. By restoring each of the things said to its own order and fitting them into the body of truth, he will expose their nonsense and demonstrate it to be empty.

XXX. Finally, because now as if on a stage, the [work] is finished ^D

^A fable has reached its end, we have deemed it advisable to add something for the refutation of their error. But first, it must be shown in what matters the authors of that fable disagree among themselves, whom diverse spirits of falsehood, as it were, carry off in contrary directions. For from this head alone, even without any other proof, it will be most certainly established that the truth which the Church preaches is solid and stable, while their doctrine is adulterated and mendacious. For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, having received the faith from the apostles and their disciples in one God the Father Almighty, who made the heaven and the earth and the seas and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who through the prophets preached the dispensations ^B and the advents, and the birth from the Virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the bodily assumption into the heavens of the beloved Christ Jesus our Lord, and his coming from the heavens in the glory of the Father to sum up all things and to raise up flesh for all mankind, so that to Christ Jesus our Lord and God and Savior and King, according to the good pleasure of the Father invisible, every knee might bow, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue might confess to him, and he might exercise righteous judgment over all; that he may send the spiritual things of wickedness, and the angels who transgressed and fell into apostasy, and the impious and unjust and lawless and blasphemous among men into eternal fire; but that to the righteous and holy, and those who have kept his commandments, and have remained in his love, whether from the beginning or after repentance, he may grant life and bestow immortality and prepare eternal glory.

XXXI.

^A possesses the power of speech, to profess anything different from these things—for no one is superior to the teacher—nor does he who is weak in speech diminish from the tradition; for since the faith is one and the same, neither has he who is able to speak much about it increased it, nor has he who can say but little diminished it. The fact that some attain a greater or lesser degree of understanding does not result in changing the subject matter itself, nor in imagining another God beside the Creator, Maker, and Nourisher of this universe, as if these were not sufficient, or another Christ, or another Only-begotten.

But their industry should labor only in this: that they may strip away and explain those things which are covered by certain wrappings of enigmas, and accommodate them to the standard of the common faith; or that they may expound that divine business and entire administration regarding the salvation of men, and explain how God most patiently endured that apostasy of the rebellious spirits and the contumacy of men; and why it is that one and the same God has made some things temporal and others eternal; and likewise, why He has made some things celestial and others earthly; and why, being invisible to the eyes, He did not present Himself to the prophets to be seen in one form, but signified what He willed to different people in different ways. And why more Testaments have been established for men, and what are the characteristic marks and proper features of each, ^B they should teach; and why God has shut up all in disobedience, that He might have mercy on all, they should investigate; and why the Word of God was made flesh and suffered, they should give thanks; and why the presence of the Son of God occurred in the last times, that is, in the end, it was revealed as the beginning, they should proclaim; and concerning the end and future things, as many as are contained in the Scriptures, they should unfold; and why it is that the formerly despaired-of nations were made fellow-heirs, one body, and sharers with the saints, they should not keep silent; and how this mortal flesh shall put on immortality and this corruptible put on incorruption, they should declare; and how you will say, "not a people, a people, and not beloved, beloved," and how the children of the desolate were more than of her who has a husband, they should preach. For it is of these and similar things that the Apostle cried out: "O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and his ways past finding out!" But they do not act in this way to falsely imagine a Mother of these things ^C above the Creator and Maker, and a wandering Thought of an Aeon, and commit so great an insult to God; nor to lie about some Pleroma—I know not what—that is above, defining it now merely by thirty Aeons, and now constituting an infinite nation of them, as do those distinguished teachers who are utterly destitute of divine knowledge: whereas the faith of the genuine Church, as we have said, is one and the same throughout the whole world.

XXXII. Let us now also see how great is the flighty and ^D unstable opinion of these men.

of the inconsistency of two or three of them, and how, regarding the same things, they do not state the same things, but dissent from one another in both the facts and the terms. ^A For the first, Valentinus, having adapted the principles of the so-called Gnostic heresy into the peculiar character of his own school, set them forth thus: he defined there to be an innominate Duad, of which one part is called "the Ineffable" and the other "Silence." Then from this Duad a second Duad was projected, of which he calls one part "the Father" and the other "Truth." And from this Tetrad, he says, "the Word" and "Life," "Man," and "the Church" were produced, and that this is the first Ogdoad. And from the Word and Life, he says, ten powers were projected, as we have mentioned before; and from Man and the Church, twelve, one of which fell away and performed the remaining work. He also postulated two Horoi: ^B one placed between Bythos and the rest of the Pleroma, dividing the begotten Aeons from the unbegotten Father, and another which separates their Mother from the Pleroma. And he says Christ was not projected from the Aeons in the Pleroma, but was born of the Mother, who had gone outside according to the judgment of her betters, with a certain shadow. And this one, being male, having cast off the shadow from himself, ran back into the Pleroma; but the Mother, being left behind with the shadow, and being emptied of her spiritual substance, brought forth another son, namely the Creator, to whom they attribute dominion and power over all things that are subject to him. And he conjectured that a sinister ruler was produced along with him, just as those so-called Gnostics, of whom we shall speak later, also hold. They also say that Jesus was sometimes produced from the one who had joined with their Mother and flowed forth with all things—that is, the Will; at other times from the one who had run back into the Pleroma, that is, Christ; and at other times from Man and the Church. And he says that the Holy Spirit was produced by the Church for the examination and fruitfulness of the Aeons, invisibly [entering] into them, by means of whom they might bring forth the fruits of truth.

The account of Irenaeus against the Valentinians is completed.

^C XXXIII. These and such things the aforementioned elder, Irenaeus—a man adorned in every way by the Holy Spirit, who was set forth by the Lord as a noble athlete and anointed with heavenly gifts for the sake of the true faith and knowledge—having wrestled down and vanquished their entire vain speculation, treated in detail and according to reason those things which they spoke in vain. Moreover, in his following second book and in others, he refuted them more abundantly, wishing, as it were, to drag along the prostrate and defeated adversary, and in the presence of all to triumph over him, and to expose the shameless and weak audacity of his boastfulness in the one who had been cast down ^D and defeated. We, however, satisfied with the writings and arrangements of these men, and seeing that others...

have labored—I speak of Clement, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and many others—who have also wonderfully effected their refutation, we have not, as I said before, desired to add much to that effort, believing it to be sufficient work by those men, and considering this very thing among ourselves, that to any person of understanding, even from their own books and teachings, there will appear the refutation of them by themselves. ^A

XXXIV. In the first place, they disagree among themselves in the variety of their opinions, and one declares that he will tear down the decrees of another. Secondly, their fables are such that they can in no way cohere, since there is no mention of them anywhere in the sacred Scriptures, nor in the law of Moses, nor in any prophet after Moses, and neither from the Savior, nor his evangelists, nor, finally, from the apostles has anything been handed down concerning them. For if those things were true, the Lord, who came to enlighten the world, and the prophets before him, and then the apostles who confounded the superstition of false gods and every sort of shameful wickedness, and who did not fear to write against every lawless teaching and opposition, would clearly have declared such things to us; especially since the Savior himself said: "To the others indeed it is given in parables, but to you the parables concerning the kingdom of heaven are to be explained." ^B Whatever parables, therefore, he spoke in the Gospels, he is seen to have explained their meaning immediately. For he explained what the mustard seed meant, what the leaven was, and who was that woman who had put leaven into three measures of flour; what that vine and fig tree were; who is he who sows, and what is the best soil. Therefore, they are caught in vain, driven by the impulse of a demon; concerning whom the most holy apostle Paul rightly speaks: "In the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils." ^C And James also agrees with this, speaking thus of such dogmas: "For this is not that wisdom that descendeth from above; but is earthly, sensual, devilish." But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, and so on. And not even one of these fruits is found in those whom we have mentioned. For among them there is inconsistency and every wicked thing, and the offspring of demons, and the hissings of serpents are found. One person preaches one thing at one time, and another at another. There is no mercy or clemency there, but dissensions and discords; there is no chastity anywhere, no peace, no equanimity. ^D

XXXV. And I am indeed pleased, since the necessity of the discourse and the argument impels me, although I had decided to make an end, to mention a few things from their decrees to refute them. For

I am not concerned with the artifice of speech, but with the benefit of those who encounter it. They say, therefore, that the twelfth Aeon, because it fell into need/deficiency, was utterly cast out of the number twelve, and that the twelfth number perished. This, they say, came to pass because Judas, being the twelfth, had fallen away, and thus the twelfth number was extinguished. Likewise also concerning the woman with the issue of blood, and her who lost one drachma out of the ten. But it can be demonstrated that the twelfth Aeon cannot hold the person of Judas; for Judas perished utterly, but the so-called twelfth Aeon—according to their own fabrication—was not emptied out; for there stood before him the Metabugeus, or the Horotheta, who is called the Definitor, saying to him, "Iaoth," and in this way, they say, he was strengthened. Nor does the woman who had the issue of blood for twelve years conform to their drama; for she was healed after twelve years, during which she was suffering from the blood of her nature; for she was not free from her affliction for eleven years and then healed in the twelfth. Nor did the woman who had ten drachmas lose one forever, so that that Aeon of matter, which they speak of as lost, might be substantiated by them; for she lit a lamp, and found the drachma. ^B

XXXVI. Now, from these two or three arguments, their entire tissue of dramas will straightway be left refuted, and rendered useless and stale for those who are sons of wisdom and children of the holy, catholic Church of God. ^C For, lest by carrying on at length against them I extend the treatise into infinity, having made my account up to this point and put an end to so much of their depravity, I shall proceed to what follows, calling upon God as my guide and helper in my weakness, so that I may be saved from this and the aforementioned heresies, and from those about to be revealed for the sake of those who love learning and wish to know the exact truth of the empty rumors and unsubstantiated doctrines in this world. For this man, having sown his own dream-fantasies among many, and calling himself a Gnostic, has bound together many, so to speak, scorpions into one chain, as the old and clear parable provides: ^D that scorpions, binding one to another like a chain, up to ten or more, let themselves down from a roof or upper story, and thus work harm upon men with deceit. Thus also he, and his so-called Gnostics, have become the originators of error, and having received their pretenses from him, one taught by another after the master has fashioned an addition to the error, and introduced another heresy, succeeding the former. And thus, by succession, these self-styled Gnostics were divided into various heresies; by Valentinus...

as I have said, and also from those who were before him, they received their beginnings. Now, however, the doctrines that have laid low and trampled upon the universal truth should be passed over, so that, relying upon the same aid and power of God, we may examine the rest. ^A

AGAINST THE SECUNDIANS

1. Having now finished with the heresy of Valentinus, and having labored greatly in his thickets and briars, we shall next, with incredible sweat and the toil of a kind of husbandry, come to root out the remaining thorns of his planting and to vanquish the vile, serpent-like shapes of his wild beasts. But first, we shall ask for the aid of the Holy Spirit from Christ, so that through his intercession we may, by means of heavenly doctrine and religious discourse, elicit the truth into the hearts of men and, from those who are willing, extract the pestilential poison. In explaining these matters, I shall follow the order of the ages, and I will reveal who became whose successor in recounting those who, setting out from him, sowed various seeds of doctrine. ^B

Of this number, then, was one Secundus, who, desiring to be thought wiser than the rest, although he asserts all the same things as Valentinus, nevertheless filled the ears of the deranged with a more grandiose sound. For he, living at the same time as Valentinus, and desiring to surpass that very man with some new invention, taught that the first Ogdoad is composed of a right-hand Tetrad and a left-hand Tetrad; and he willed that the one be called Light, and the other Darkness. And as for that Power which is said to have fallen and been reduced to want, he claims it did not exist from that number of thirty Aeons, but that it was of some lower order, namely, of the flock of those who are placed below another Ogdoad. Regarding Christ and other dogmas, he holds the same views as his teacher and the minister of his poison, Valentinus. And since there is not much that is explained by this man in different or strange terms, I thought that these few things which have been said were sufficient, as they are enough in themselves to furnish arguments for refutation. But we must still dispute briefly against him as well, lest it seem we overlooked him because we could bring nothing against him. ^C

For if, according to their opinion, there are right-hand and left-hand Tetrads, there must be assigned something in the middle between them, because whatever has right and left orders must necessarily be placed in their middle; nor can right or left exist anywhere unless the distinction of either part is sought from an intervening body. Wherefore, O most foolish of mortals, Secundus, and all you Secundians, there will be one thing in the middle, to which what are called left and right are subject: and that which is subjected to it as right or left cannot be foreign to that one thing; and thus all things will be referred to one nature, than which there is nothing ^D

^A higher, nor lower, nor lowest, except for those things which have been created by Him; and it will not be obscure to those who understand the truth that there is one God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. If, then, there is one God, from whom are all things, there is in Him nothing sinister, nor any other defect, nor anything that has been subjected, except for those things which were created by Him. Furthermore, all things after the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit have been well created, and have proceeded forth from Him in abundance for their constitution.

II. But if another such snake, coming forth to us from its hiding place, should object that the right and left ^B exist from the One, and that He Himself is in the middle of them, and that He draws the right things to Himself, and rejoices in them, calling them “right” and “light,” while the left things, as being foreign to Him and placed on the left side, He repels; let him tell me, I pray, whence he derived this geometry, so that he might correctly arrange the right and left as being unchangeable. For with us, the right or left is rightly so called from the limbs fixed in the body, in which no change ever occurs. But things outside us can be at one time right, and at another time left. For to everyone who looks towards the east, the south, or mid-day, will be called the right; but the northern, or arctic, climate will be on the left. But if a man is turned around ^C towards the western parts, the climates will be found to be named differently; that which just a moment before was right, namely the south or mid-day, is changed into the left; and the region which was said to incline to the left of the person—that is, the arctic or northern climate—will be said to be on his right. Where, then, did this deceiver find for himself this geometry applied to God? O the incredible frivolity, and one that confuses all things! But he says that after the thirty ^D Aeons a defect came into being. Whence, then, have you grasped the nature of this defect, O man, or of the power that apostatized, tell me? For if you found this to be from a budding forth of those above, not created but begotten, since according to your judgment and that of your master, those things which are created have not been created but begotten, and every nature has received what it has by a certain communication from another, and has come forth into light; then you must be trapped by your own confession. For if that posterior power and defect originated from those above, and budded forth, so to speak, then it is clearly a participant in the heavenly ornaments, since that posterior one has something in common with the Pleroma, and the Pleroma with the posterior one; nor does one differ from the other, when both are joined to one another at their common boundaries. Wherefore, most miserable of men! you are proved to have drawn that whole structure of errors from nothing else but the instinct of a demon, in every respect!

III. But that nothing may be omitted by us of what is said or done by some, especially since many

^A are the leaders, and they boast that they are fabricating one thing after another in opposition to their own master—I will linger a little while longer, instructing those who are inside that very heresy, and noting other things said by these men; I mean concerning Epiphanes, who, under the pretext of hortatory discourses, cast himself into a still deeper gulf of misery. Truly, then, he received the pretexts for his false dogma from Carpocrates, his own father according to the flesh, but he attached himself to the heresy of the aforementioned Secundus, and was even numbered among the Secundians. For great is the disagreement of these wandering men with one another, and their vain loquacity is a sort of uncomposed and confused medley. For this Epiphanes (86), as I said, being the son of Carpocrates and a mother named Alexandria—for such was her name—joined himself to these, as I previously said, ^B being of the lineage of Cephallenia on his father's side; having lived for seventeen years, he ended his life prematurely, as the Lord removes the wicked like thorns, providing something better for the salvation of the world. Yet after his death, those who had been deceived by him were not delivered from the plague that came from him. For in Same (87) he is honored even to this day as a god. For the local inhabitants built a sacred precinct for him, and every new moon they perform sacrifices and rites, and they set up altars to him, and they raised a much-detested museum in his name, called indeed the Museum of Epiphanes. For the Cephallenians, having been led into such great error, offer sacrifices to him, and pour libations, and feast in the sacred precinct built for him; and they sing hymns to him. By the excess of his education, both in the liberal arts ^C and in Platonic philosophy, he became a trap to the aforementioned, not only in their heresy but also in their other error—I mean that which turned the local inhabitants toward idolatry. At any rate, this Epiphanes followed Secundus and those around him. For he copied his venomous nature, I mean the long-windedness of his serpentine corruption.

IV. They say that Isidorus (88) cast the foundations of his wickedness in his *Hortatory* books. But whether he was of the same sect and originated from the same opinions, or whether he learned to be a master of exhortations from the philosophers, we have not been able to discover with complete certainty. However, they all agree—they stitch together the same doctrine. In the first place, that even ^D this Epiphanes, together with his father and the founder of the heresy, decreed that...

Carpocrates and those around him should hold women in common, having taken a pretext from Plato’s *Republic* and being intent on fulfilling his own lusts. ^A From this he makes his beginning, saying that the Holy Gospels contain the saying of the Savior that there are three kinds of eunuchs: those who have been castrated by men, those born that way by nature, and those who have voluntarily made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He says: "Those, therefore, who become eunuchs by necessity are not eunuchs by reason. But those who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven say that they did so to avoid the troubles that come from marriage, fearing the burden and anxiety of providing for a household. It is better to marry than to burn [a]; therefore, beware that you do not cast your soul into the fire (for this, they say, is the command of the Apostle) while you resist day and night and fear lest you fall away from chastity. For the soul that is engaged in resisting and standing firm is divided from its hope. Therefore, stand fast, as I said before, in the exhortation," bringing into the middle of the discourse ^B what Isidore says verbatim in his *Ethics*: "The ways of an obstinate wife must be borne, lest you be stripped of God’s grace. When you have cast out the flame of lust together with the seed, then pray with a clear conscience. But when your thanksgiving has fallen into petition, and you begin to stand, and you have not yet succeeded in not being defeated, then marry." Then he says again: "But if a young man is poor or prone to the flesh—that is, weak—and does not wish to marry according to the Word, let him not separate from his brother." And the wretch concocts some shameful suspicions and performs a farce for himself. He says, therefore: "Let him say, 'I have entered into the holy places, I can suffer nothing.' But if some suspicion should take hold of him, let him say, 'Brother, lay your hand upon me, that I may not sin,' and he shall receive help, both sensible and intellectual. Let him only wish to accomplish what is good and he will succeed." Then he says again: ^C "Sometimes we say with our mouth that we do not wish to sin, but our mind is inclined toward sinning. Such a person, because of fear, does not do what he wishes, so that the punishment may not be reckoned against him. But human nature has certain necessary and natural things: it is necessary and natural to use clothing; natural is the desire for sexual pleasure."

V. I have been compelled to bring these words of theirs into the middle, in order to refute those wicked and impious men—I mean the Basilidians, the Carpocratians, and the disciples of Valentinus and of the man called Epiphanes, to whom Secundus, whom we previously mentioned, is attached. For they are propagated from one another: whether one sold this evil doctrine to the other as if they were bad wares, or the other to the first, they have communicated a pestilential teaching. And although they may differ in some things, they have nevertheless deposited themselves in one single heresy ^D, so that they have also decreed that they have the authority...

to commit sin on account of their perfection, ^A by which—as they claim—all existing natural beings are to be saved, even if they sin now because of their innate choice. For the fore-fathers of these doctrines do not even permit them to do the same things.

But these people also say, as they extend themselves toward the higher and more gnostic realm, that the first Tetrad is as follows: “There is a pre-beginning before all things, unthinkable, ineffable, and without a name, which I enumerate as Monad.” With this Monad there co-exists a power, which I also call Unity. This Unity and this Monad, being one, brought forth the beginning, which is intelligible, unbegotten, and invisible, ^B before all things, which the Word calls the Beginning. With this Beginning there co-exists a power consubstantial with it, which I also call the One. These powers—I mean the Monad and the Unity, the Monad and the One—brought forth the remaining emanations of the Aeons.

VI. Concerning the fact that all these things differ from the truth.

VI. But how much all these things abhor the truth, certain excellent writers have demonstrated in the commentaries they have published against them, especially Clement of Alexandria—whom some make an Athenian—and the holy Irenaeus; who, after he has mocked them, adds that tragic exclamation:

Alas! Alas! Oh! Oh! ^C For truly that expression, taken from the stage, can be transferred to that calamity which those writers bring upon us with their monstrous words and such unbridled audacity of trifles; who shamelessly invent certain names for their lies. For when he writes thus: “Before all things there is a certain first beginning, and first, surpassing all intelligence, which I call the monad”; and again: “With this monad exists a power, which I also call singular”; he manifestly confesses that these things which are proposed are entirely fabricated, and that he himself has imposed on this fable names which have hitherto been used by no one. ^D Therefore, there is no doubt that he was the first to invent these things, and if he had not existed in life at some time, the truth would surely have remained without a name. Nothing, therefore, prevents another person from defining something on the same hypothesis in this way.

^A For this reason, the blessed bishop Irenaeus, as we have said, also set forth ridiculous names, composed by himself in jest, as being in harmony with their trifles; such as the kinds of melons, gourds, or colocynths, to which he assigned names related to specific things—a fact which learned men will easily discern from what they have previously read.

VII. Moreover, some of them designate the first and most ancient Ogdoad with these ^B names: first, Proarche; then, Anennoetum; the third, Inexplicable; and the fourth, Aoratum [the Invisible]. And they maintain that from this first Proarche there was brought forth a beginning in the first and fifth place; and from Anennoetum in the second and sixth place, the Acataleptum [the Incomprehensible]. From the Inexplicable, in the third and seventh place, the Anonomastum [the Unnamable]; and from the Aoratum, the Agennetum [the Unbegotten], the complement of that first Ogdoad. They wish these powers to have pre-existed Bythos and Sige, so that they might appear more perfect than the perfect, and more Gnostic than the Gnostics; ^C to whom one might justly exclaim: "O you babbling sophists!" For indeed, there are many and diverse opinions among them concerning Bythos himself. For some say he is without a consort [injugem], neither male nor female, nor anything else at all; while others say he is hermaphroditic, attributing to him the nature of an androgynous being. Others, again, attach to him Sige as his consort, so that there may be a first marriage, and from this, they may weave the rest of their drama string-by-string. And great within them is this babbling daydream, one which casts their minds into a deep sleep.

But why should I dwell on this for long, since their hypothesis is clearly exposed, and since their ^D refutation and overthrow are evident from what has already been said to anyone who wishes to hold fast to his life and not be deceived by empty myths? But let these things be said by me concerning them. Having passed over this, I shall examine the things that follow, looking ahead to a safe path and a smooth road for myself, so that, by going through and refuting their wickedness, I may save both myself and those who hear me in the power of God, through the teaching of our Lord and the true contemplation [of the truth], so that, by stamping upon this "Myagron" viper—which is like many other vipers—with the example of the Gospel, we may examine what follows.

AGAINST THE PTOLEMAEANS,

^A I. Secundus, therefore, and Epiphanes transferred the exhortations of Isidore to the use of their own sect and opinion. Ptolemy succeeded them, who, although he embraced the heresy of those who are called Gnostics and of the Valentinians, and also of certain others, nevertheless added some things to those which he had imbibed from his teachers; and from his name certain of his followers boast, whom they call Ptolemaeans.

This Ptolemy, with his own followers, advanced far beyond those who were his teachers in erudition, and accumulated their doctrine with a great accession. For to the God whom they call Bythos, he attributed two spouses invented by himself, which he also called Affections, namely, Thought and Will. Of these, the former always existing in Him and thinking something, brought it forth; but the latter subsequently supervened. For first, he says, He thought of creating, then He willed. Wherefore, from these two Affections, or Virtues—for he also calls them Virtues—Cognition and Will, as if mingled together, there arose the pair of the Only-Begotten and the Truth. They believe that these proceeded as visible figures and images of the two paternal affections, as if of things that cannot be seen: Truth, namely, from the Will, and Mind from the Thought. And through the Will, the masculine image of the ingenerate Thought came to be: the feminine image, however, was of the Will itself. The Will, therefore, was the ministering power of the Thought. For although the latter might think within itself concerning production, it could not, however, bring forth what it thought of by itself. But when the power of the Will supervened, then it brought forth what it thought.

^B II. O foolish and old-wives' fables! For no one who has even a little judgment would dare to assert anything of this kind even of a man, much less of God. But to me, even Homer seems wiser than he, when he described Jupiter, solicitous and consumed with cares and angered, spending a sleepless night thinking of the destruction of the Greeks: when he was asked by Thetis to take vengeance for the injury of Achilles, punishing both the leaders of the Greeks and the Greeks themselves. For Ptolemy devised nothing more apt concerning that parent of his of whom he speaks, whom he calls Bythos, than what was composed by Homer concerning Jupiter. But he seems to have fashioned an idea of Jupiter himself such as he had learned from Homer. Indeed, he would more tolerably use that Homeric fiction about Jupiter and the Greeks than to dispute in such a way about the common Lord of all. For He, as soon as He conceives something in His mind, immediately brings forth whatever He wills; and as soon as He wills, He conceives in His mind what He wills:

^A for being entirely thought, entirely will, entirely mind, entirely eye, entirely hearing, entirely the fountain of all goods, He is contained by no passion. For He is God, and not solicitous, nor anxious like that Bythus, or Jupiter, concerning whom Ptolemy imitated what Homer wrote about Bythus. ^B But for a more thorough refutation of the deceiver, I shall proceed to append, in the order of nature, the things written by Ptolemy himself to a certain woman, Flora—things that are seductive and poisonous—so that no one might think that we refute the deceiver from hearsay alone, without having first encountered the teaching corrupted by him. For in addition to the things already mentioned, he is not ashamed to blaspheme the law of God given through Moses. And these are those things:

Ptolemy’s Epistle to Flora.

III. That the law established through Moses, my sister Flora, is not understood by very many, neither knowing its foundation nor its commands, I think you will easily understand if you learn how various are the opinions held concerning it. For some say it was ordained by God the Father; others, ^C taking the opposite path, maintain that it was enacted by the opposing, corruption-dealing devil, to whom they also ascribe the creation of the world, calling him Father and Creator. But those who have shared such dogmas with one another have greatly hallucinated and have strayed from the purpose of truth which they had proposed to themselves. For it does not appear to have been established by the perfect God and Father, inasmuch as it is less than perfect and in need of being fulfilled by its own—containing commands ^D alien to the nature and will of such a God. Nor, on the other hand, is the law to be ascribed to the injustice of the adversary, whose nature it is to do iniquity; and those who conclude this in no way notice the things spoken by the Savior. For our Savior declared that a house or a city divided against itself cannot stand. Furthermore, he asserts that the creation of the world is his own, and that all things were made through him and without him nothing was made; by which words the Apostle refutes the unsound wisdom of the most mendacious men, and grants authority over those things not to some poisonous god, but to a just one, who is an enemy of all iniquity. But those are the judgments of reckless men, who do not understand the causes of the Creator's providence, and who seem to be blinded not only in the eyes of their mind but also in those of their body. How greatly, therefore, they depart from the truth, you may abundantly understand from what has been said. But both of them have fallen into this specifically...

^A because they did not know the Father of all, while others did not equally know the parent of the universe, whom He alone, upon coming, who alone knew Him, revealed. It remains for us, having been deemed worthy of both of these as well as having been deemed worthy to reveal to you and to clarify the law itself, what sort of thing it might be, and the lawgiver by whom it has been established, presenting to you the proofs from the words of our Savior, by which alone it is possible to be guided unerringly to the realization of the things that exist.

IV. First, therefore, it must be learned that that entire law, which is contained in the five volumes of Moses, has not proceeded from one single lawgiver—that is to say, not by God alone—but there are some commands among them that were established also by men, and the words of the Savior teach us that this law is divided into three parts. ^B For it is divided into God himself and His legislation; it is also divided into Moses—not that God legislates through him *of Himself*, but that Moses, initiating from his own understanding, also legislated certain things; and it is divided into the elders of the people, who are found to be the first to have inserted certain private commands. How this is so is shown by the words of the Savior, as you may now learn. For the Savior, conversing in a certain place with those who were disputing with Him about the bill of divorcement—which the law had permitted [that a bill of divorcement was allowed]—he said to them that “Moses permitted you to put away your wives because of the hardness of your hearts (98). But from the beginning it was not so. For God,” He says, “joined this union; and what God has joined, let not man separate.” ^C Here, he shows that one law is of God, which forbids a wife to be separated from her husband, and another is of Moses, which, because of the hardness of heart, permits this couple to be separated. And indeed, in this respect, Moses legislates in opposition to God. For it is contrary to [God’s law] not to separate. If, however, we should examine the mind of Moses—in what regard he legislated this—it will be found that he did not do this according to his own preference, but out of necessity, to provide for the weakness of those for whom he was legislating. For because they were unable to keep that judgment of God—in that it was not permitted for them to cast away their wives, with whom they lived unpleasantly, and were in danger of falling from this [situation] further into injustice, and from this into perdition—Moses, desiring to cut off this unpleasantness ^D of theirs, through which they were in danger of perishing, legislated for them on his own authority a second law of divorce, as a lesser evil substituted for a greater one on account of the circumstance; so that, if they were unable to keep the former [law], they might at least keep this one, and not turn aside into injustices and wickedness, through which destruction [comes] to them.

^A This was his judgment, by which he is seen to establish a law contrary to God. Moreover, that another law is shown here to have existed, apart from the law of God, is beyond all controversy, even if we have already demonstrated it through one example. And that there are also certain traditions of the elders interwoven in the law, our Savior Himself also indicates. For God, He says, said: *Honor your father and your mother, that it may be well with you.* But you, He says, addressing the elders, have said: *A gift to God ^B is whatever you might have profited from me*; and you have invalidated the law of God because of the tradition of your elders. Isaiah proclaimed this, saying: *This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. And in vain do they worship me, teaching teachings, the commandments of men.* It is manifest, therefore, from these things that that whole law is shown to be divided into three parts. For we have found in it legislation from Moses himself, from the elders, and from God Himself. This, then, is the division of that whole law, which, being divided for us in this way, has revealed its truth. ^C

V. And again, the one part, the law of God itself, is divided into three things: into the pure legislation, unmixed with evil, which is also properly called law, which the Savior did not come to abolish, but to fulfill—for it was not alien to Him what He fulfilled, for it did not have the perfect—and into that which is interwoven with the worse, and with injustice, which the Savior abolished, being inconsistent with His own nature. It is divided also into the typical, and symbolical, which was legislated according to the image of the things that differ according to the image, which the Savior transferred from the ^D sensible and visible to the spiritual and invisible. And there is the law of God, pure and unmixed with

the image of the spiritual and, especially, having profited

^A Now, that pure and sincere Law of God, which is not joined with an inferior one, is the Decalogue itself, those ten commandments distinguished into two tables, by which either things to be avoided are prohibited, or things to be done are commanded. Although they are pure and clear, yet because they are not yet perfect, they had to be fulfilled by the Savior. To that class, then, which contains some element of injustice, must be referred those laws by which the pursuit of injuries and retribution upon those who may have harmed us first is prescribed. Just as when it commands that an eye be given for an eye, a tooth be pulled for a tooth, and that murder be compensated by murder. For he who perpetrates this after another acts no less unjustly, since it is a matter of order alone, yet he commits the very same crime. But that commandment was and still is, in another sense, just, because of the infirmity of those to whom it was given, since it was prescribed against the violation of a more sincere law, although it is alien to the nature and goodness of the Father of all: or rather, it is perhaps consistent, but was expressed by a certain necessity. For he who forbids even a single homicide when he decrees, "Thou shalt not kill," but afterwards commands the author to be killed in turn, and in enacting a second law commands a double murder—the one who had prohibited just one—is seen to have acted out of necessity and unwisely. And therefore the Son, sent by Him, abolished that part of the law, which He Himself confessed was given by God; which is ascribed to the ancient heresy as well as in other matters, and in those things which God decreed in these words: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."

^C To that class, indeed, which is called typical or prefigured, pertains everything that contains images of spiritual and excellent things; of this kind are the ceremonies of offering sacrifices, circumcision, the Sabbath, fasting, the Pasch, unleavened bread, and other such things prescribed by the law. For all these things, being images and symbols, were transferred once the truth was revealed; according to the outward and bodily appearance they were abolished, but according to the spiritual meaning they were taken up, the names remaining the same, but the reality of the things having undergone a change. For the Savior instructed us to offer sacrifices; but not those of irrational animals or those kinds of incense, but rather through spiritual praises and hymns, and thanksgiving, and through sharing among our neighbors and acts of kindness. He also wishes us to be circumcised, but not in the foreskin of the body, but in the foreskin of the heart and mind. And likewise to keep the Sabbath; for He wishes us to rest from evil works. Furthermore, when He commands us to fast, He does not determine that bodily starvation, but the temperance of the soul, so that we may abstain from all wicked things. Although that kind of fasting is also employed in our exercises, insofar as it contributes something to the profit of the soul, if you perform it with reason; not through a desire to imitate anyone, nor through custom,

^A nor for the sake of the day, as if this were a chosen day. But it is at once also a remembrance of the true fast, so that those who are not yet able to fast that fast may, by being reminded by the exterior fast, have a memory of it. And the same applies to the Pascha and the unleavened bread, that they were symbols, as Paul the Apostle also declares: *Our Pascha*, he says, *Christ has been sacrificed*; and, *That you may be*, he says, *unleavened, not partaking of leaven* (and he calls malice leaven now), *but may be a new lump*.

VI. This law of God, then, which is acknowledged by all to have come from God, is divided into three parts: that which was fulfilled by the Savior—for, *You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not swear falsely* are all contained in *Do not even grow angry, and do not covet*—and it is divided also into that which was totally abolished. For, *An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth*, which is intertwined with injustice and carries the very work of injustice within it, was destroyed by the Savior by means of opposites. For opposites are destructive of one another. *For I say to you*, he says, *not to resist evil at all, but if anyone strikes you on the cheek, turn to him the other also.* There is also an allegory regarding what was transferred and changed from the bodily to the spiritual, this symbolic [law] which was ordained according to the image of things that differ. For images and symbols, being representations of other things, were well and good as long as the truth was not present. But when the truth is present, one must do the things of the truth, not the things of the image. This both his disciples and the Apostle Paul ^B showed: the one concerning images, as we have already said, having shown it for our sake through the Pascha and the unleavened bread; and [the one concerning] the law intertwined with injustice, having said that *the law of commandments in dogmas has been abolished*; and [the one concerning] that which is free from the worse elements, having said, *The law, indeed, is holy, and the commandment is holy, and just, and good.*

VII. Therefore, as far as it is possible to speak briefly, I think it has been sufficiently shown to you both the legislation that crept in from men, and the law of God itself being divided in a threefold way; but it remains for us to say who exactly this God is who gave the law. But I think this too has been shown to you in the aforementioned things, if you have listened attentively. For if this law was not established by that perfect God, as we have instructed, nor yet by the devil—nor is it permissible to say so—it must be that someone else other than these is the one who established the law. This being is the creator and maker of this whole world and of the things in it, being distinct from their natures, and standing in the midst of them rightfully, and he might well take the name of "the middle." And if the perfect God is good by his own nature, as he indeed is (for one alone is good… ^C

^A whom he himself has revealed); but there is also a nature contrary to him, evil and wicked, characterized by injustice. Now, standing in the middle of these, and being neither good nor evil, nor unjust, he might in a peculiar sense be called just, being the arbiter of the justice that belongs to him. And this God must indeed be inferior to the perfect God, and less than his justice, inasmuch as he is a generated being, and therefore not unbegotten (for the Father alone is unbegotten, from whom all things are uniquely, as all things are suspended from him); yet he is greater and more sovereign than the adversary, and has obtained an essence and nature different from the essence of either of these two. For the essence of the adversary is corruption and darkness; for he is material and manifold. But the essence of the Father of all, the unbegotten, is incorruption and light itself, existing by itself, simple and uniform. And the essence of these produced in a way a twofold power; but he himself is an image of the better. And let not this now trouble you, desiring to learn how, from one Principle of all things, which is acknowledged and believed by us to be the unbegotten, and incorruptible, and good [God], these natures—both that of corruption and that of the middle—have come to exist, being of a different substance, when the nature of the Good has it to beget and bring forth things like to itself and of like substance. For you shall learn, God granting, in what follows, both the beginning of this and its generation, becoming worthy of the apostolic tradition which we also have received by succession, together with [the duty] to test all words by the teaching of the Savior. These things, sister Flora, I have spoken to you in few words, and I have written them in summary form; yet so as to have explained sufficiently what was proposed. A matter which I trust will hereafter be of great use to you: if only, like a good and fertile field, you compensate for the seeds received with a wealth of fruit. ^B Here ends Ptolemy’s letter to Flora.

VIII

and entangled themselves in interminable genealogies, while they do not know even the things that are at hand, but profess to define heavenly things by certain measures, and claim knowledge of certain obstetric wombs, as if they were heavenly wombs, an entirely fabricated matter, as though they were possessing true and substantial knowledge. Whoever hears such things from them, if he be somewhat foolish, thinking that he has learned some sublime thing from them, will easily be led away by the ^A blandishments of their lies: For every bird is gathered according to its kind, and every man shall be joined to his like, says the Scripture. But if anyone who is somewhat more intelligent and endowed with correct judgment should encounter them, he will consider those trifles worthy of derision, and from those very things which they argue he will see how they may be refuted. For they are convicted of being armed against themselves by their own most vain lies.

For I wish you to answer me, O all you Ptolemæi and Ptolemææ! Whence come to you the measures of the Depth, and the obstetrications of births, and the knowledge of formative hypotheses? For you show us the knowledge of these things as if you had been present, and had beheld the natures of heavenly things, and as if you yourselves had preceded that Depth of yours which is called such—yet no one of the prophets has ever said this: not Moses himself, nor anyone before or after Moses, nor any of the evangelists, nor finally anyone of the apostles. Unless, perhaps, you might take refuge in the poems of the pagans, such as those of Orpheus, Hesiod, and Stesichorus, ^B among whom the generations of men were transferred into the appellations of gods, and things that were done among mortals were staged in a poetic manner. For those men also thought in this way, deifying those around Jupiter, and Rhea, and Juno, and Athena, and Apollo, and Venus, and by honoring the wicked offspring of these, they cast the world into the fantasy of polytheism and idolatry. But there will no longer be any great need for me for your refutation and confusion, O Ptolemæus, and that of yours, since your ancestors have already sufficiently received their refutation. For since, through the things already said, how shameful those dogmas of yours are has been declared, having first implored the help of the Divine, so that He might succor my insignificance, I shall betake myself to discussing the errors of others, so that I may expose and triumph over ^C the pestilential opinions that have been invented in every nation, requesting from God grace for this purpose, that I may carry out this undertaking and proposed study which I have set for myself, and I shall petition for heavenly favor and grace.

IX. But that we may in the meantime weigh those few words which you wrote to the woman Flora, with great pomposity and arrogance (for, as the Apostle says, weak women burdened with sins are wont to be deceived by such viperous dogmas), I shall set forth your own words here, O Ptolemæus, and constrained by necessity, lest in any ^D way...

the root of your noxious seed remain, I shall proceed in orderly fashion to refute them. ^A For you assert, O man, that the Law is divided into three parts: that it has something from God, something from Moses, and something from the Elders. And that you think it comes from the Elders, though you have not a written proof to show, this is clear. For the traditions of the Elders are nowhere recorded in the Law. But, being ignorant of both the Books and the truth, you proceed by means of calumny, not knowing the coherence of a precise understanding of each matter. For the traditions of the Elders are called "Deuteroseis" (Secondary Laws) among the Jews. And there are four such types (6): one that is circulated under the name of Moses; a second that they attribute to the one called Rabbi Akiba; a third to Adda, that is, Judas; and a fourth to the sons of the Asamonæans. Since where, O contentious and unsteady-minded man, can you prove in the five books of the Pentateuch and the legislation of God that the saying was spoken which was pronounced by the Savior: *Whosoever shall say to his father, Corban, which is a gift, he shall be nothing profited out of it?* But you have no evidence to show. Therefore, your argument falls, as the saying is found nowhere in the Pentateuch, and you have disillusioned Flora, whom you have deceived, to no avail. ^B But the things ordained by Moses were not foreign to God, but were ordained by God through Moses, and this is demonstrated by the judgment of the Savior himself. Indeed, the very testimonies you cite, you have brought forward against yourself. For the Lord says in the Gospel that Moses wrote *for the hardness of your hearts.*

Now, what Moses wrote, he did not write apart from the will of God, but he ordained it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit. For immediately the Savior, in the same Gospel, says: *What God has joined, let not man separate.* And the way in which he joined them, he sets forth the word so that we might understand, saying: *For this cause shall a man leave his father, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.* ^C Then he goes on to say: *What therefore God has joined, let not man separate.* Yet nowhere is it read that the Lord uttered this when he fashioned Adam and Eve; but only this: *Let us make him a helper like unto him.* But this was said by Adam, who, when he awoke from sleep, said: *This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of the man.* He then continues: *For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.* Since, therefore, it was not God who said this, but Adam, and yet the Lord in the Gospel attests that these are the very words of God, the matter itself sufficiently declares that these words of Adam... ^D

were spoken by the will of God. Thus also did Moses legislate, when God declared the legislation to him. And these two claims of yours have already fallen, and not from far off, but from the very usage of the words. And that the legislation is of God, this is clear. For God legislates everywhere, partly for the times, partly for types, and partly for the revelation of future good things, the fulfillment of which our Lord Jesus Christ, when he came, showed in the Gospel.

^B X. I come now to that other threefold distinction of gods invented by you, concerning which I shall prove by the same reasoning that it has been slandered by you, and that you have done what is the work of a rogue and a swindler. For who is this third god among us, compounded of two likenesses, who is neither the other of the two, nor tainted with malice and injustice, as you say, nor endowed with goodness and a luminous nature, but is a just god of some middle order? And, indeed, you are deservedly remote from all justice, and do not know what it is, since you separate this very thing from goodness. You, most wicked of men and greatest enemy of truth, are convicted of manifest error! For what we call "just" does not arise from anywhere other than from goodness; and no one can be just unless he is also good. Therefore the Lord, commending the law of Moses by his own proclamation, said: "You garnish the sepulchres of the prophets, and build the monuments of the just, and your fathers killed them." Whence, therefore, were the prophets and just men, if not from the Parent of goodness? And in order to show that the just exists as a part of goodness, he said: "Be like your Father who is in heaven, who makes his sun to rise on the good and the evil, and rains on the just and the unjust": so that he might show the just to be good, and the good to be just, and the wicked to be unjust, and the unjust to be wicked.

For the claim that you make, that the law is tangled and perplexed, you are unable to prove. For you were caught slandering the law, attributing to it a certain perplexity because the law says: "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth," and because the law executes the murderer. But it shall be shown from the very dealings of our Lord Jesus Christ that there was no perplexity, but that it was the same legislation and acts toward the same end as the command spoken by the Savior: "If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." And the law of old was contrived for this very thing, saying: "An eye for an eye," that is, "turn to him your cheek." For so that he might escape what he would suffer if he struck back, he offered his cheek to the striker, knowing that if he should gouge out an eye, he would suffer the same things through the law.

XI. And just as the Father desires to instruct his children, so do...

^A both things appear absurd: therefore, souls are not being created now. For that saying: My Father is still working, is understood to refer not to creation, but to providence, which even Eunomius himself seems to think. But Apollinarius thinks that souls are begotten from souls, just as bodies are from bodies. For he imagines the soul to proceed in such a way that, like the propagation of bodies, the soul is likewise propagated from the first man into all who are generated from him. He thinks that souls were neither stored up and created [previously], nor are they being generated now; for those who say this, he judges to make God a collaborator in adultery, because children are born from these acts. And that statement is also proven a lie: God rested from all his works which he began to do, if indeed he is still creating souls even now. But if everything that is generated through propagation by mutual generation is demonstrated to be mortal (for it procreates and is procreated for this reason, that the race of perishable things might remain), it is necessary either to say that this also is a mortal soul, since it comes into being by mutual generation, or that souls are not generated by such propagation. As for those who are born from adultery, let us leave them to the reason of providence, which is unknown to us. ^B Yet, if anything is to be conjectured about providence, it surely knows that which is being generated, whether it is to be useful for the life of man or for Himself, and therefore he permits the soul to enter the body. Of this we may seize as a sufficiently great proof Solomon, who was born from the wife of Uriah and David. ^C

^A you have brought upon us, or rather upon yourself and those deceived by you!

XII. I believe that even in this present matter, enough has been said against your arguments, O charlatan. Having made the refutation, I shall proceed to the subsequent heresies, customarily invoking the same God to assist our mediocrity, in order to unmask the refutation of each fabricated heresy. For the fact that, having come up from the sea like a shark [(8)] and summoning Hera as a viper by means of his writings, he deceived both her and others with her, has been demonstrated in what has been said; but in the net of truth, of which the Lord in the Gospel declared the kingdom of heaven to be an allegory, we have entangled him, and having proven him to be one of the wicked fish, by unmasking his base words, we have beseeched Him through the teaching of the true faith. Relying, therefore, on the power of God, having vanquished this man, let us ourselves give thanks to God, and in the same way, as I said before, let us prepare to proceed to the next ones. ^B

CONTENTS OF THE THIRD VOLUME OF THE FIRST BOOK,

In which there are thirteen heresies.

LIST OF HERESIES CONTAINED IN VOLUME III OF BOOK I,

WHICH ARE THIRTEEN IN NUMBER.

Marcosians. A certain Marcus has appeared, the fellow student of Colorbasus, who also himself introduces two principles. He denies the resurrection of the dead. By means of certain illusions ^C produced through incantations, he would change the contents of cups into a blue or purple color, and initiate the women who had been deceived into the mysteries. He also wishes for all things to be governed by the twenty-four elements, just like Valentinus.

Colorbasians. And this Colorbasus, while likewise relating the same things, yet differing in some measure from the other heresies—I mean those regarding Marcus and Valentinus—taught the emanations and the Ogdoads in a different way.

Heracleonites. They too are carried along by the mythology of the Ogdoads, yet in a way different ^D from Marcus, Ptolemy, Valentinus, and the others. And furthermore, at the end, those among them who are dying

^A are redeemed in like manner to Marcus with oil, opobalsam, and water, whispering certain Hebrew invocations over the head of the one who is supposedly being redeemed.

Ophites. The Ophites are those who worship and preach the serpent, and claim that he is Christ; and for that reason, they actually keep a serpent in a chest.

Cainites. The Cainites, in the same way, reject the Law and the one who spoke in the Law, and deny the resurrection of the flesh, but commend Cain, asserting that he was of a certain superior power. And they also deify Judas, and at the same time those around Core, Dathan, and Abiron, as well as the Sodomites.

Sethiani. ^B These again glorify Seth, claiming he was begotten by the supreme Mother, who repented that she had produced Cain. After he was cast out, and Abel was killed, she had intercourse with the supreme Father and brought forth a pure offspring, namely Seth; from whom the whole race of men has flowed. Finally, they postulate principles, powers, and all the rest, just as the others do.

Archontici. These, in turn, refer everything to many rulers (archons), and define whatever has happened as having arisen from them. They also engage in a certain most foul sort of lust. They reject the resurrection of the flesh and calumniously spurn the Old Testament. Although, even so, they occasionally use both the Old and New Testaments, cunningly adapting individual phrases to their own view.

Cerdonians. ^C These originated from Cerdon, who built upon the error he had imbibed from Heraclius with new inventions. And when he had set out from Syria to Rome, he disseminated his dogmas in the times of Pope Hyginus. Furthermore, he affirms two principles opposed to each other. He denies that Christ was born. Likewise, he rejects the resurrection of the dead along with the Old Testament.

Marcionites. Marcion, originating from Pontus, was the son of a bishop; but because he had defiled a virgin, he was cast out of the Church by his own father and fled to Rome. Where, when he had sought penitence in vain from those who were presiding over the Church at that time, ^D he began to attack the catholic faith. For this reason, he said there were three principles: the good, the just, and the evil. He taught that the New Testament was foreign to the Old and to its author. He abolished the resurrection of the flesh. He grants not only one baptism, but even three after a fall. Others among them receive baptism on behalf of their deceased catechumens. He permits women, without any discrimination, to confer baptism, supposedly.

Lucianists. Lucian, an ancient figure—not that other one who flourished in the time of the Emperor Constantine—adhered in all things to the footsteps of Marcion. Although he strove to teach something more abundantly by adding certain things.

^A Apellians. This Apelles also, in similar fashion to Marcion and Lucianus, blames all creation and the Creator. Yet he did not introduce three principles as they did, but brought in only one, and likewise one God who is supreme and nameless; and he says that this one God created another. And this one who was begotten, having been found evil, created the world out of his own wickedness. Severians. Severus, in turn, a follower of Apelles, utterly condemns wine and the vine, imagining them to have sprung from the union of the dragon-like Satan and the Earth. He also rejects the female sex, saying that it belongs to a sinister power. He introduces certain names of rulers and some apocryphal books. In rejecting the resurrection of the flesh and the Old Testament, he agrees with the other heresies. Tatianists. He flourished in the time of the holy martyr and philosopher Justin. After the death of the martyr Justin, who was also a philosopher, he was tainted by the contagion of Marcion’s dogmas; having become his disciple, he held the same doctrines as him, adding other things beyond what he taught. It was said that he originated from Mesopotamia.

BOOK I VOLUME III.

CONTRA MARCOSIOS, Haer. XIV, sive XXXIV.

^C I. There was a certain Marcus, from whom the Marcosians take their name, having originated from them and having dared things beyond them, he vomited poisonous venom into the world. For he succeeds those around Secundus, and Epiphanes, and Ptolemy, and Valentinus, but he was carried away into an even more quackery-filled gathering. For he led away women and men who had been led astray by him, having been thought to be, wretched man, the corrector of the aforementioned impostors, being himself most experienced in the sorcery of dice. But having deceived all the aforementioned persons, and persuaded them to pay attention to him as one most knowledgeable, and as one possessing the greatest power from the invisible and nameless regions, he is shown to be truly a forerunner of the Antichrist. For by mixing the tricks of Anaxilaus with the craftiness of those called magicians, he cast those who saw him and believed him into astonishment through the phantasms and magic he performed by these means; and those who are under him still perform this to this day. And those who look upon these things out of curiosity think that they are powers.

^A For they themselves, having lost their minds and lacking the knowledge to discern, do not see that the fabrication of the trickery of his is, so to speak, accomplished by magic. For they have become utterly thunderstruck, having been led astray by some evil suspicion. For they say that three vessels of white glass are prepared among them, filled with white wine; and in the incantation performed by him, which is thought to be the Eucharist, it is immediately transformed, so that one appears red like blood, another purple, and another azure.

^B I, therefore, that I may not seem to do double work, have thought it sufficient to use the arguments compiled by the most blessed and holy Irenaeus against this Marcus himself and those who spring from him; which I have hastened to set forth here word for word. And they are as follows. For the holy Irenaeus says to them, while indicating the things said by them, speaking thus:

From the holy Irenaeus

II. Pretending to give thanks over cups mixed with wine, and extending the formal prayer to a greater length, he causes them to appear purple and red, so that you would think that the grace from the One who is above all things drops His own blood into that cup through his invocation, and that those standing by are eager to taste of that drink, so that the grace which is invoked by this magician might drench them as well. And again, handing the mixed cups to women, he commands them to give thanks in his presence. And when this has been done, he himself, bringing forward another cup much larger than that from which the deluded woman has given thanks, and pouring from the smaller one, which has been blessed by the woman, into the one prepared by himself, he says at the same time: "May the grace which is above all things, the inconceivable and ineffable, fill your inner man and increase within you the knowledge of it, planting the grain of mustard seed into the good earth." And after saying such things, and having driven the wretched woman into a frenzy, he proves himself a master of legerdemain. For suddenly the larger cup, into which the smaller one was poured, is so filled that the liquid overflows from it. Doing these and many like things, he mocked many and led them away with him. It is credible that a demon is present with him ^C to perform these things in his hands and those of his followers. For they themselves, having lost their minds and lacking the knowledge to discern, do not see that the fabrication of his trickery is, so to speak, accomplished by magic. For they have become utterly thunderstruck, having been led astray by some evil suspicion. For they say that three vessels of white glass are prepared among them, filled with white wine; and in the incantation performed by him, which is supposed to be the Eucharist, it is immediately transformed, so that one looks red like blood, another purple, and another azure.

^D [alt-version omitted]

^A He did similar things to deceive many, and led them astray after him. It is likely that he possesses some familiar spirit, through whom he himself seems to prophesy, and causes as many as he considers worthy to participate in his grace to prophesy. For he busies himself especially with women, and among these, those who are elegant, and wearing purple, and very wealthy—whom he often tries to win over by flattering them, saying: "I wish to bestow upon you some of my grace, since the Father of all things constantly beholds your angel before his face. The place for your greatness is within us. We must grow together into one; therefore, first receive the grace from me and through me. Prepare yourself as a bride expecting her bridegroom, so that you may be what I am, and I may be what you are. Let the seed of light be planted in your bridal chamber. Receive the bridegroom from me, and take him in, and be taken into him. Behold, grace has descended upon you; open your mouth, and prophesy." And upon the woman's replying, "I have never prophesied, and I know not how to prophesy," he performs certain invocations and says a second time: "Open your mouth, speak whatever you will, and you will prophesy."

^B The woman, puffed up and rendered senseless by these words, and her soul inflamed by the expectation that she is about to prophesy, with her heart beating more than is customary, she dares to speak nonsense, and to pour out whatever happens to come into her mouth, vainly and recklessly, just as one warmed by an empty spirit. As one better than us has said concerning such people: "It is a bold and shameless soul that is warmed by empty air." From that moment on, the woman considers herself a prophetess and gives thanks to Marcus, who has poured his own grace into her. And she tries to repay him not only by the gift of her possessions—whereby he has indeed amassed a great quantity of money—but also by the communion of her body, wishing to be united with him in every way, so that she might descend with him into the One. ^C Now it has happened occasionally that some of the women, who have the fear of God and were not deceived, whom he likewise tried to compel into error and commanded to prophesy, have instead rejected this very man and loathed him, separating themselves from such a gathering; for they knew well that the power of prophesying does not come to men from Marcus the magician, but to those upon whom God chooses from above to send His grace, and these possess a God-given prophecy and speak when and where God wills, not when Marcus commands. For the one who commands is greater and more authoritative than the one who is commanded. Since the former takes precedence, and the latter is subordinate. If, therefore, Marcus or anyone else commands—as is the custom in banquets for these people to play, and to urge one another to prophesy, and to divine for themselves according to their own desires—the one who commands, being a man, will be greater and more authoritative than the prophetic spirit,

which is impossible. But such spirits, which ^A are summoned by them and speak whenever they themselves wish, are worthless and feeble; although they are bold and shameless, sent by Satan for the deception and destruction of those who do not strictly guard the faith which they received from the beginning through the Church.

III. Regarding the use of love potions and philtres to the insult of their bodies.

Now, that this same Marcus employs love potions and inducements to the defilement of the bodies of certain women—though not all—they themselves, upon returning to the Church of God, have very often confessed: ^B that they were defiled by him, and were captivated by his own love and allurements. Indeed, a certain deacon of ours in Asia, having received him into his house with hospitality, fell into this calamity; his wife, a woman of remarkable beauty, was corrupted in both mind and body by this magician and followed him for a long time. Eventually, through the great labor of the brethren, she was brought back to a better way of life, spending the remainder of her days in repentance, mourning and lamenting bitterly that she had allowed herself to be corrupted and defiled by the magician.

Furthermore, some of his disciples, wandering through various towns, deluded many women using these same arts: they boasted that they themselves were perfect, and that no one could compare with them in the abundance of their knowledge—not even if you were to name Paul or Peter, or any other of the apostles—for they alone understood more than all others, and they alone had imbibed the magnitude of that ineffable power. They claimed that they were raised on high, above every power. Consequently, they acted freely, fearing nothing at all. ^C For, by means of the redemption they had obtained, they believed they could not be apprehended, or even seen, by the Judge. And if by chance he were to lay hands upon them, they would then, with that redemption of theirs, speak to him in this manner: “O assessor of God and of the mystical Silence before the ages, by whose guidance and advocacy those magnitudes that perpetually behold the face of the Father withdraw their countenances toward heaven—those countenances, I say, which that most daring one, having imagined the goodness of the Supreme Parent, produced as our likenesses, when she had conceived the thought of heavenly things as if in a dream—behold, the judge approaches, and the herald commands me to plead my case. You, therefore, as one who thoroughly understands the affairs of both, bring forth before the judge a common plea for the sake of us both.”

Upon hearing these words, the Mother immediately places upon them the Homeric helmet of Hades, so that they might escape ^D the sight of the judge, invisible. And straightway, raising them up, she leads them into the bridal chamber and restores them to their own bridegrooms. By professing such things in word and deed, they have in this our region of the Rhone...

^A misled many women, who, having their conscience seared, some confess openly, while others, feeling ashamed of this, yet silently having despaired of the life of God, some have fallen away entirely, while others fluctuate in between; and, as the proverb has it, they suffer the fate of being neither inside nor outside, bearing this fruit from the seed of the children of knowledge.

IV. Now, this Marcus ^B proclaimed himself to be the sole womb and receptacle of Colorbasus, being, as he said, his only-begotten; and he brought forth the seed of the deficiency which had been deposited in him in roughly this manner. He declared that that most high Tetrad from those invisible and unnameable places had descended to him in female form: because, he said, the world could not bear its masculine aspect; and that, in order to reveal who she was, and the generation of all things, which she had never before revealed to any god or man, she had recounted them to him alone, saying: "When the Father, who is incomprehensible and insubstantial, and is neither male nor female, first began to beget ^C that which was inexplicable in himself, and desired to form that which was invisible, He opened His mouth and brought forth a Word like unto Himself; the Word, standing by, showed Him what He was, appearing as the image of the Invisible One." The pronunciation of the name occurred in this fashion: He spoke the first word of His name, which was the beginning, and this syllable consisted of four elements. He added the second; and this, too, consisted of four elements. Next, he spoke the third; and this, too, consisted of ten elements. And the one after these he spoke; and it, too, consisted of twelve elements. Thus, the pronunciation of the whole name came to be thirty elements, but four syllables. Each of the elements, moreover, has its own letters, and its own character, and its own pronunciation, and its own shapes and images; and no one of them is what it perceives to be the form of the one ^D of which it is an element; nor does it even know it, nor does it grasp the pronunciation of its neighbor, but each pronounces itself, as if each were pronouncing the whole and calling the whole by its name. For each of them, being a part of the whole, calls its own sound the whole, and does not cease to sound until it has reached the final letter of each element, having spoken in one tongue. Then also...

he defines everything as being about to be restored when all the letters, reduced to one, shall resound in one and the same pronunciation. ^B Indeed, he said that an image of this pronunciation exists when we all say *Amen* together. He stated that the sounds by which that Aeon, who is devoid of nature and generation, is formed, are the same as the forms to which the name of angels has been attributed by the Lord, who continually look upon the face of the Father. He named the names of the elements, which it is permitted to speak, both common—Aeons, and words, and roots, and seeds, and pleromata, and fruits. But those which are proper to each one individually, he signified were to be understood as encompassed by the name of the Church. Of these elements, the last letter of the final one uttered its own voice, the sound of which, going forth, produced its own elements in the likeness of the elements; from these, he thought these lower things were ordered, while the higher things were generated. He adds, moreover, the letter whose sound followed below, lifted up from its syllable to fill the universe; but the sound itself, as if cast out, stuck in the lower regions. Furthermore, the element to which that letter belongs descends downward with its pronunciation: and he asserts that it consists of thirty letters, each one of which contains other letters within itself, by which the letter's name is called. And again, these letters are called by other letters, which are in turn named by yet others, so that that multitude of letters proceeds to infinity. Which you might perceive more easily in this way: ^C V. The element Delta contains five letters, namely D, E, L, T, A. And these letters are themselves written by other letters, and these in turn by others. If, therefore, that in which the nature of delta itself consists runs on to infinity, and others are propagated from others and succeed one another; how much greater must the sea of letters of that element itself be? And if one single letter is so infinite, see how immense and deep the heap of the whole name is; from which the Pro-Father of Marcus’s *Sige* (Silence) taught that it consists. Therefore, since the Parent himself knew that he could not be comprehended, he attributed this to the elements, which he also calls Aeons, so that each one might utter its own pronunciation with a great cry, because one alone could not utter the whole. When the Tetrad had declared all these things to him, she added: "I wish also to show you Truth herself, whom I have brought from heavenly dwellings, so that you may look upon her naked, and recognize her beauty, nay rather, even hear her speaking, and be stunned at her prudence. Therefore, look at her head above, the Alpha and the Omega, but her neck, B and T, ^D and her shoulders and hands...

^A Γ and X, her breasts Δ and Φ, her midriff E and Y, her back Z and T, her belly H and Σ, her thighs Θ and P, her knees I and II, her shins K and O, her ankles A and Ξ, her feet M and N. Such is the body of Truth according to that magician. This is the figure of the element, this is the character of the letter. And he calls this element "Man"; he says it is the source of all speech, the beginning of every voice, the utterance of all that is ineffable, and a certain mouth of the hushed Silence; and this is her body. But you, lifting the thought of your mind on high, hear from the mouth of Truth of the same generator and bestower of the Father, namely the Word.

VI. When she had said these things, ^B Truth, looking upon him and opening her mouth, utters the Word; and this name then came to be—the name we know and speak—Christ Jesus. When she had named him, she suddenly fell silent. But while Marcus was waiting for her to say more, the Tetractys, advancing again into the midst, says: "How small a thing you consider the word to be, which you heard from the mouth of Truth! It is not that which you know, nor should you think you possess an ancient name. For you perceive only its sound, but you are ignorant of its power. For Jesus is indeed an excellent name, comprised of six letters, understood by all those of the calling; but that which exists among the Aeons of the Pleroma is manifold, and is of another form and a different type, known by those kinsmen of his, whose magnitudes are eternally with him. ^C Therefore, know that your twenty-four letters are certain derivations and images of the three Powers, which contain the whole number of the upper elements. For you must think that the nine mute letters belong to the Father and Truth, because they are mute, that is, they cannot be uttered or pronounced. The eight semivowels are to be attributed to the Word and Life, because they are of a certain middle kind, existing between the mutes and the vowels, and they receive both the emanation from above and the relation of the lower things to themselves. The seven vowels, then, the Man and the Church claim for themselves, since the voice proceeding from Man fashioned all things. For the sound of the voice bestowed upon them their form."

Therefore, eight belong to the Word and Life, ^D seven to the Man and the Church, and nine to the Father and Truth. And since the ratio was not sufficiently clear, he who had been established in the Father descended, having been sent to him from whom he had been separated, for the sake of setting in order the things that had been done, so that the unity of the Pleromas might have equality.

and might, as it were, emit fruit from all things; then truly he who had the seven ^A possessed the power of the eight; and the three places themselves became similar, being Ogdoads, which, having come together in three, revealed the number of twenty-four. Yet he leaves aside the three elements from the three existing in syzygy of powers, which are six; from which flowed the twenty-four elements, quadrupled by the ratio of the ineffable Tetrad, which makes the same number for them, which he says belongs to the Unnamable. And these are carried by the three powers, unto the likeness of the invisible, of which elements the double letters among us are images ^B, which being numbered with the twenty-four elements, according to the analogy of the thirty, produce the number.

VII. The fruit of this reasoning and dispensation, he says, has come to exist in the likeness of an image: he who after six days ascended the mountain as the fourth, and became the sixth ^C, and was gripped, and descended in the week ^D; he is the illustrious Ogdoad, and comprehends in himself the entire number of the elements: this, when he had come for the sake of baptism, the descent of the dove pointed out, which is Ω and Α. For the number of it is eight hundred and one. And for this reason, he says, Moses wrote that man was created on the sixth day: and also that the dispensation on the sixth day, which is Parasceve, revealed the last man for the regeneration of the first man; the beginning and end of which dispensation was the sixth hour, in which he was nailed to the wood. For the perfect Mind, knowing that the power of effectuating and regenerating subsisted in the number six, revealed to the sons of light the regeneration that came to be through him by the "Insig- [the episemon]" that appeared through him. From this, he says, the double letters possess the episemon number. For the episemon number, combined with the twenty-four elements, completed the thirty-lettered name. He uses the magnitude of the seven numbers as a deacon, as the Silence of Marcus says, so that the fruit of his self-willed counsel might be revealed.

However, understand this episemon number for the present, he says, formed from the episemon, which is as if divided and bipartite, and remains outside; which by its own virtue and prudence, and proper efficiency, animated this world to the imitation of the virtue of the seven, comprehended by seven virtues; and constituted the soul of all that is visible. He himself, therefore, uses this work, as if it were done of its own accord by him. But other things, since there are certain imitations of the non-imitables...

serve the Thought ^A of the Mother. And so the first heaven utters A; the second E; the third H; the fourth and middle one of the seven brings forth the power of the vowel I; the fifth O; the sixth Y; the seventh and fourth from the beginning proclaims the element Ω, as Marcian Sige asserts, who, mouthing great trifles, speaks nothing true. These Virtues, moreover, all sounding together in concert, he says, proclaim him by whom they were produced. The sound of this praise is brought first to the Forefather: and the same sound, having been carried down to earth, is made the fashioner and creator of all things that are in the earth. He endeavors to demonstrate this from infants recently born, who, as soon as they have come forth from the womb, express with their wailing the sound of each one of these elements. Just as, therefore, he says, the seven Virtues praise the Word, so too the soul in infants, weeping and mourning for Marcus, praises him. For this reason also David has said: Out of the mouth of infants and sucklings you have perfected praise; and again: The heavens declare the glory of God. And for this reason, ^B when the soul is in labors and tribulations, so that it may be in some way purer, it utters the letter Ω, which is an indication of praise, so that the heavenly soul, recognizing what is akin to it, may send down a helper to itself.

VIII. But concerning the whole name which is composed of thirty letters, and the Depth which in turn takes an increase from these letters, and also the body of Truth, consisting of twelve members, each of which is composed of two letters; and concerning the voice of this same Truth, which he has most ineloquently set forth; and then concerning the resolution of the unuttered name; and concerning the soul of the world and of man, in how far they correspond to the administration of providence expressed in his likeness; about this he has trifled much. How indeed the Tetractys showed him a Virtue equal in number to the names, we shall explain hereafter, so that nothing of those things which have come down to us from what he said should ^C hide from you, beloved, just as you have often asked of us.

In this way, therefore, the all-wise Sige declares to him the generation of the twenty-four elements, existing with the unity in the monad. From which came two projections, as has been said before, the monad and the one being twice two, which became four. For twice two make four. And again the two and the four, joined together, manifested the number of the six. And these six, multiplied four times, brought forth the twenty-four forms. And the names of the first Tetrad, which are understood as holy of holies and cannot be spoken, are known to the Son alone; the Father knows what they are; but those which are august and are named with faith by him are these: Arrhetus and Sige, Father and Truth. ^D

^A The entire number of this Tetrad collects twenty-four elements. For Arrhetus contains within itself seven letters; Sige five, and Father five, and Truth seven, which, when added together—twice five and twice seven—completes the number of twenty-four. Likewise also the second Tetrad, Logus and Zoe, Anthropos and Ecclesia, display the same number of elements. And the expressible name of the Savior (which it is lawful to utter) is of six letters. But that which cannot be pronounced has twenty-four letters. Thus, Christ the Son has seven letters: but that which is ineffable in Christ has thirty letters. And for this reason he calls himself A and Ω, that he might signify the dove; for this number belongs to this bird.

^B IX. As regards Jesus, he says that he was allotted this generation, which cannot be explained in words. For from the Mother of all, that first Tetrad, the second Tetrad sprang like a daughter, and an Ogdoad was formed, from which the Decad proceeded; thus the Decad and the Ogdoad came to be. Now the Decad, having joined itself to the Ogdoad and having multiplied it by ten, advanced it to the number eighty. And having again multiplied the eighty by ten, it generated the number eight hundred. Thus the total number of the letters, having proceeded from the Ogdoad to the Decad, is H and Π and Ω, which is eighteen. For the name of Jesus is equal in the number that the letters yield, namely eight hundred and eighty-eight; and they think that it clearly contains in heaven the birth of the more sublime Jesus. Hence they say that in the alphabet of the Greeks there are found eight monads, ^C eight decades, and eight hecatontads, so that it yields the number eight hundred and eighty-eight—that is to say, I, H, and I—the number constituted of all the numbers; and that it is called by the letters Alpha and Omega, signifying the generation from all. And again in this way: by the progression of the number into the first Tetrad, the number of ten appeared as it was added to it. For one, and two, and three, and four, added together, result in ten; and this they believe to be Jesus. But also Christ, he says, being composed of eight letters, demonstrates the first Ogdoad,

Eight monads, four decades upon these, And eight hecatontads, to incredulous men It shall show the mark.

[index: entries preserved]

^A which, being joined with ten, produced Jesus. It is said also, they say, and Son Christ, that is to say, the dodecad. For the name 'Son' consists of four letters; but 'Christ' of eight, which, being added together, have demonstrated the magnitude of the dodecad. Before, therefore, he says, this name appeared, that is, Jesus, to the sons of men, they existed in great ignorance and error; but when the six-lettered name was revealed, which clothed itself in flesh, that it might descend to the perception of man, having in itself those six and twenty-four [letters], then, knowing him, they ceased from ignorance. And from death they ascended to life, the name having become for them a way to the Father of Truth. For the Father of the Universe willed to dissolve ignorance and abolish death. And the dissolution of ignorance became the knowledge of Him. And for this reason, the man who was fashioned according to his will, according to the image of the power above, was chosen.

^B X. For the Aeons proceeded from the Tetrad. In which Tetrad were considered Man and Church, Word and Life. From these, therefore, he says, certain powers, flowing forth, brought into existence the Jesus who appeared on earth. And they assert that in the place of the Word, the angel Gabriel was substituted; for Life, the Holy Spirit; for the power of Man, that of the Son; and the place of the Church, the Virgin demonstrated. Thus, the man according to the economy ^C is fashioned through Mary by him, whom the Father of all chose, as he passed through the womb, through the Word, for the knowledge of him. And when he had come to the water, they narrate that there descended upon him, in the form of a dove, that very one who had ascended on high, and who completed the twelfth number; in whom exists the seed of those who were sown along with him, and who descended together, and ascended together. And this power which descended, he says, is the seed of the Father, having within itself both the Father and the Son, and that nameless power of Silence ^D which is known through these, and all the Aeons. And this is the Spirit which spoke through Jesus, which confessed itself the Son of Man, and revealed the Father, having descended into Jesus, and been united to him. And he abolished death, he says, the Savior from the economy, and made the Father known as Christ. He says, therefore, that Jesus is the name of the man from the economy, but that it was placed for the likeness and formation of the Man who was to descend into him, who received him. And he had received him, both the man himself, and the Word, and the Father, and the Ineffable, and the Silence, and Truth.

and the Church, and Life. [XI]. These fables of theirs are all of such a nature that no "alas! alas!" nor any tragic voice or lamentation whatsoever could suffice to deplore them. For who would not hate the miserable contriver of such lies, when he sees Truth herself deformed by Marcus into a hollow phantom—and what is graver, branded like a slave with the letters of the alphabet—striving to peddle her as if she had existed long ago, though it all happened but a short time since, only yesterday or the day before, as they say? The Greeks, for their part, record that they first received sixteen letters from Cadmus; then, as time progressed, one might find that they themselves discovered, at one time the aspirates, at another the double letters. Finally, they say that Palamedes added the long letters to these. Before these were handed down to the Greeks, therefore, Truth could nowhere have existed. For her body, Marcus, since it is, as you say, later than Cadmus and those who preceded him, and later than the others who discovered the remaining elements, and even later than you yourself. You are the only one who has dragged her, whom you call Truth, into I know not what phantom. But whom do you think can endure your Silence, so talkative to that degree, which names Him who cannot be named, explains the inexplicable, and investigates Him who can be traced by no footsteps? And what of your saying that He opened His mouth—He whom you preach to be devoid of both body and form—and brought forth the Word, as if it were some composite living creature? And that you taught this same Word to be like the Parent from whom it was produced, and an image of the invisible, consisting of thirty elements and four syllables? Therefore, that Parent of all things, just as the Word, as you assert, will consist of thirty elements and four syllables.

^B Who, indeed, could patiently endure that you should reduce and constrain the Creator of all things, the Artificer and Maker, the Word of God, into figures and numbers—sometimes thirty, sometimes twenty-four, at other times only six—while you chop Him up into four syllables and thirty elements? You who include the Lord of all, by whom those celestial orbs were founded, into the number 888, as if He possessed the nature of an alphabet. You who divide the supreme Parent, by whom all things are encompassed while He Himself is encompassed by no one, into a tetrad, an ogdoad, a decad, and a dodecad. And by this license of multiplication, you declare in discourse this very thing which you preach can neither be explained in words nor conceived by the mind in the Father; and you argue that His nature and substance, though you make Him destitute of body and nature, are cobbled together from many lines, of which some are born from others: in which you show yourself to be a most false Daedalus and a wicked craftsman of that supreme power. You who divide that same power—which you say is indivisible—into mutes, and vowels, and semi-vowels, attributing the mutes to the Father of all and to the thought of the Son.

thereby casting all who trust in you into the highest blasphemy and greatest impiety. Therefore, justly and fittingly, that divine elder and herald of the truth has inveighed against your audaciousness in these verses, having spoken thus: ^A

Idol-maker Marcus, artificer of monsters, Skilled in guileful magic and the science of the stars, By which you confirm the doctrines of error, Displaying signs to those whom you lead astray, The deeds of an apostate power, Which you yourself manage (29) as a father. O Satan, if By angelic power you perform the deeds of Azazel, Having yourself as the herald of opposing craftiness.

These are the words of the God-loving elder. ^B We, however, shall attempt to recount briefly the remaining mysteries of theirs, which are extensive, and bring to light that which has long been concealed. For thus, they would be most easily refuted by all.

XII. Therefore, these men who reduce all things to numbers, ^C attempting to interpret the generation of their Æons, and the straying of the sheep, and its recovery, more mystically, join them together; they assert that the whole consists of the monad and the dyad; and, counting from the monad to four, they thus bring forth the decad. For one, and two, and three, and four, when gathered together, have produced the number of the ten Æons. Again, the dyad, proceeding from itself to the mark—for example, two and four and six—has demonstrated the dodecad. And again, from the dyad, when we count in the same way up to ten, thirty is shown, in which are included eight, and ten, and twelve. ^D They say, therefore, that the dodecad, because it has linked with it the mark, and because the mark—namely, the Passion—has followed upon it, is called the Passion. And for this reason, they say that because the error occurred around the twelfth number, the sheep strayed, having leapt away, since they claim that this departure happened from the dodecad. In the same way, they divine that by a departure from the dodecad, one Virtue was lost; and that this is the woman who lost the drachma, and lit a lamp, and found it. Thus, therefore, with the remaining numbers, in the case of the drachma, nine, and in the case of the sheep, eleven, if they are multiplied by one another, they produce the number ninety-nine. For nine times eleven becomes ninety-nine. Therefore, they say that the term "Amen" also contains this number.

^A But I will not hesitate to explain to you how they interpret these things in another way, so that you may perceive their fruit from every side. For they wish the element H (50) together with the episemon to be an ogdoad, situated in the eighth place from the first letter. Then again, calculating the number of those elements without the episemon, and adding them up to H', they show the number thirty. For beginning from Alpha and ending at H, by numbering the elements, having excluded the episemon, and adding the increment of the letters, one will find the number thirty. For up to the letter Θ', there are fifteen. Then, the number of the seven being added to them, ^B it produced B' and K'. Added to these is H', which is eight, and it completed the most wonderful thirty. And from this they demonstrate that the Ogdoad is the mother of the thirty Aeons. Since, therefore, the number of the thirty is unified into thirty powers, being three itself, it made ninety. For three thirties add up to ninety. And the triad itself, being added onto itself, produced nine. Thus the Ogdoad brought forth among them the number of the nine. And since the twelfth Aeon, being deficient, left behind the eleven above, they say that the type of the letters lies in the shape of the Word. For the letter Λ' is placed eleventh in order, which is the number of the thirty, and they say it is placed according to the image ^C of the upper economy. Because from Alpha, excluding the episemon of those letters, the number up to Λ' being added together with that same Δ' according to the increment of the letters makes the number ninety-nine. And that the Λ' is eleventh in order and descended to the investigation of its own likeness, in order to complete the twelfth number, and having found it, it was fulfilled, this is clear from the very shape of the element. For the Λ' as if having arrived at the investigation of its own likeness, and having found it, and snatched it into itself, filled the place of the twelfth, the element M' being composed of two Λ's. Wherefore they also say that one must flee from its region of ninety-nine through knowledge, that is, the deficiency (31), the type of the left hand; but to pursue the one which, being added to the ninety-nine, transferred them to his right hand.

XIII. When you go through these things, beloved, I well know ^D that you will laugh a great deal at such arrogant wisdom of theirs.

foolishness. ^A Yet those who treat such holy religion, and the magnitude of ineffable power, and all the dispensations of God so coldly and with such forced interpretations—reducing them to that "Alpha," and "Beta," and other numbers—are nonetheless to be deplored. And whoever separates themselves from the Church to cling to these old-wives' tales is truly condemned by their own judgment; those whom Paul bids us to avoid after a first and second admonition. John, the disciple of the Lord, increased their condemnation, not even wishing them to be greeted by us. For he who says "Greetings" to them, he says, participates in their evil works. And with good reason. For there is no peace for the impious, says the Lord. But their impiety surpasses all impiety: they claim that the Creator of heaven and earth, the only almighty God, above whom there is no other God, originated from a defect, and that he himself arose from another defect, so that, according to their opinion, he is a projection from a third defect. ^B Such a sentiment, which has truly puffed them up and which we have anathematized, requires us to flee far away from them. And the more they persist and rejoice in their inventions, the more we must consider them to be incited by the Ogdoad of wicked spirits. Just as it happens with those who fall into a state of frenzy: the more they laugh, and seem to possess a vigorous body, and do everything as if they were healthy—sometimes even more robustly than if they were truly sane—the worse off they are. In the same way, these people, the more they fancy themselves knowledgeable, and exhaust themselves by shooting arrows from an over-stretched bow, the more they are held by madness. For the impure spirit of ignorance, upon exiting and finding them occupied not with God but with profane questions, brings back seven other spirits ^C more wicked than himself, and having slackened their minds—as if they were capable of comprehending things above God—and having prepared them to be suitable for subversion, he places into them the Ogdoad of the folly of wicked spirits.

XIV. ^D I wish also to relate to you how they say that creation itself was constructed by the Demiurge according to the image of invisible things, as if he were ignorant of Him, through the Mother. First, they say the four elements—fire, water, earth, and air—were projected as an image of the upper, first Tetrad. And they count their activities, such as hot and cold, dry and moist, as exactly reflecting the Ogdoad. Next, they enumerate ten powers in this way: first, the seven corporeal circular orbits, which they call heavens; then the ring that encircles them, which they call the eighth heaven; and beyond these, the sun and the moon. These ten in number, they say, are images of the invisible Decad that came forth from the Word and Life; and the Duodecad is indicated by the zodiac of the so-called—

^A circle. For they say that the twelve signs most clearly shadow forth the Duodecad, the daughter of Man and the Church. And since, they say, it is yoked in opposition to the movement of the whole, which is most swift—the time that weighs heavy against that very circuit, and counterbalances their swiftness with its own slowness, so that it completes the circuit from point to point in thirty years—they say that this is an image of that Horus who encompasses their Mother, who is distinguished by thirty names.

They say that the moon, again, while encompassing its own heaven in thirty days, shadows forth through these days the number of the thirty Aeons. And that the sun, being encompassed in twelve months and terminating its circular restoration, makes the Duodecad manifest through the twelve months. And that the days, having the measure of twelve hours, are a certain simulacrum of that luminous Duodecad. Furthermore, they say that the hour, which is the twelfth part of the day, is adorned with thirty parts, because of the image of the Triacontad. And that the circumference of the zodiac circle itself consists of three hundred and sixty parts; for each sign ^B contains thirty degrees. And thus they say that in this circle, too, the imitation of that relationship which exists between the duodecad and the tricenad is preserved. Furthermore, they assert that the earth is divided into twelve climates and regions, and that each climate, receiving in the descent from heaven a Virtue or perpendicular, and bringing forth fruits most similar to that Virtue from which it was derived, manifestly represents the Duodecad itself, as they say, and its children.

Beyond these things, they relate that the Creator, when he desired to imitate the infinity, eternity, and the condition of the supreme Ogdoad—which is devoid of the circumscription of time and place—and yet could not express what is stable and sempiternal in it, because he was a fruit of penury and some defect, distributed that eternity into storms and times and multiple numbers of years, thinking that he could attain its infinity through the accumulated multitude of times. From this, they believe, it came to pass that when Truth had withdrawn from him, falsehood immediately followed. And therefore, when his times are completed, his work must be dissolved. ^C

XV. Since such is their opinion regarding creation, yet every day each of them, as much as he is able, concocts something new, so that no one is finally perfect among them who does not bring forth some notable lie as if it were fruit. Now, as to what they accommodate to their own notions from the oracles of the prophets, it is necessary to point them out and bring ^D refutation upon them. For Moses,

^A they say, beginning the treatise concerning the creation, immediately at the beginning pointed out the Mother of all, saying: *In the beginning God created heaven and earth.* Having named these four—God, and the beginning, the heaven, and the earth—he set forth, as they say, their Tetrad. And in order to indicate her invisible and hidden nature, he said: *And the earth was invisible and unformed.* They declare that Moses thus also expressed the second Tetrad, the offspring of the first Tetrad, when he named the abyss, and darkness, and water, and the Spirit hovering over the waters; and that after this, mention is also made of the Decad in the same place, when light is spoken of, and day and night, and the firmament, and evening, and morning, and what is called dry land and sea, and furthermore vegetation, and in the tenth place, the tree. Thus, they say, through the ten names, he indicated the ten Eons. ^B And they believe that the power of the Dodecad is likewise depicted by him. For he speaks of the sun and the moon, and stars, and seasons, and years, and whales, and fishes, and reptiles, and birds and quadrupeds, and wild beasts, and (some say, birds) the twelfth, man. Thus they teach that the thirty was spoken of by Moses through the Spirit. But furthermore, they say that the fashioned man, according to the image of the power above, contains within himself the power from the one source. And these things are established in the place of the brain; from which flow four powers, called after the image of the Tetrad above: one, sight; the second, hearing; the third, smell; and the fourth, taste.

They say that the Ogdoad is pointed out through man in this way: since he has two ears, and as many sights [eyes], and furthermore two nostrils, and a double sense of taste, of bitter and of sweet. And they teach that the whole man thus possesses the entire image of the Tricenarius (the thirty). In the hands, he bears the Decad through the fingers; and in the whole body, divided into twelve members, the Dodecad. And they divide him just as the body of Truth, ^C of which we have spoken before, is divided by them. Therefore, the Ogdoad, being ineffable and invisible, is to be understood as being hidden in the vital parts.

XVI. Again, they say that the sun, the great luminary, was created on the fourth day to indicate the number of the Tetrad. And the curtains of the tabernacle which was constructed by Moses, having been made of fine linen, and hyacinth, and purple, and scarlet, demonstrated the same image among them. And they determine that the tunic of the priest, which reaches to the feet, adorned with four rows of precious stones, signifies the Tetrad; and whatever such things are lying in the Scriptures, which can be brought to the number of four, they say were made so because of their Tetrad. Again, the Ogdoad is demonstrated in this way: they say that man was formed on the eighth day. For at one time they wish him to have been created on the sixth, and at another on the eighth; unless, perhaps, they understand the earthly man to have been created on the sixth day, and the carnal man on the eighth. For these things are distinguished among them. But some hold a different [opinion] of that...

man, created to the image and likeness of God, who is androgynous, holding him to be the spiritual one; and another, the one formed from the earth. ^A And they declare too that the economy of the ark, in the time of the deluge, in which eight human beings were saved, most manifestly signifies the saving Ogdoad. They say the same thing also signifies David, being the eighth in the lineage of his brothers. Furthermore, they say that circumcisions performed on the eighth day indicate the circumcision of the heavenly Ogdoad. And, in a word, they allege that everything found in the holy Scriptures that can be drawn to the number eight fulfils the mystery of their Ogdoad.

But they also say the Decad is signified by the ten nations whose land God promised to give to Abraham as a possession. They apply the same [logic] to the economy concerning Sarah, when after ten years she gave her maid Hagar to him, so that he might produce children by her. And likewise the servant of Abraham sent for Rebecca, who at the well offered her ten gold bracelets, and her brothers who kept her for ten days; furthermore, Jeroboam who received the ten tribes; the ten curtains of the Tabernacle; the ten-cubit columns; the ten sons of Jacob who first went down to Egypt to purchase grain; and the ten apostles to whom the Lord appeared after the resurrection, besides Thomas; all these, I say, according to their opinion, ^B revealed that invisible Decad.

XVII. But they declare that clear and manifest vestiges of the Dodecad—in which that deficiency, that calamity and mystery occurred, from which calamity they define all visible things to have originated—are found everywhere. Such are the twelve sons of Jacob, from whom also came the twelve tribes; the variegated breastplate containing twelve stones; and the twelve bells; and the twelve stones placed by Moses at the foot of the mountain; and likewise those placed by Joshua, some in the middle of the river and some on the further bank; ^C and those who supported the ark of the Covenant; and furthermore those that Elijah is read to have placed during the burnt offering of the calf; and also the number of the apostles; and simply everything that retains the number twelve, they claim characterizes their Dodecad.

They say that the union of all these, which is called the Triacontad, is [signified by] the thirty cubits of height of Noah’s ark, and by Samuel commanding Saul to recline first among the thirty invited guests, and by David, ^D when he hid in the field for thirty full days, and by those who came with him into the cave—and for this reason, the length of the holy Tabernacle was thirty cubits. And if they find other things equal in number to these, they call [them] the Triacontad.

^B XVIII. In addition to all these things, I thought it necessary to add the scriptural testimonies by which they endeavor to establish their dreams concerning the supreme Parent, who, they claim, was unknown to all before the coming of Christ. They strive to demonstrate this: that another Father, different from the Creator of the universe, was proclaimed by Christ the Lord, who, as we said before, they contend blossomed forth from a defect [of the Pleroma] as if he were a fruit. For what the prophet Isaiah said, *Israel indeed did not know me, and the people did not understand me*, they adapt to the ignorance of that Bythus [Depths] who cannot be discerned by the eyes. Then, the passage which is in Hosea: *There is no truth in them, neither is there the knowledge of God*, they think refers to the same thing. Likewise: *There is no one who understands or seeks God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless*; they attribute these also to the ignorance of the Bythus.

Furthermore, they consider that the saying of Moses, *No one shall see God and live*, pertains to the same point. For they falsely maintain that it was the Creator alone who was seen by the prophets; but they assert that the saying, *No one shall see God and live*, was pronounced regarding that majesty which cannot be seen and is unknown to all. But that this very phrase, *No one shall see God*, is used of the supreme One—the Father and Creator of all, who cannot be seen—is easily understood by us all. However, that this does not refer to the Bythus fabricated by them, but to the Creator, and that he himself is the invisible God, will be demonstrated as our discourse proceeds.

They also claim that Daniel indicated this very thing when he asked the angel for the interpretation of the parables, as if he were ignorant. They say that the angel, desiring to conceal the great mystery of the Bythus from him, replied thus: *Go, Daniel; for the words are closed and sealed, until the wise understand and the white are made white*. For they boast that they themselves are those "white" and "wise" ones.

Moreover, they thrust forward an infinite number of apocryphal and spurious writings, which they have invented themselves, in order to stupefy the ignorant and those who do not know the authentic Scriptures. Indeed, they bring forth that wickedly invented story: that when Christ was a boy and was learning his letters, his teacher commanded him, as is the custom, "Say Alpha," and he answered, "Alpha." And again, when the teacher commanded him to say "Beta," the Lord answered, "Do you first tell me what Alpha is, and then I will answer you what Beta is." This they interpret as if he alone understood what was unknown, and wished to declare it under the likeness of the letter Alpha. They also apply certain things that are read in the Gospel to the same pattern; for example, the answer to his mother when he was twelve years old: "Do not..."

know that I must be in my Father's affairs?" ^A For, they say, he was announcing to them the Father whom they did not know; and it was for this reason that he sent the twelve disciples to the twelve tribes, preaching the God unknown to them. And to the one who said to him, "Good Teacher," they say he confessed that God is truly good, by saying, "Why do you call me good? There is one who is good, the Father in heaven." And by the name of the heavens, they say, the Aeons are now to be understood. Furthermore, because he did not answer those who said to him, "By what authority do you do this?" but rather, by asking a counter-question, left them at a loss, they interpret this as his having demonstrated the ineffable nature of the Father through that silence.

They also claim that when he said, "Often I have desired to hear one of these words, and I had no one to tell me," he was indicating that he had to be the one to reveal the truly one God, whom they had not known. Furthermore, when he approached Jerusalem and wept over it and said, "If you had known, even you, in this day, the things that are for your peace; but now they are hidden from you," they say that by the word "hidden," he demonstrated the hidden and abstruse nature of the Bythos. ^B Just as they maintain that he indicated the Parent of Truth by these words: "Come to me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest," and, "Learn from me," etc. For they say he promised that he would teach them what they did not know, even the highest knowledge. And they bring forward these words as if it were the citadel and climax of their proof: "I confess to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and have revealed them to babes. Yes, Father, for so it was good-pleasure before you. All things have been delivered to me by my Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son, and no one knows the Son except the Father, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal him." By these words, they think it is clearly declared by him that the one whom they have rashly invented as the Parent of Truth was known to no one before Christ came; ^C on the contrary, they infer that the Maker and Creator had been perpetually manifest to all. For they do not doubt that all these things were uttered by Christ concerning that unknown Parent whom they themselves preach.

XIX. They define the tradition of their Redemption as something that can neither be seen nor comprehended by the mind, ^D inasmuch as it is the mother of those things which are equally impossible to be contained or seen. And therefore, because it is inconsistent and unstable, it cannot be embraced by one single and simple discourse, since it is handed down by each one of them according to his own inclination and will. For they say that there are just as many redemptions as there are leaders of that doctrine and its mysteries. Indeed, we shall demonstrate in the proper place, when we refute them, that their whole show and pomp of renouncing baptism and the grace of that second generation from God, and of casting away the faith, is a fabrication of Satan. They say it is necessary for...

those who have received the perfect knowledge, so that they may be reborn into the power that is above all. For otherwise it is impossible to enter within the Pleroma, since this is what leads them into the depth. ^A For they maintain that the baptism of the visible Jesus is for the remission of sins, but the redemption of the Christ who descended into him is for perfection; and that the one is animal, the other spiritual. And that the baptism was proclaimed by John for repentance, but the redemption was brought by Jesus for perfection. And this is what he says: "I have a baptism to be baptized with, and I am very eager for it." But even to the sons of Zebedee, when their mother asked that they should sit at his right and left in the kingdom, they say the Lord added this redemption, saying: "Can you be baptized with the baptism with which I am to be baptized?" And they claim that Paul also often explicitly mentioned the redemption in Christ Jesus, and that this is the one handed down by them in various and discordant ways. ^B

XX. For some of them construct a bridal chamber and perform a initiation rite with certain invocations for those being perfected, and they affirm that what is performed by them is a spiritual marriage, after the likeness of the reunions above. Others lead them to water, and baptizing them, they say this: "Into the name of the unknown Father of all, into truth, the mother of all, into him who descended into Jesus, into union and redemption and communion of the powers." Others utter certain Hebrew names, ^C in order to strike greater awe into those being perfected, as follows: *Basema, chamasse, baasiagora, mistadia, rhuada, custa, babophor, kalachthei*. The interpretation of these is as follows: "Above every power of the Father ^D

^A I invoke the name that is called light, and good Spirit, and Life: for You reigned in the body." Others, again, describe the redemption as follows: "The name hidden from every divinity, and lordship, and truth, which Jesus the Nazarene put on in the lives of the light of Christ, Christ, I say, living through the Holy Spirit for angelic redemption, the name of restoration: *Messias, Uphareg, Namempsaman, Chaldaan, Mosomedaca, Acphrane, Psaua, Jesu Nazaria*." The interpretation of these, also, is such: "I do not divide the Spirit, the Heart, and the super-celestial Power, the merciful One; may I be blessed by Your name, O Savior of truth." While these things are pronounced by the presiding ministers, then he who is being initiated into the sacred rites replies: "I have been confirmed, and redeemed; and my soul is redeemed from this age and all things that are from it, in the name of *Jao*, who redeemed his own soul into redemption in Christ the living One." To these things, all who are present add: "Peace to all upon whom this name rests." Then they anoint the person initiated with *opobalsam*, ^B which they consider to be an image of that ointment of most fragrant odor which is above all things.

There are not wanting among them those who think it superfluous to lead [the initiate] to water; but, having mixed oil and water, they pour it upon the heads of those being perfected with incantations of the same kind as those we recorded a little before: and this, at last, they name the redemption; although they also anoint them with balsam. Others, to the contrary, rejecting all these things, say that the mystery of an ineffable and invisible power ought not to be performed through visible and corruptible creatures, and [that] things inconceivable and incorporeal [ought not be performed] through things perceptible and corporeal. They say that perfect redemption is the very knowledge of the ineffable greatness. For since every defect and perturbation originates from ignorance, whatever has been compounded from it is destroyed by that same reasoning, so that the knowledge of the inner man is the redemption; and [it is] neither corporeal—for the body is capable of corruption—nor animal ^C, since the soul also proceeded from a defect and is as it were the dwelling of the Parent. Therefore, the redemption must also be spiritual. For the inner, spiritual man is redeemed through Moses. And they say they are content with the knowledge of all things; and they call this the genuine redemption. Thus far Irenæus.

257 XXI. That most blessed old man, Irenæus, performed this accurate investigation of that error, and set forth the entire sequence and order of their fictitious dogma. Wherefore, ^D as even now, to me

^A you are content with those things which were elaborated with great effort by him, we have transcribed everything word for word as it is contained in his work. For easily from those things which were set forth by that most holy man for the refutation of his (the heretic's) wickedness, they (the heresies) can be overthrown and routed. For we believe that which truth itself altogether bears witness to, and which sound reason persuades, and which is in agreement with the rule of piety, and with the law and the prophets, and with the patriarchs from of old who followed in succession, and also with the teaching of the Savior Himself, and of His apostles, who clearly teach us to confess one God the Father, Almighty over all, and our Lord Jesus Christ, and His Holy Spirit, one holy uncreated Trinity, while all other things, after the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, were brought into being out of nothing. And since these things have been clearly confessed and believed by all the aforementioned holy prophets and evangelists and apostles, no trickery of human invention could withstand the ray of truth; as has often been stated by us at length in our proposition against each heresy. So that it is altogether exposed that this charlatan and deadly [influence], like those previously mentioned, had come to invent and manufacture these great monstrosities purely for the sake of display and idle curiosity.

XXII. On the Marcosians.

AGAINST THE COLORBASIANS, which is heresy XV, or XXXV.

1. ^A Colorbasus follows these [men], having gathered his inanities from the same impostures of Marcus. Indeed, he also sprang up like thorns and thistles from the roots of Ptolemaeus, devising again other things to harass the world like stings, as though he had descended from heaven, uttering greater trifles and dreams. At first, he had a partnership and agreement of dogmas with Marcus, so that their sect appeared like a two-headed snake—a bipartite thing. Afterward, like a head severed from the body of a serpent, yet still breathing, it was the ruin of many; for he was believed to bring forth something greater and more learned, not only than his equals, but even than his superiors. For he does not believe the Ogdoad was propagated by the procreation of one Aeon from another gradually, but that the other six Aeons flowed forth simultaneously and at the same moment from the supreme Parent and his Ennoea—that is, his Thought—a thing which he asserts [happened] as if he himself had acted the part of a midwife. Therefore, he does not establish, as others do, that Man and the Church proceeded from the Word and Life, or [as others] please, that the Word and Life proceeded from Man and the Church. But they define this in another way: namely, that which the supreme Parent thought to produce, this was called Father. ^B Furthermore, since it was Truth, it was marked with the name of Truth. Therefore, when he wished to show himself, this was called Man. But those whom he considered when he brought [them] forth, this was called the Church; and this Man is the Word, the firstborn Son. And Life follows the Word. And thus the first Ogdoad was completed.

Moreover, there is great dissension among them concerning the Savior. For some think he was composed from all, and therefore he is called Eudocetus—that is, "well-pleasing"—because the whole Pleroma pursued him with common affection and benevolence. Others assert that he proceeded only from the ten Aeons which were derived from the Word and Life, and that he retained the names of those from whom he received his origin. There are those who feel he flowed forth from the twelve Aeons that were generated by Man and Life, and that for this reason he is called the Son of Man, as if he were a grandson of Man. Others say he was generated by Christ and the Holy Spirit for the support of the Pleroma; and for this reason he is called Christ, so that he might retain the designation of him from whom he had received his origin. ^C Others—if I may so call them, rhapsodists—define the supreme Parent of the universe, the first Principle, and the one greater in thought, as being called Man; and that this is that great and hidden mystery: that the power which is above all things and all-containing is called Man, and that for this reason the Savior calls himself the Son of Man.

II. ^D Such is that inept and feigned doctrine of Colorbasus, which with great clamor of words...

^A one may observe, as one will understand from what precedes, how much conceit is in the opinion of each of these. For every one of them, being vain and desiring to gather a collection for himself, so that they might follow him, has uttered falsely whatever entered into his own mind, neither speaking according to prophecy (for the Holy Spirit did not speak in them) nor having even one pretext from the truth of the prophets and Gospels. But the subversion of all these from the so-called knowledge is the same argument of truth already spoken against the first. For all these belonging to the school of Valentinus and those before him, and interpreting that Mind each in a different way, will incur the same shame among them. For this Colorbasus also came bringing us a great deception of empty speech. ^B For he set forth for us, having poetically made for the incomprehensible, invisible, and holy God, the Father of all, the name "Man," in order that he might couple to his own error the word of the Savior, who calls himself the Son of Man, and might turn the mind of those who have used him away from the true and most evident confession of Christ concerning himself, into helplessness and empty speech in seeking, supposing that to be in the heavens which is not. For let us grant him that, because his Father is called Man, he names himself the Son of Man, and not from the flesh which he took from the virginal womb, that is to say, born from the holy Mary through the Holy Spirit, according to the word of this pitiable Colorbasus; what would he say ^C concerning that which our Lord Jesus Christ himself says, as he said to the Jews: "But now you seek to kill me, a man, who have told you the truth which I heard from my Father"? And he did not say here, "of the Man my Father"; but while confessing concerning the Father, he indicated God the One of all; but concerning himself, that he became man, he truthfully affirmed himself to be a man, as also the apostles say, so that the truth might be established on all sides, and it might be known from where the names were attached to the Lord: "Jesus, a man approved among us by signs and wonders," and the rest.

What then, ^D O most pitiable of all men, would you say to these things? Since you have come from above bringing us new names, and you boast in these, to which you dared to attach that name of "Man" to the Lord of all and Father of all; so that from this the Lord is called Son of Man, because the Father is called Man. Find for us also some other appellation fitting the Father, [such as] "a man approved." But you would never find it. For even if a man is a human being, and for the sake of distinction from a woman we call the human being "a man," nevertheless not even in this would you be able to contriving anything. For without shapes and limbs, hidden and visible, a man cannot be called. For we say also the

woman a "human," but not a "man." Wherefore we say both "the human" (masculine) and "the human" (feminine). But distinguishing the nature specifically, the female we call woman, and the male, man. For this is the distinction of the gender, male and female, the man and the woman, the relation of the genders being divided. Yet homonymously, both the man and the woman are called "human."

^B III. Since these things are thus, draw near to me, all you servants of God, you lovers of the truth; and laugh at that impostor and charlatan Colorbasus—or rather, lament those who have been deceived, and themselves, and those who have led many to destruction. But let us give thanks to God, that truth is accustomed to lead its own children into the straight path by means of modest and simple words; but against those wretched doctrines, full of arrogance and ornamented with exquisite blandishments, it scatters, overturns, and utterly extinguishes them, advancing calmly and gently, as can be clearly seen from the prophetic word. For the prophet, reproving those who curiously inquire into terrible things and devise infamous things for their own deception, said: "Because you would not accept the water of Siloam which flows in silence, the Lord will bring upon you the water of the river, the king of the Assyrians." For the water of Siloam is the doctrine of the Sent One. And who could this be but our Lord Jesus, sent from God the Father, and indeed quietly: for He cries out nothing insolent or painted, but truly and sincerely teaches His most holy Bride, whom in the Canticles of Solomon He names a dove because of the simplicity, meekness, and purity of the animal. And, what is more worthy of admiration, those others, which, though they are foreign, usurp His name, He calls concubines and queens because of the royal name of Christ, which each one insolently strives to arrogate to herself. "But even if there are eighty concubines," which are the heresies; "then maidens without number," he says, "there is one, my dove, my perfect one": namely, the holy and catholic Church. A dove, indeed, as I said, because of the meekness, innocence, and sincerity of that bird; but perfect, because she has received perfect grace from God, and knowledge from the Savior Himself through the Holy Spirit. Therefore the Bridegroom Himself, who may be interpreted as the Sent One—that is, Siloam—has water flowing gently, that is, doctrine not rushing with great noise and crashing, nor boasting in vain pomp and ambition. And His bride, like the dove, is herself a quiet dove, having neither sting nor mill-teeth, nor pricks, as do all these serpent-formed ones, and those who swarm, each having been ambitious to prepare some poison for the world and to harm those who have trusted in him: of whom this one is also one, whom I have been eager to expose here by the divine word and the help from above, and to crush like a tarantula—that four-jawed creature so called—or as if it were to be severed from the two-headed viper ^D

But leaving this aside, I shall pursue the remainder. While I undertake this, I humbly beg of God that I may set forth what concerns these matters according to the truth of the situation, so that neither deceit nor destruction may redound upon anyone, or even upon myself.

AGAINST THE HERACLEONITES, Which is Heresy XVI, or XXXVI.

I. Colorbasus is succeeded by Heracleon, from whom the sect of the Heracleonites is named, being no less instructed in the follies and lies of the others. For whatever is asserted by them, he maintains and defends in every way, inasmuch as he derived his origin as well as his poisonous contagion from them. Yet, by adding some things invented and made up by himself to their opinions, he strove to surpass them and to claim a school of his own. For all these people, transforming themselves into a centicephalous or centimanus body, wished to express that giant—I know not whom—from the fables of the Greeks; I think of Cottus, or Briareus—whom they also called Aegaeon—or Gyges, or him who is called Argos of the thousand eyes: such portents as they are wont to describe in their own rhapsodies, making poetry, and saying that one has one hundred hands, and sometimes fifty heads, sometimes a hundred, and another one hundred eyes. And for this reason they say that Mercury is called Argiphontes, because he killed the multifarious-eyed Argos. Thus, each one of them, wishing to set himself up as a leader, has named himself a head, introducing other things beyond the vain labor and maddening doctrine of his teachers. But that I may not make the preface too long, I shall proceed to the matter at hand. ^B

II. Heracleon, therefore, along with his followers, as I have said, thinks the same as Marcus and those who preceded Marcus concerning the Ogdoads—I mean the higher and the lower. Next, he establishes the pairs of the thirty Aeons in a not dissimilar way. He also proclaims Man to be the supreme Parent of all things, whom he also names Bythus. He considers Him to be neither male nor female, and from Him exists the mother of all, whom he calls Sige and Truth. From her, the second mother, who was placed in oblivion—whom he also calls Achamoth, as others do—derived her origin; from her, subsequently, all things were established in deficiency. But he has placed something more into his own opinion than all who came before him. For those among their flock who are about to die, having taken the opportunity from Marcus, are not redeemed in the same way as he, but he observes another method of this kind for claiming them for salvation. For there are some among them who sprinkle the head of the dying person with oil mixed with water; others with an ointment, which they call opobalsam, and

^A they add a certain invocation, using the same one, as we have taught that Marcus also used, with the addition of a few names. Now the invocation is as follows: *Mesia, uphar, egnamempsa menchaldia, nossome, daco, acpharam, epseuva, Jesu nazaria.* They do this so that those who receive these invocations at the end of their lives, along with the water and oil—or ointment—mixed together, may, they claim, become ungraspable and invisible to the principalities and powers above, so as to escape, unseen, of their internal man, since their bodies are left behind in the creation, while their soul stands before the Creator above, who came into being in a state of deficiency, so that it may remain there with him. But they say the inner man rises higher, being more inward than both the soul and the body; which they think is derived from the Pleroma above.

III. Furthermore, they are accustomed to exhort those who have been deluded by them in this way, saying: "When you have flown past the principalities and powers after death, remember to utter these words: 'I am a son from the Father, a pre-existing Father, and a son in the present time, who came to see all things, both alien and my own; yet they are not entirely alien, but belong to Achamoth, who is female and made these things for herself. ^B My origin is drawn from him who exists before all, and I return again to the place whence I have come.' By saying these things, they claim he escapes the powers and comes to those who are with the Creator, up to the first Ogdoad. For they want there to be a hebdomad below the Creator, and him to be the eighth in the seven, yet established in deficiency and ignorance. Therefore, they instruct the one who has departed from this life to address the Creator and his companions in this way: 'I am a vessel more precious than that female who created you. If your mother is ignorant of her own root, I know myself and know whence I am; and I call upon the incorruptible Wisdom who is in the Father, and is the mother of your mother, who has no mother, nor any male consort; rather, being female, she produced you from a female, being ignorant of her own mother, and deeming herself to be alone. But I call upon her mother.' ^C When those who are with the Creator hear these things, they are greatly disturbed and condemn their own root and the lineage of their mother; but the one who has said these things departs to his own place, having cast off his bondage, and the angel, that is, the soul. For they fancy that, besides the body and soul, there is something else found in man. And these are the things which we have been able to discover concerning their redemption.

IV. Furthermore, anyone who is sound in judgment, when he hears these most empty trifles, will laugh at the mimicry and fables, just as ^D for each of them enacts a dogma different from the other, as he wills, and is not restrained by his own audacity; but each invents whatever he can. And of those

^A born among them up to this day, who day by day find something new to say and to dazzle those who are led astray, it is difficult to investigate or to relate everything that belongs to them. Wherefore I shall be content again with the things that have been said concerning this heresy, which have also come down to us to set forth. For to whom would such a teaching not be clear as being altogether a myth and a mockery? For whence, O you, or those before you, have you received your body? And your soul, whence? And your innermost man, whence? And if you say it is from above, from the higher spiritual being, as you pretend to narrate, and by a promise of hope having deceived those led astray by you, so that, lifted up by some goal, they might be dragged down by your enchanted narration ^B — tell me, what is the communion of the higher spiritual being with the material? And what is that of the material with the psychic? And how did the Creator create things not his own? And how did the one above grant his spiritual power to the Creator who did not work well? And from whence did the Creator, having mixed his own psychic nature with the material, prefer rather to fasten his own power to the matter? But if he wishes to intermix his own power, then the matter is not alien. But if it is indeed alien, who granted him the authority over the matter? And first tell me, O impostor, whether he bound it to the matter out of hatred for the soul, or in ignorance of what would result. But I know that you will say neither of these. For we do not call the body “matter,” God forbid! nor the creations of God. But Scripture knows of a certain matter after this vile and abject one, which is proposed for each art and work, another one—I mean the filthy thought springing from the mind, and the muddy reasonings of sin. For they spring up as if from mud, a foul and unclean effluence, pestilential and muddy; as the blessed David, being pursued and slandered as by wicked men, said: “I stuck in the matter of the deep” (Ps. LXVIII, 3), and the rest. ^C

V. But since it seems right to you, Heracleon, to call this “matter”—the bodies of men, and this whole world—for what goal did the Creator intermix his own soul with the matter? If, being ignorant of the evil, he who does not know what he wishes to effect can effect nothing at all. For we ourselves do not perform anything in our individual arts ^D which we do not understand. For we reflect beforehand on what we wish to accomplish, and we know before we create what we decided to accomplish. And yet we, being weak and falling far short of the power of God, nevertheless, through the wisdom granted by Him to men, we know and understand. But it has happened to you, O Heracleon, that the wisdom from God has become a snare, because you do not handle it according to God, but according to a wicked purpose.

^A Yet again I ask: whence is the mixture of the spiritual with the psychic and the material, which you term the "inner man," joined to the second and third, namely the "outer man," I mean to the soul and body? And if it were by the will of the power above, the Father of all—I mean, by your "Bythus"—would not the creation down here around us, being mingled together, be uncommunicative with those above, as I said, being joined by the providence of the Father above, and by that spark sent down from Him, which is, according to you, the spiritual and innermost man? But if you say that the Creator, who is in deficiency and privation, or the mother whom you call Achamoth, received power from above, that is, the spiritual element, then the Creator is no longer in deficiency and ignorance, nor is the one called your mother. For how could anyone be in ignorance of that which he desires? For if he desires something better at all, he knows what is fair and good. And he who knows the good, and does not hate it but desires it, is not alienated from the good. ^B Yet again I ask: whence is the [spiritual element]...

VI. But so that I do not wear myself out by lingering any longer on the deceits of that impostor, I shall be content with what has been proposed. For all his nonsense collapses, since there is no one who does not perceive that the Lord of all is good, foresees all things, and is able to accomplish all things, and that the whole nature of things, having been created by Him, was fashioned in a most excellent way. ^C For nothing can exist without God, except only sin, which has no root of origin, nor does it remain to the end, but it comes into us adventitiously, and from us it ceases again, as I have demonstrated everywhere while arguing against the heresies: namely, that there is one God, by whom all things were made and created, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; and one is His only-begotten Son, our Lord and Savior and God; and one is His Holy Spirit—one holy and consubstantial Trinity, from which all things were rightly created; not some things evil, but all things good, according to the goodness that has so willed it, and they were called into being out of nothing. To this God be glory, and honor, and power, to the Father in the Son, and the Son in the Father, with the Holy Spirit, unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Having thus overthrown this heresy in a few words, ^D I shall proceed to what follows, refuting each one according to my ability, and thus I shall put an end to the destructive wickedness of them all. For that one may justly be called a *seps*. For this species of beast is not so much a serpent as a four-footed reptile, [a stellio,] or a lizard. The latter is a *chalcis*, or *chalcidica*, because it is distinguished by certain lines resembling the appearance of bronze. Epiphanius speaks of this species. Whence the word *chalcis* was either noted by some learned man in the margin of the codex, or moved from its proper place. It interrupts the series of the speech itself. Now, as for what Epiphanius asserts, that the bite is not so deadly, but that it destroys with its spittle, it seems to be in conflict with what Aristotle writes—that the *seps* either kills with its bite or inflicts the most intense pain. Concerning the spittle, I have read nothing in any other author.

of the lion’s species; and although its bite does essentially no harm, if its spittle should drip into food or drink, it is said to bring immediate death to those who consume it. Such is the nature of this doctrine. But having uncovered the poison of this one as well, and having wiped it away from the throats or lips of those about to be harmed by the divine aid, let us proceed to the others, and, as I said before, present the refutation of their error. ^A

AGAINST THE OPHITES, Which is Heresy XVII, or XXXVII.

I. Therefore, relying upon the divine protection, we undertake the heresy of the Ophites, which is very close to those insane and stupid sects mentioned previously. It partly agrees with them, and partly differs, according to the diverse customs and habits of those who have followed it, so that this very emptiness and discord, implicated in errors, may be a great argument to all that they are supported by falsehood, not by truth. Now, therefore, their madness must be unmasked and refuted by our discourse.

For the Ophites, as I said, have taken their pretexts from Nicholas, and the Gnostics, and the heresies before these. They are called Ophites, that is, "serpent-men," from that serpent which they venerate. But indeed, the things that these men vomit forth are truly horrendous, filled as they are with the foul odor, so to speak, of that [forbidden] eating. For they worship the serpent as if it were a new deity. And observe with what great deceits that serpent, by whom they have been ensnared, holds them bound. ^B For just as he deceived Eve and Adam of old, so now, concealing and dissembling himself, he has imposed upon mortals even in the time of the Jews, up until the arrival of Christ. Then, as the ages progressed, he kept misleading and inciting men—who were gluttonous for that food they had dared to take *contra* the prohibition of God—and led them away from the one true God into greater deception, ever promising many things, just as he did in the beginning; for even then he deceived them, saying: "Ye shall be as gods." Then, as time went on, he crafted for them varied and monstrous illusions. For having led them away from the one true God, he long ago planted among them the blasphemous nonsense of idolatry and polytheism. For they were never gods, just as they do not exist now, but only God. ^C

He had long since conceived within himself this insane cult of idols, this multitude of gods, and these fraudulent designs. Nor, indeed, was the serpent that appeared externally the sole cause of such great evil; but the other serpent who spoke through him—I mean the devil—who stirred up the hearing of the man through the woman. And the tree itself was not sin. For God plants nothing evil. The tree provided the knowledge of discerning both good and evil. And death did not come by reason of that knowledge, but by reason of disobedience. For all the enemy’s contrivance then was not for the sake of the food, ^D

^A but for the sake of working their disobedience. Hence, having disobeyed then, they were cast out of Paradise, having been rebuked most justly—not out of hatred, but out of the care of God. For the Lord says to them: *Earth you are, and into the earth you shall return.* For it was consonant with reason that the One who is truly the Artificer, like a potter taking care of His own work and vessel which He had fashioned with His hands—which had later come to be in a state of defect through disobedience, and, as one might say, the vessel being still clay and having begun to leak from some crack and fissure—should not abandon it in that state, but should reduce it to the original mass, so that in that restored generation, that is to say, the resurrection of the dead, He might recall that vessel to its former beauty and luster; or rather, should add something to it besides. This is to be understood regarding the bodies of those who, after horrendous crimes, led by repentance and recalled from their offenses, have been perfected in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, so that that mass from the earth may rise again, like clay which is softened and worked by the hand of the artificer, and in that way be reformed into an ancient or perhaps even more excellent form. Such were the serpent’s snares against Eve.

II. For indeed, from the beginning, human nature is desirous of novelty, and is accustomed to being carried away by the vain dreams of doctrines and empty promises. ^B In the beginning, that hidden one, creeping in gradually, concealed the outcome of his venomous sting. Later, when the Savior had come assuming a body, he began to vomit and spew out all his venom and the wickedness of his heinous crime. For he set himself up to be considered and celebrated as God in the minds of those wretched people. But it is the same serpent who later, through the disciples of his teaching, once circumvented men through that visible serpent—for Scripture names the devil a serpent, not because that is his form, but because he is the most tortuous of all beasts, and because he perpetrated the first of all deceptions under the guise of a serpent. Therefore, among those who are not ignorant of the truth, his doctrine is ridiculous, no less than those who, acquiescing to the same, worship the serpent as a deity. For the devil, when he could not deceive the manly mind strengthened by the knowledge of God from the Lord, turns toward the woman—that is to say, toward the ignorance of men; and since he cannot mock strong minds, he attempts to allure to himself those upon whom the blindness of ignorance has been cast. ^C For he clings perpetually to womanly thoughts—that is, to pleasure and desire, which is to say, to the effeminate ignorance in men; but he dreads firm and constant minds, which shape a consistent and congruous knowledge of all things, and discern God himself by the law of nature. For the serpent among them declares himself to be Christ—or rather, not he himself (for he cannot speak), but the devil who has prepared their understanding to think in such a way. Who, then, seeing the serpent, will not recognize the enemy and flee? For this reason also the Lord ^D

^A permitted hostilities between the serpent and the human race; because the devil had entirely used this kind of beast as an instrument and had deceived man within the borders of Paradise, so that those who have caught sight of the hostile image of the external serpent might beware of his snares and, if I may say so, shudder at the very sight of him.

^B III. The Ophites, however, attribute all knowledge to this [serpent], and thus they maintain that the serpent was the author of all knowledge to men; and from this they have devised mere fables which they hold for mysteries, though they are nothing else but the ridiculous and empty diversions of mummers; for these are fables truly. For they say that from the highest Aeon, Aeons were projected, and that at a lower level Jaldabaoth was born; and that he was projected because of the listlessness and ignorance of his own mother, that is, of the upper Prunicus. For they say that this Prunicus, having descended into the waters and having become mingled with them, was not able to return to the upper regions because she was mingled with the weight of matter, and having been mixed with the waters and matter, she could no longer depart. But she exerted herself by force towards the higher regions and stretched herself out; and thus the higher heaven came into being. And as she was found to have solidified, being no longer able to rise upwards nor to descend downwards, but having solidified and remained stretched out in the middle space. For she could not be carried down to the lower parts, because it was not of her own kin; but she could not travel upwards, because she was weighed down by the matter which she had taken hold of. And according to her ignorance, Jaldabaoth was projected and came to the lowest parts; and he made for himself seven sons, who themselves made for themselves seven heavens. But he, having shut off the things above him, hid them, so that the seven sons projected by him might not know the things above him, being lower than he, but [know] him alone; and this, they say, is the God of the Jews, Jaldabaoth. But it is not so, God forbid! But the God who is almighty, being the God of both Jews and Christians and of all, is about to judge them; and whoever this Jaldabaoth may be, he is such according to their own nonsensical mythology.

^D IV. Then they say: With the upper things shut off by the craft of Jaldabaoth, these seven sons begotten by him, whether Aeons, or gods, or angels (for they are called by various names among them), according to the likeness of their father Jaldabaoth, fashioned man—not easily, nor quickly, but in the same way in which the earlier heresies also devised [the story] in their empty talk. For they also say: Man was a creeping thing like a worm, unable either to look up or to stand upright. Toward the addition

^A of the design of Jaldabaoth, the mother above, who is called Prunicus, wishing to empty Jaldabaoth of the power that she had imparted to him, devised this—that she might take it away; and therefore she wished to infuse that power of hers, and a certain spark—this is the soul—into the Man whom his children had fashioned. Then, they say, Man stood upon his feet, and by his thought transcended the eight celestial spheres, and recognized, and praised, the Father above, who is above Jaldabaoth. And then Jaldabaoth, moved by pain because the things above him had been recognized, cast his eyes down in bitterness toward the sediment of matter, and generated a power having a serpent-like appearance, whom they also call his son; and thus he, they say, was sent and deceived Eve. And she heard him, and ^B was persuaded as by a son of God, and being persuaded, she ate from the tree of knowledge.

V. Then, when they have recounted this foolishness and the ridiculous nature of the contrivance—having composed this as it were a tragic, or rather comic, drama—they begin to show us something for the representation of the false gods spoken of among them. “Do not even our innards, by which we live and are nourished, possess the form of a serpent?” They add many other things, which they offer to their followers to create belief in their errors and delusions. “For this reason,” they say, “we worship the serpent, because this god became the cause of knowledge and cognition to the multitude of men. Jaldabaoth desired the memory of the supreme Mother and Parent to be extinguished among men. But the serpent persuaded them, and brought in knowledge, and communicated the whole knowledge of divine mysteries to the man and the woman.” Because of this, the Father Jaldabaoth, being angry at the knowledge which he had shown to men, cast him down from heaven. And from that point, they who have given themselves over to the party of the serpent, and possess nothing else, ^C call the serpent the king who fell from heaven. Therefore, they say, they worship him because of this knowledge, and offer bread to him. For they keep a serpent by nature, feeding it in a certain chest; and at the time of their mysteries, bringing it to the cave, and piling loaves on a table, they call upon the serpent. When the cave is opened, he comes forth. And thus, having come up, the serpent, already knowing their foolishness by his own cunning and craft, climbs onto the table and coils himself about the loaves. They consider this to be the most perfect sacrifice. Whence also, as I have heard from someone, they not only break and distribute these loaves, among which the serpent himself has coiled, but each person also approaches and kisses the serpent on the mouth, either by some incantation the serpent having been softened into gentleness, or by some other working of the devil—the animal ^D being made harmless for the deception of these poor wretches. They worship such a creature and call this "Eucharist," when it has gone around the loaves placed there with its tortuous coils and circumvolutions. And finally, through him, as they say, to the Father above

^A they send up their offerings, and in this way they perform their mysteries.

VI. That these ineptitudes are most vain and worthy of mockery no one will deny; nor is it necessary to refute them more sharply with divine testimonies drawn from Scripture, since, to anyone gifted with some intelligence, it can be demonstrated by itself how ridiculous that whole business is. For it is easily discerned that it contains nothing but the most contemptible fables and delusions. For if they believe there is some "Prunicus," who would not perceive from the very word itself how weak and flimsy that which they profess is, as I have already shown? For whatever is said to be "Prunicus" is useless; and therefore it is to be counted at the very least among things of no account. For how can that which is useless be praised? Furthermore, how foolish it is to suppose that Jaldabaoth was "drained" by Prunicus, and that from the one thus emptied a spark was cast down to the lowest depths! And that, having come to be in the upper realm, it recognized the one who was superior to the one who had been emptied. ^B And it is a very great wonder that a man, in whom there is a most minute spark, knows more than the angels who fashioned him! For the angels who made man, or rather the sons of Jaldabaoth, did not know the things above Jaldabaoth. But he who was created by him knew, through the spark. Therefore they overthrow themselves by their own dogmas, now honoring the serpent, now asserting that he was deceitful toward Eve, in saying: "He deceived Eve"; and now proclaiming him to be Christ, and now the son of the higher Jaldabaoth, who committed an injury against his sons by shutting off from them the knowledge from above, and who spurned his mother and the Father above, so as not to allow those sons whom he had begotten to worship the Father who is above him. How then is the serpent a heavenly king, if he has risen up against the Father? Or how, if he bestows knowledge, is he proclaimed to have "deceived" Eve? For he who imparts knowledge through deceit no longer ^C bestows knowledge, but instead of knowledge, ignorance. As it is indeed true to see that this is perfected in them. For having ignorance, they think it is knowledge, being truthful in this—in that they call their own deceit and ignorance by the name of knowledge. For he who brings some science through fraud, he offers not science, but replaces it with ignorance. That this happens to them is established by the most certain reasoning. For although they live in the greatest ignorance, they nevertheless think it is science. In which matter they are violently hallucinating, while they hide their error and ignorance under the name of science.

VII. They also bring forward other testimonies, saying that Moses in the desert set up the bronze serpent, having placed it there, so that it might be a remedy for those bitten by the sight of it. For they say that this form was the remedy for the bite. Yet again, they define these things against themselves. For if the bites were from serpents, and these were harmful, it follows that the serpent is not good. But that which was raised ^D by Moses at that time effected the cure through the contemplation of it, not because of the nature of the serpent, but because of the good pleasure of God, who, through the serpent, provided an antidote to those who had been bitten at that time. Nor is it anything to be wondered at that a person obtained healing through the same means by which he had been harmed. And let no one revile the creation of God, as others again are misled into saying. For this was foreshadowed to those in Num. xxi, 8 sqq.

^A the desert for the reason which the Lord, having come, states in the Gospel, that "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up," which indeed came to pass. For just as those who had insulted the Savior, as if he were a serpent, were harmed by the treachery of the serpent—that is, the devil—so, just as in the lifting up of the serpent healing came to those who had been bitten, so also in the crucifixion of Christ has a ransom been made for our souls from the bites of sin that have come to be within us. The same people even bring forward this very passage as testimony, saying: "Dost thou not see, as the Savior said, 'As Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up'?" And for this reason, they say, he also says in another place: "Be ye wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." And that which God has well ordained as symbols of instruction, these men drag to their own deceived way of thinking, ^B and they impudently adapt such images and signs, which God clearly provided for heavenly teaching, to the upholding of their own false doctrines.

VIII. For our Lord Jesus Christ, who is also God the Word, begotten of the Father before all ages without beginning and beyond all time, is by no means a serpent—far be it from us to think so—but he came against the serpent. Yet if at any time he said, "Be ye wise as serpents, and harmless as doves," it is fitting for us to ask and to know why he set these two figures before us for our instruction, the dove and the serpent. For there is nothing wise in the serpent except these two things: first, that when he is pursued, knowing that his whole life is centered in his head, and fearing the command given to him by God regarding man of old, which said, "Thou shalt keep his head, and he shall keep thy heel," he coils his whole body onto his head, hiding his skull, and in his great cunning offers up his other body [to the enemy]. So our only-begotten ^C God, who came forth from the Father, bids us, at a time of persecution and a time of temptation, to surrender all our possessions to the sword and the fire, but to protect our own head, that is, never to deny Christ. For "the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God," according to the Apostle. There is, however, another most cunning quality ^D of the serpent, as those who study the nature of this creature attest. For when, being thirsty, he comes forth from his lair to water that he may drink, he does not take his poison with him, but leaves it in his lair; and so, having arrived, he takes his drink of water. We ourselves should imitate this: that when we come to the holy Church of God, whether for prayer or to participate in the mysteries of God, we should not bring with us malice, or pleasure, or enmity, or anything else in our souls. For how would we be able

to imitate the dove, if we are not expert in malice? Although that genus of birds ^A is not in every respect praiseworthy. For it is a genus of doves that is profligate and not restrained from promiscuity, lustful, and at every hour inclined to pleasure. Moreover, it is faint-hearted and cowardly. But because the animal is guileless, patient, and does not remember wrongs, and furthermore because the Holy Spirit appeared in the form of a dove—the divine Word wishes that we imitate the will of the Holy Spirit, which is pleasing and agreeable to Him, and that we imitate the guilelessness of the guileless dove, so that we may be prudent toward what is good, yet guileless toward what is evil. And thus their entire dramatic artifice is dissolved. For straightaway the holy Apostle does not define this craftiness and treachery at greater length, but directs it against the devil and the serpent, saying, "I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent seduced Eve by his craftiness, your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity and purity of Christ and righteousness." You see how the Apostle declared the actions of the serpent toward Eve to be corruption, and terrible craftiness, and deception, and showed that nothing done by that same one was worthy of praise?

IX. Therefore, from every side, their madness is apprehended and made manifest to anyone who wishes to know the teaching of the truth and the knowledge of the Holy Spirit. But so as not to waste time, and having ^B shaken off this harsh and difficult storm of the sea, I will fit out the boat for other maritime voyages, so that I may carefully keep the helm, relying on the power of God and the prayers of the saints, so that as we sail past we may observe the swelling of the wild waves and the forms of the venomous beasts in the seas. And we may pass by unscathed by the venom of the lamprey, the stingray, the dragonet, the shark, and the scorpion-fish, ^C and through prayer and supplication may be able to reach the calm harbor of truth, also fulfilling in us the scripture which says, "They that go down to the sea, shall tell the works of the Lord." I shall therefore gird myself to narrate the next journey.

AGAINST THE CAIANITES, Which is heresy XVIII or XXXVIII.

I. They are called Caiani, having taken the name of the heresy from Cain. For they praise Cain and appoint him as their father, and they themselves, so to speak, ^D springing forth as if from a different rising of waves, are not outside the same swell and tempest; and as if they had sprung from a thorny thicket, they are not outside the entire pile of thorns, even if they differ in name. For there are many kinds of thorns, but in all of them the malice of stinging injustice is common. These men say that Cain is from the stronger power and the authority from above; and likewise Esau, and those with Core, and the Sodomites; the

^A truth is that they hold all these to be praiseworthy, and to be of their own kindred. For they pride themselves on being kinsmen of Cain, and of the Sodomites, and of Esau, and of Core; and these, they say, belong to the perfect and higher knowledge. For this reason they say that the Creator of this world, having busied himself with the destruction of these people, could not harm them at all. For they had hidden themselves from him and had been translated into the upper Aeon, whence the stronger power originates. For Wisdom had received them to herself, as being her own; and on this account they say that Judas had accurately understood the things concerning them. For they desire him also to be a kinsman of theirs, and in the excellence of their knowledge they include him among them. So much so that they also circulate a small book in his name, which they call the Gospel of Judas. And other writings like it they fashion in the same way against Hystera, that is, the womb, by which name they call the Creator of this whole fabric, of heaven and of earth. And they say that no one can be saved unless they have passed through all things, as Carpocrates also asserts.

277 II. For every one of them, on the pretext of this ^B doctrine, commits certain unspeakable acts, and wallowing in execrable lusts and every kind of outrage, calls upon the names of the individual angels—both the real ones and those falsely named by them—and attributes to each of them some detestable crime and sin as his distinctive mark; and he accommodates whatever crime he commits to the name of a certain angel. For when they commit anything of this kind, they are accustomed to preface it in this way: "O angel N., I perform your work! O power N., I am fulfilling your action!" And this is what is called "absolute knowledge" among them, since they obtain the opportunity to fly with impunity through all sorts of unspeakable outrages from the superior sects, namely the Gnostics, and Nicolaus, and the dogmas of the Valentinians and Carpocrates who are related to them.

There has also reached us a certain book of theirs, in which they have invented I know not what most wicked terms, and in which these things are contained. This, it says, is the angel by whom Moses ^C was blinded, and these are the angels by whom Core, Dathan, and Abiron and their followers were hidden and taken away. Furthermore, they have devised another book in the name of the apostle Paul, filled with perverse lust, which those whom they call Gnostics are accustomed to use, which they call the Anabaticon of Paul; they seized the opportunity for this forged work from the fact that the Apostle himself testifies that he was caught up into the third heaven and heard there unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. These, they say, are those unspeakable words. They teach these and similar things, honoring the wicked and rejecting the good. For as I have said, they say that Cain was from the stronger power, and Abel from the weaker. They attribute these powers to Eve

and say that through their interaction they brought forth both; so that Abel belongs to one, and Cain to the other. Furthermore, they claim that Adam and Eve drew their origin from these same powers, or angels, and that the children whom they afterwards begat—Cain, I say, and Abel—strove against one another, and that he who was begotten of the stronger power slew the offspring of the inferior and weaker power.

^C III. These portentous lies they sow in the handing down of the pestilential mysteries of their ignorance, to the ruin of their followers, and they admonish them as follows: that every person must choose for himself the stronger power, and separate himself from the inferior and weak one—that is, the one that created the heaven, the flesh, and the world—and thereby fly up to the heights through the crucifixion of Christ. For this reason, they say, he came down from above, that in him a strong power might be accomplished, having taken the trophy against the weaker power, and having delivered up the body. Some of them say this, while others teach otherwise. ^D For some think that Christ was betrayed by Judas because he was evil and dared to violate the ordinances of the Law. For they revere Cain and Judas, as I have said, and they say that he handed him over for this reason: because he wished to overturn what had been well taught. Others among them say not so, but that, being good, he was betrayed according to heavenly knowledge. For the princes knew, they claim, that if Christ were to be taken up onto the cross, all their power would be exhausted; since Judas was not ignorant of this, he hastened and moved every stone to deliver him to the Jews. In this matter, they claim, he consulted excellently for our salvation. And therefore it behooves us to honor him with praise, since by his work the salvation of the cross was prepared for us, and the knowledge of heavenly things was communicated on the same occasion.

But since these men honor and praise no one who is truly good, they are, as the saying goes, as far off as heaven is from earth. Nor is it hidden that these seeds of ignorance and fraud were sown in them by the devil. In them is fulfilled that which is written: "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that say it is sweet which is bitter, and bitter which is sweet" (Isa. v, 20). For both the Old and New Testament proclaim with a clear voice the impiety of Cain. But these men, being lovers of darkness and imitators of evildoers, hate Abel, love Cain, and celebrate Judas with their own praise. They possess a corrupt knowledge, positing two powers, a weaker and a stronger, which contend against each other and bring into the world not a variation of wills, but cause those who come into the light to have their origin—some from evil, others from goodness—by nature. For they say that no one is good or base by the deliberation of the soul, but by nature itself.

^A IV. Let us first look at what is written in the Old Testament concerning Cain. "Cursed," it says, "are you from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand; and you shall be groaning and trembling upon the earth." The things which the Lord speaks about this same matter in the Gospel agree with the Old Testament, when the Jews had said, "We have God as our Father." For the Lord challenged them thus: "You are of your father the devil, because he is a liar; because his father was a liar. He was a murderer from the beginning, and did not stand in the truth. When he speaks, he speaks a lie from his own, because his father also was a liar." From this, other heresies, when they hear this statement, say that the devil is the father of the Jews, and that he has another father, and that his father is in turn another. But with darkened minds, and with tongues set loose, they vaunt this. ^B For they refer the lineage of the Lord of all—both of Jews and Christians, and indeed of all—back to him, saying that this one is the Father of that father who prescribed the Law through Moses and performed so many wonders. But the matter is far otherwise, O most clear one. For the Lord, constantly taking care of us in all things, so that we might not craftily invent one thing for another, or truly suppose the devil to be their father, addresses His disciples thus: "Did I not choose you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"—signifying that he was a devil not by nature, but by intention. Again, in another place: "Father, Lord of heaven and earth, keep those whom You have given me. When I was with them, I guarded them, and no one of them perished, except the son of perdition." Item elsewhere: "The Son of man must be betrayed, as it is written of him. But woe to him by whom he is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born," and so forth. ^C We have therefore clearly understood that He meant this about Judas when He spoke with the Jews. For whoever is overcome by someone is also a slave to him; and whomsoever anyone obeys, this one he has as a father and the author of his persuasion. Therefore the Lord uses these words: "You are children of your father the devil," because they obeyed Judas instead of Christ, just as Eve, having turned aside from God, obeyed the serpent from the beginning. Furthermore, that he was not only a liar, but also a thief, according to what is said in the Gospel: "For this reason He entrusted the money-box to him, so that he might have no excuse when, for the sake of greed, he betrayed his own Master into the hands of men." For who else is the father of this man, who existed as a liar before him, if not Cain, of whom Judas is the imitator? ^D For there, having lied to his brother, he deceived him under the guise of brotherly love, and seduced him through the lie, and leading him out into the field, he lifted his hand and killed him. Thus also Judas: "What do you wish to give me," he says, "and I will deliver him to you?"

And, "Whomever I shall kiss, he is the one; seize him." And the traitor approaching said, "Hail, Rabbi," honoring him with his lips, but holding a heart far removed from God.

V. Wherefore this is that Judas who, having become their father and having turned into a Satan and a devil, not by nature but by will, on account of his denial of God and his betrayal, has become a son of this Cain by his imitation of the murderer and the liar; since his father before him—not Adam, but the devil—was a liar, whose imitation he displayed in the fratricide, in hatred, and in the lie, and in his talking back to God, by saying, "Am I my brother's keeper? I do not know where he is." Just as also the devil says to the Lord, "Does Job fear God for naught?" For because the devil himself deceived Eve and Adam with a lie, saying one thing for another and displaying a feigned friendship, saying, "You will be as gods, and you will not die," Cain, imitating this one, deceived his brother under the appearance of brotherly love, saying, "Let us go out into the field." On account of this, also the holy John said, "He who hates his brother, this one is not perfected in love, but is from Cain; because he killed his brother. And for what reason did he kill him? Because his works were evil." And he envied his works, because they were good. So then, do not these men also, by envying Abel all the more, who has good works, and honoring Cain, stand refuted by the very words of the Savior, who passed a severe and unhesitating judgment against them: "That all the righteous blood shed from righteous Abel from the beginning to the prophet Zacharias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar, shall be required of this generation," and so forth?

VI. It is false, therefore, that, as these men claim, Judas handed over the Savior because of the knowledge he possessed; nor did the Jews gain a reward by crucifying the Lord, even though through the cross we have our salvation. For neither did Judas hand him over so that he might become our salvation, but he was led by ignorance, jealousy, and the love of money, which he had joined to the denial of God. For even if the Scripture predicted that Christ was about to be handed over to the cross, or even if the divine Scripture spoke of the transgressions to be committed by us in the last of days, one of us who performs these unlawful acts would not necessarily find an excuse by bringing forward the testimony of Scripture, which predicted that these things would be. For we do not act because the Scripture said it; rather, because we were about to do it, the Scripture predicted it, on account of God's foreknowledge, and so that God, being good, while meting out wrath against those who sin, might not be supposed to be seized by passion. For the wrath from God against each one of those who sin does not arise from passion. For the divine nature is passionless; but it metes out wrath against man, not having been seized by a passion of anger, nor overcome and mastered by wrath. For it shows that the passionless...

nature of God, in declaring the coming judgment and the just punishment at His hands, signifies the impassibility of His divinity. Thus, the Scripture spoke in advance, securing us through foreknowledge, and teaching us, so that we might not fall into the inexorable wrath of God—which is not defined by passion nor resulting from defeat, but which is most justly prepared for those men who perform sin and do not repent from the truth. ^B

VII. We must think the same thing concerning the punishment of the cross. For it is not because the Scripture predicted it would so come to pass that Christ was acted upon by the Jews to the cross, or was betrayed by Judas: but because Judas was about to betray Him, and the Jews were about to crucify Him, for this reason did the divine Scripture in the Old Testament, and the Lord Himself in the Gospel, pronounce it as a thing to happen at some time. Wherefore, Judas did not betray the Lord out of a certain knowledge of that singular benefit that from Him would derive to the world, as those people falsely claim; but rather he knew Him to be his Lord, even while he was ignorant that His passion would be the salvation of the world. For how could he care for the salvation of men, who was called by the Savior Himself the son of perdition? And did he not hear that word: It were good for that man if he had not been born? And likewise: Friend, wherefore art thou come? And, One of you shall deliver me up; and that: He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me, as the Gospel expressed from the previous witness of the Psalter; and, Woe to him by whom the Son of Man is betrayed? ^C For Judas himself revealed everything concerning himself, and exposed the madness of those who praise him, and his own, even if against his will; yet nevertheless, after he had received the reward, the thirty pieces of silver, he later repented, and returned the money as if he had perpetrated some evil thing—evil for himself, and evil also for those who crucified Him. ^D But the Lord, bringing about of Himself that which was good for us and the universe, delivered Himself up, that salvation might be for all. Therefore, we give thanks not to the traitor Judas, but to the most benign Savior, who laid down His life for us, His own sheep, just as He Himself said. For how could he, who thought he was performing some good thing, later say: I repent, for I have betrayed innocent blood? And he returned the silver; as the prophets wrote concerning him: And he returned the thirty pieces of silver, the price of Him that was priced by the children of Israel; and again in another prophet: If it be good in your eyes, give the wage

or ^A refuse it. Item, another prophet: They gave the silver, the price of the one valued. And he said: Cast it into the smelting furnace, and see if it is proven, as I was proven by the children of Israel.

VIII. And how many things can we collect from the divine Scripture ^B concerning those things that were fulfilled in our Lord, not stemming from any voluntary contribution of Judas toward the good, but rather from that which our Savior and Lord Jesus Christ, God, for our sake, submitted to—not compelled by necessity, but by His own volition—the betrayal and the economy of the cross for our salvation? I know, indeed, that I am bringing forward a great volume of testimonies; as another prophet says again: Let his habitation be desert, and ^C let another take his office. Who, having been thrown headlong, burst asunder in the midst, and all his entrails were poured out. And the end, having used a noose, showed the entirety of his own destruction, having missed his hope, according to his disorderly and rash treachery against his Master, and because of avarice, into the denial of God; just as the apostles set Matthias in his place in their number, saying: From which Judas ^D strayed, to go to his own place. What place, indeed, is this, if not that which the Savior pointed out to him, saying that he is the son of perdition? There he obtained, in place of a portion, a portion; and in place of an apostolic office, the place of perdition.

Having thought that these things said suffice concerning this matter, let us pass on in order to another heresy, O beloved, laying bare again the school-taught, beastly, and venomous teachings of those who, through the contrived devilish design, have been thunderstruck for the harm of the world among the rest of the sects. For having uncovered the minds of such people, who long for the worse, resembling the kind of the *buprestis* beetle (50), and having crushed them, being harmful, by the power of God, let us turn our minds to the investigation of the others, and let us call upon God as our helper, O children of Christ.

AGAINST THE SETHIANS

I. The Sethians, again, are another heresy, so called. This one is not found everywhere, nor is the one before this, which is called the Cainites. Perhaps by now even the majority of these have been uprooted from the world. For whatever is not from God will not stand, but although it may flourish for a time, it cannot remain permanently. Perhaps, I think, I may have encountered this heresy in the land of the Egyptians. For I do not precisely remember the place where I met them.

^A And as for those things that pertain to them, we have learned some parts from direct observation, and others from their own writings.

For these Sethians boast that their lineage descends from Seth, the son of Adam. They glorify him, and refer to him everything that pertains to virtue—all the proofs of virtue and justice, and whatever else of that kind there may be. Furthermore, they name him Christ, and they assert that he is Jesus himself. They teach their doctrine in this way: that all things were brought into being by the angels, and not by the power above.

^B For they agree in this respect with the first heresy, that of the Cainites, saying that from the very beginning there existed two men, and from these two were Cain and Abel. And they say that the angels, being in conflict regarding them, came into opposition with one another; and thus it came about that Abel was slain by Cain. For there was indeed a conflict among the angels, struggling over those two generations of men—that which generated Cain and that which generated Abel. But they say that the power above, which they call the Mother and a female, proved victorious. For it seems to them that there are mothers above, and females and males; and they go so far as to speak of kinship and patriarchates. Since, therefore, as they say, the Mother—the one called female—was victorious, and when she perceived that Abel had been killed, she took thought and caused Seth to be born, and placed her own power within him. And having grasped in him the seed of the power from above, and the spark sent down from above for the first foundation of the seed and the establishment. And this is the establishment of justice, and the election of the seed and lineage; so that through this establishment, and through this seed, the powers of the angels who had created the world and the two men from the beginning might be overthrown. For this reason, therefore, the lineage of Seth is distinguished and descends from that point, being an elect lineage, separated from the other. As time went on, they say, and the two lineages—that of Cain and that of Abel—having come together for the sake of much wickedness and having been mingled in the same place, the Mother of all, having observed this, willed to prepare a pure seed of men, as I said before, ^C because Abel had been slain. And she chose this Seth, and showed him to be pure. And in him alone she deposited the lineage of her own power and purity.

[D ] III. But seeing again, once more, a great intermingling and the reckless impulse of the angels and men—those having come to the mixing of the two lineages, and certain foundations of lineages having caused their disorder—that same Mother and female went forth again and brought a flood, and destroyed every faction of men of every opposing lineage; so that, truly, the pure and righteous lineage from Seth might alone remain in the world, for the establishment of the lineage above and the spark of righteousness. For having

^A again brought Cham, who was born of their lineage, the angels introduced him into the ark. For out of those eight persons who are recorded as having been saved in Noe’s ark, they claim that seven were of the pure lineage, but that the eighth, by name Cham, having been produced by an alien power, had hidden the heavenly Mother and slipped into the ark; and that this very thing was accomplished by the fraud and counsel of the angels. For since, as they say, those angels knew that all their own lineage was about to be wiped out in the flood, with a certain craftiness they cast Cham into the ark for the preservation of the lineage of wickedness which had been created by them. And from this source, error and forgetfulness toward men, and disorderly impulses of sins, and a manifold mixture of wickedness have arisen in the world. And thus the world was turned back again to the ancient state of disorder, and was filled with evils, just as it was in the beginning before the flood. But from Seth, according to the seed and according to the succession of the lineage, Christ himself, Jesus, came, not born according to lineages, but miraculously appearing in the world; for he himself is that same Seth, who in those times was Seth, and now having visited the lineage of men as Christ, has been sent down from the Mother from above.

IV. In this way do they determine all things. But how stupid, how feeble, and how vain are the things which are boasted by them, no one fails to see. For there were not two human beings created, but only one, Adam; and from Adam were Cain, and Abel, and Seth born. And no longer [did they proceed] from two human beings, but from one alone until the flood, all the generations of Adam having their own foundations in the world. But from the flood, [they proceeded] again ^B from Noe, the one man, and not from diverse ones, but from the one Noe, who was in the succession from the seed of Seth; the whole lineage of men is derived, not divided in two, but comprised in one stock. From whom both Noe and his wife proceeded, and his children Sem, Cham, and Japhet, and also the wives of each one; who indeed were all born from the lineage of Seth, and not produced ^C from two human beings who never existed on earth, just as these men invent.

V. Furthermore, they circulate certain books inscribed with the names of great men. Of these they attribute seven in all to Seth; others they call *allogeneis*—that is, of an alien lineage. There is also another book under the false name of Abraham, which they hawk as an Apocalypse, filled with every kind of wickedness. Besides this, they lie that others were edited by Moses, and others by others. But bringing their own minds to a great stupidity, they say that a certain woman, Horaea, was the wife of Seth. See for yourself, beloved, the mindlessness of these people, so that you may condemn their stage-acting ^D and their fabulous vanity and fabricated nonsense in every way. For there are indeed some other heresies which say that there is a certain Power, which they call by name Horaea. Those, therefore, who imagine that Power which exists among others, called Horaea, say that she was the wife of Seth. From which we can demonstrate, as you know,

^A and that Seth was a human being by nature, and not something changed from above, but was by nature a brother to Cain and Abel, born of one father and one mother. For Scripture says: "Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain." And he gave him the name Cain, which is interpreted as "possession," saying: "I have gotten a man through the Lord God." And again of Abel: "Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore a son, and he called his name Abel." And after many things, after the death of Abel: "Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore a son, and he called his name Seth," which is interpreted as "compensation." For, he says, "God has raised me up a seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew." And the words, "I have gotten through God," and "God raised up for me," indicate one God, who is the Creator of all things and the Giver of those who are born. That both of them, Cain and Seth, had wives is clear; for Abel was killed while younger, not having yet married.

VI. But as it is found in the Jubilees, which is also called the Lesser Genesis, the book contains the names of the wives of both Cain and Seth, in order that they who have introduced those fabricated fables into human life might be thoroughly put to shame in every way. For when Adam had begotten sons and daughters, it was necessary at that time for the children to be joined to their own sisters. For such a thing was not unlawful, since there was no other race. For even Adam himself, so to speak, was joined in marriage to his own daughter, who was almost fashioned out of his own body, having been formed for him by God, and it was not unlawful. And his sons were also joined—Cain to the elder sister, named Save, and Seth, the third son born after Abel, to his sister called Azura. There were also other children born to Adam, as the Lesser Genesis contains, nine after those first three, so that he had two daughters and twelve sons, one of whom was killed, and eleven were left surviving in life. You have the indication of these things also in the Genesis of the world, and in the first book of Moses, which speaks in this way: "And Adam lived nine hundred and thirty years, and he begat sons and daughters, and he died."

VII. ^D When the human race had multiplied and the number of Adam’s descendants had increased, the exactness regarding ^C honorable marriage was gradually broadened as it progressed. And since children and children’s children were born to Adam, and daughters were brought forth from them in the succession of the race, thereafter they were no longer taken to marriage with their own sisters. But in accordance with lawful order...

and before the written law given through Moses, the institution of honorable marriage ^A prevailed; and they took the wives of their uncles for themselves. And thus, as men were just beginning to multiply, the two lineages were mingled, that of Cain with the lineage of Seth, and the lineage of Seth with the other, as well as the other lineages of the sons of Adam. From that point on, when the flood had utterly destroyed the whole condition of mankind, Noah alone was kept safe, having found grace before God, having been found righteous in that generation. He built for himself an ark according to the commands of God, as we have already mentioned before, as the true Scriptures contain. The same Book of Truth declares that he was saved in it, together with the seven souls mentioned along with him; I mean his own wife, and his three sons, and likewise their three wives. From this, the truth establishes that the remnants of the human composition in the world came into being once more. Whence, as they proceeded by generation, and with the son succeeding the father, the age passed through five generations.

And at that time the founding of Babylon occurred in the land of the Assyrians, and the tower then built by them. At that time, as I have already related in the previous heresies, in the succession of the generations I have discussed above, there were all together seventy-two men in number, leaders and heads: thirty-two of the lineage of Ham, fifteen of Shem, and twenty-five of Japheth. And thus the tower and Babylon came to be. From these, tribes and languages were scattered over the whole earth. And since those seventy-two, who were building the tower at that time, were dispersed having been confused in their languages, and having been inspired by a divine will from the one which they knew, they gained others—one this one, another that. From which, even to this day, the composition of languages has persisted; so that, to anyone who wishes, it is possible for him to find the leader of each language: as Javan had the Greek tongue, from whom those called Ionians are named, who hold the ancient language of the Greeks; Thiras ^B that of the Thracians; Mosoch the language of the Mossynoeci; Thobel that of the Thessalians; Elud that of the Lydians; Gephar that of the Gaspheni; Mistrem that of the Egyptians; Phous that of the Axumitae; Armoth that of the Arabs; and each of the rest, to ensure I do not name everyone, was inspired with his own language. And thus the succession of each language has spread in the world.

VIII. Whence, therefore, did these men falsify their statements, by introducing their own mythology, dreaming and imagining things that do not exist as if they were real, and scattering the things that actually exist from their own minds? But the whole purpose of the devil was breathed into these human souls. It is possible to see and marvel ^D (52), that in many absurdities...

and in ways unworthy, he deceitfully lured men and dragged them into crime—namely through acts of prostitution, adultery, lusts, pagan superstitions and magic arts, the shedding of blood, robberies and insatiable greeds, gambling, gluttony, and other such wickedness—yet he never dared, before the coming of Christ the Savior, to utter an insulting word against his own Lord or to conceive of rebellion. For he used to wait for the coming of Christ, as he says: *It is written of you, that he will command his angels concerning you, and in their hands they shall bear you up* (Ps. XC, 11). For he had constantly heard it announced by the prophets that the presence of Christ the Lord would be the redemption of those who had sinned and who would embrace repentance. Therefore, he too hoped to attain some mercy. But when the wretch perceived that his own conversion for the sake of obtaining salvation was rejected by Christ, he immediately opened his mouth against his own Lord and vomited forth all manner of slanders, casting into men the suspicion that they should deny the One who truly is, and seek after one who is not. In this way, then, it is evident from every side that these people also are led into deception and have been deluded. For Seth has died, and his years have been recorded. For having lived nine hundred and twelve years, he paid the debt of nature, having begotten sons and daughters, as the divine Scripture says. ^B And his son succeeded his father in turn (Enos was his name), and he too, having lived nine hundred and five years, departed from this life of ours, having begotten sons and daughters, as the same book of truth contains.

IX. What logic, therefore, allows this Seth, who died at that time and left behind sons who also finished their own time of life in succession, to be Christ the Lord—who, out of a desire to represent the life and salvation of men, was born of the Virgin Mary, although he himself, having been begotten by the Father before all time, remains forever with him, being God himself and the subsistent Word? He who in these last times came into the world, and by fashioning for himself from the Virgin Mother’s womb flesh and taking on a human soul, thus became man in the most perfect sense, having preached to us the mysteries of life, and having established his own disciples as workers of righteousness, and having instructed the race of men in his own teaching through himself and through them; he did not reveal the dogmas of the Sethians, nor did he name himself Seth—as those triflers, like men drunk, most mendaciously proclaim. ^C

But since today this heresy has been reduced to such a small number, I have not felt the need to refute it with an extended discourse; and therefore, what has been said so far is sufficient. Especially since their insanity can be easily overcome, and it convicts and exposes itself: not only in what pertains to the plan for bringing forth Christ and that most full... ^D ...have fallen away from the truth.

IX. Whence, then, shall Seth, who died at that time, and whose sons also passed from this life in succession, be found to be the Lord who was born of the ever-virgin Mary, having willed to be for the life of men—he who was born timelessly, who is with the Father always, the subsistent God the Word, and who, having come at the end of days, and having fashioned for himself from the virginal womb flesh and having taken on a human soul, thus became man in the most perfect way, having preached to us the mysteries of life, and having established his own disciples as workers of righteousness, and having taught the race of men his own doctrine through himself and through them? He did not reveal the things of the Sethians, nor did he name himself Seth—as these men, raving and possessed by a certain drunkenness, have fallen away from the truth.

But for the present, since the heresy is small (53), I have not felt the need to extend the refutation against it, and I am satisfied with these present points alone. For their folly is vulnerable, and able both to convict and to expose itself; not only regarding the conduct of Christ, and the slandered teaching that they believe and assert that Seth himself is, but also...

regarding the two men they speak of. For if those spirits, as they call them, recognize some higher origin, the deeds performed by the two could not certainly have been brought to completion without the assistance of the one whom they define as the mother of all. For both of those spirits proceeded from the one cause, without which absolutely nothing of those things which exist could have been produced. Thus eventually they must necessarily recur to the point of acknowledging that there is one Lord of all things, and Creator, and Maker of all, once a single origin has been proven. Having finished these arguments against this heresy, and having exposed the pestilential venom of their kind, like the venom of vipers, we must turn our speech next to another, as the series of our instituted work calls us. ^A

AGAINST THE ARCHONTICS, Which is Heresy XX or XL.

I. Next to this is the Archontic heresy, which, however, is not seen in many places outside of Palestine. Although they have also spread their virus into Greater Armenia. Indeed, even in Lesser Armenia this tare was sown by a certain man who, a little before the death of Emperor Constantius, journeyed from Armenia to the land of Palestine, by the name of Eutactus—or rather, more accurately, Atactus—that is to say, disturbed in his conduct. Having imbibed that wretched dogma, he returned to his home and began to profess what he had learned. Furthermore, he had drawn this poison, as it were from a viper, from a certain old man named Peter, though he was little worthy of that name; he lived in the territory of Eleutheropolis and Jerusalem, at the third milestone from Hebron, a town they call Cabarbaricha. ^B To this old man the dress was at first dreadfully harsh, and affected for the sake of simulation; and while outwardly he was clothed in a sheepskin, inwardly he was a most rapacious and hidden wolf. For he appeared to be an anchorite, living in a cave. He drew many to himself, supposedly having renounced all their possessions, and he was commonly called "Father" both on account of his age and his appearance; he would distribute whatever he had to the needy, and gave alms daily. But from his early youth he had addicted himself to various heresies. Later, having been denounced to Bishop Aetius and convicted of the Gnostic heresy, he was deposed from the priesthood. For he had once been appointed presbyter of that place. ^C

Having been exposed and driven away by Aetius, he departed and settled in the Arabian town of Cochaben, where the seeds of the Ebionites and Nazoraeans had begun to sprout, as we have already signaled in the refutation of many heresies. Finally, as if having become wiser with the maturity of age, he returned postliminiously, carrying that hidden virus in his breast, being unknown to all until, at long last, from certain remarks that he whispered into the ears of some

^A he was detected, found to be a heretic by us, and excommunicated, and by the efforts of our own mediocrity, he was convicted. Whence he subsequently retreated into a cave, condemned by the execration of all, and abandoned as much by the brethren as by the many from whom the necessary provisions of life were supplied. To this old man, therefore, the aforementioned Eulactes—if he is even to be called by that name—when he had come from Egypt and had been imbued by him with impious dogmas, carried back such a plague into his own homeland as if it were an exquisite merchandise. This region, as we have said, was Armenia Minor in the vicinity of Satala. When he had returned there, he infected very many in that same Armenia Minor, insinuating himself into the friendship of certain wealthy people, and of a woman of senatorial rank, and of other prominent personages, through whom, as they were leading men, he brought destruction upon an infinite number of people. But the Lord quickly removed him from the midst, when he had already scattered his tares.

II. Regarding the Apocryphal Books of these heretics, and their errors concerning the heavens and the soul

II. But these men have nevertheless invented certain apocryphal books for themselves, the names of which are these: for one they call the "Symphonia"—a small book to be sure—and another the "Great Symphonia." But they also heap upon themselves certain other books, if they should happen upon them, so that they may seem to confirm their own error through many things which they introduce. They also make use of books called "The Aliens" [Allogeneis]; for there are books so named. They also take arguments from the "Ascension of Isaiah," and from other apocryphal works of this kind; but they make most use of that book which is called "Symphonia," in which they define there to be eight or seven celestial spheres. In each of these, they say, princes reside, so that they are distributed through seven spheres, and in each one there exists a prince. Furthermore, they say that certain ranks are assigned to each prince. Above all these, in the eighth heaven, they establish the luminous Mother, after the manner of other heresies. ^B But some of them contaminate their own bodies with the foulest lusts. Others, feigning fasts, deceive the more simple-minded under the guise of monks, and sell themselves on the renunciation of all goods. Now indeed, in each heaven, as has been said, they place a prince and a power with some angelic attendants; for they say that each prince has begotten and produced his own satellites for himself. They deny that the flesh rises again, and attribute this only to the soul. They condemn baptism, even though there might be among them some who had been initiated into baptism beforehand. ^C They repudiate the communion of the mysteries and goodness itself, as being alien and discovered in the name of Sabaoth; for they wish this one to be, according to some of the other heresies, reigning as a tyrant in the seventh heaven, and prevailing violently over the others. They call the soul the food of the principalities and powers, without which they cannot live, because, having been created by the heavenly dew, it quickens and fosters them. And when it attains to knowledge and has fled from the baptism of the church and the name of Sabaoth, who is the author of the law, it begins to fly up to the individual

^A heavenly spheres, and to offer an account to each power; and thus it passes beyond to the Mother above and the Father of all, from whence it once descended into this world. I have already said how they reject baptism, as flies die and spoil the preparation of fragrant oil; and as concerning these and those like them, the proverb in Ecclesiastes is spoken. For they are flies that truly die and cause death, and spoil the perfumed oil of fragrance, the holy mysteries of God which have been granted to us in the bath for the remission of sins.

^B III. Indeed, one might wonder at finding among those who write on natural history things full of utility, if one is willing to imitate the prudence of the bee, which settles upon all blossoms and gathers what is useful to itself from every side. For a prudent and discerning man suffers detriment from nothing, but gains from every occasion; whereas the imprudent man will suffer loss, as the holy prophet also says: *Who is wise, and will understand these things? And it is the word of the Lord, and he will know them, because the ways of the Lord are right; but the impious shall stumble in them.* For we have found, or rather we ourselves observe among those called naturalists, that the species of beetle—called by some a "bylaros"—has the habit ^C of wallowing in filth and dung, and this is both food and labor for them; but to others, this same muddy food is a cause of distress and stench. And while for bees this dung and stench is death, for the "bylari" it is labor and food and business. But to bees, on the contrary, fragrance and flowers and perfumes are for refreshment, for creation and eating, and for labor and business; but to the aforementioned beetles, or "bylari," such things are the opposite. For in fact, he who wishes to test these, as the naturalists say, by taking perfume—I mean opobalsam or nard—and bringing it to the beetles, causes death to them. For they die at once, not bearing the fragrance. So too these [heretics], desiring ^D wantonness, and impurity, and wickedness, place their own hope in evil things; but as soon as they approach the holy bath and that fragrance, they die, blaspheming God and rejecting His sovereignty.

IV. But we shall refute them with one or two testimonies. For if there be those called principalities and powers, they have not come into being outside of God, especially in the heavens. For the Scripture speaks of angels and archangels, not as being arranged in opposition, but as ministering spirits sent forth for service for the sake of those who shall inherit salvation. For indeed, upon the earth, according to each kingdom, there are many authorities,

^A subject to one king. For the authorities that exist are ordained by God, says the Apostle. Therefore, he who resists the authority resists the ordinance of God. For rulers are not against the good, but for the good; and they are not against the truth, but for the truth. Do you wish not to fear the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from it. For it does not bear the sword in vain. For it is God’s minister, appointed by God for this very purpose, against anyone who does evil. Do you see how this worldly authority is established by God, and has received the authority of the sword? Not from anywhere else, but from God, for the purpose of retribution. And we cannot say, because there are principalities and authorities in the world, that the king of these is not king; but rather, that while there are principalities and authorities in the world, there is ^B also a king over them. Just as we see upon earth—it has been demonstrated—that the authorities are not contrary to the king, but are subordinate for the administration of the whole kingdom and for the good order of the earth; where there are murders, and battles, and ignorances, and [various] teachings, and legal order and lawlessness—it is for this reason that authorities exist, so that all things may be well-ordered and governed by God into a well-regulated constitution of the administration of the whole world—so also in heaven, and indeed especially there, where there is no envy, no jealousy, no lawlessness, no opposition, no sedition, no swearing of oaths, no robbery, nor anything else of that sort, authorities are established for a different purpose. And what do I mean, if not for the rhythm of the hymn, for the pure doxology on high, for which our generous God and King willed to grant to each of those created by Him appropriate glory, so that the brilliance and unassailable ^C splendor of His kingdom may be eternally glorified? Clearly, therefore, those people are led astray, being ignorant of the grace of God.

V. Concerning the Slanderer and the False Mythology of the Heretics

V. Furthermore, they claim, as has been indicated by me before, that the devil is the son of the seventh authority, that is to say, of Sabaoth. And that Sabaoth is the God of the Jews, and that the devil is his evil son, who, while existing upon the earth, resists his own Father. They claim that this Father is neither the kind of being—that is, evil—that they say he is, nor again is he the incomprehensible God, whom they call Father; but rather that he belongs to the authority of the left. And these people add another fable of this sort. They say that the devil, approaching Eve, had intercourse with her as a man with a woman, and that from him she conceived both Cain and Abel. From this they assert that the one rose up against the other on account of the ^D envy with which they were incited against one another, and not because Abel was more acceptable to God, as is the truth; but they distort the truth with a new kind of lie. For they say that both were burning with love for their own sister, and for this reason Cain rose up against Abel and killed him.

^A For they say that they were by nature born of the seed of the devil, as I have said before.

They do not lack testimonies drawn from the Holy Scriptures, which they abuse to deceive men. One such is that which I mentioned in another heresy, which the Saviour said to the Jews: “You are of the devil,” and, “When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar, as is his father.” ^B By this they wish to show that Cain is the devil, since he said, “He was a murderer from the beginning,” and to point out that his father is the devil; and that the father of the devil is that liar prince, whom these most foolish men, blaspheming against their own heads, say is Sabaoth, thinking that Sabaoth is the proper name of some God. We have discussed this matter at length in previous heresies, where we also provided the interpretation of Sabaoth and other names, such as Eli and Eloi, 296 Israel, Sadadai, Ellion, Rabboni, Ia, Adonai, Iabe. We have shown that, if we interpret these words correctly, they are various titles used to proclaim the glory of God, not names imposed to signify the Divinity itself. And we shall take care to repeat them here, providing their interpretation: Israel is God; Eloim, God always; Eli, my God; Saddai, the sufficient one; Rabboni, Lord; Ia, Lord; Adonai, He who is Lord; Iabe, He who was and is and always exists, just as He Himself declares to Moses: “He who is has sent me to you, you shall say to them.” Ellion signifies the Most High, and Sabaoth is interpreted as "of hosts." Therefore, the Lord Sabaoth is the Lord of hosts. For this word "Lord" is always added wherever the name of Sabaoth is used in the Scripture. It does not only state, "Sabaoth said to me," or "Sabaoth spoke," but it immediately adds, "The Lord Sabaoth." For so it is written in Hebrew, *Adonai Sabaoth*, which is translated as "the Lord of hosts."

^C VI. But these things, which were spoken altogether excellently, are vainly distorted by them and those like them through calumny and malice, due to the blindness of their minds. For our Saviour, in the discourse He held with the Jews, was by no means speaking about the devil, as anyone who strives to cling to the truth sees openly; but He used this expression on account of Judas. For they were not children of Abraham, whom He had once received under the oak of Mamre before He assumed flesh, but by their own decision they declared themselves children of the perfidy of Judas, whom the Lord calls Satan and devil in these words: “Did I not choose you twelve, and one of you is a devil?” ^D And for this reason, the Lord, exposing his wickedness, said: “When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources.” To which pertains that which is written in another place in the Gospel, that he was a thief and carried the money box. This Judas, therefore, having been called by the name of devil, had as his father...

^A Cain, who defrauded his brother by a lie and slew him. And he, too, when asked by the Lord, "Where is Abel, your brother?" answered with a lie, "I know not." Merito, therefore, this man also, who in his character has imitated the true devil, is rightly proclaimed by the mouth of the Lord as his son. For by whomsoever anyone is overcome, to him he is enslaved. And each of us, whatever we may carry out, will have as fathers those whose examples we have expressed in the same deeds. Wherefore that sentence of the Lord is now clearly explained: "You are children of the devil." Likewise: "When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for his father is a liar." By these words He understands Judas and Cain. That phrase, moreover—"For his father also is a liar"—is to be referred to the devil, because some things were perpetrated by them in imitation of him. For the devil, breathing into the mouth of the serpent, spoke all things falsely, and thus he deceived Eve at that time. And in this way the whole fable fabricated by these people utterly vanishes. For the fact that Scripture testifies concerning Cain, that he slew his brother because he was from the devil, has been demonstrated entirely; it was not because ^B any fetus was conceived by Eve from the seed of the devil, as if she had brought forth Cain and Abel through a certain conjugal union and joining of bodies, as pleased these people; but rather, on account of their similarity of character and the depravity expressed by imitation of the devil, he was called his son.

VII. Furthermore, it is also asserted by these same people that Adam had received Seth as a genuine offspring from his wife Eve. But then they say that that supreme Power, having descended with the angels who are the ministers of the better God, had snatched away Seth himself, whom they also call an alien. And when they had taken him up into a certain place on high, and had nurtured him for a long period of time, so that he might not by chance be killed, they finally, after a long interval, brought him into this world, and rendered him both spiritual and corporeal, so that he might not be oppressed by ^C Cain or by the other powers and principalities of the Creator of the world. Moreover, that he had ceased to venerate the same Creator and Maker, and had acknowledged that Power which cannot be comprehended by any name, and had disclosed many things against the author of the world and his principalities and powers. Hence, they also produced some books inscribed in the name of Seth, which they affirm were handed down and left behind by him. They also have others in the name of both him and his seven children. For they hold that just as many were procreated by him, who are named—as we have shown in other heresies—Gnostics, that is to say, and Sethians. Moreover, they mention other prophets; a certain Martiades, and Marsianus, whom they imagine to have been snatched up into the heavens and to have descended on the third day. They add many other ^D spurious and ridiculous fables, and they cast many insults against the true and omnipotent God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. They claim that He is a ruler and the inventor of all iniquity, so that they are throttled by their own confession.

For if He is an inventor of evils and a malefactor, would He not be proven good by this very fact, as we have objected against other heresies, in that He has enacted many decrees against lewdness, adulteries, rapine, greed, and injuries? For they themselves acknowledge Him to be the God of the Jews. Yet He gave the Law to the Jews, in which He forbade all those things of which they claim He is the author. How could He be called the father of Satan, ^A having shown so many things against him, if He is alien to the God who is called the "God on high" by them, and is not the very same God Almighty, our King and Lord Jesus Christ, who in the Law, in the Gospels, in the prophets, and in the apostles is the very same God and Lord, and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ? As the Lord Himself clearly teaches us in the Gospel, saying: "I confess to Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth," by which He signifies that His ^B Father is the God of all.

VIII. He also clearly declares that there will be a resurrection of the dead, when He says: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." By "temple," He meant His own body, which was being destroyed by the hands of men—that is to say, being put to death. But if it were not a true body, but merely appearing in semblance, as these people again claim, it could not have fallen into hands, nor have been raised on the third day, as He promised. Therefore, through this dispensation, the resurrection of the dead is clearly shown to be irrefragable; and there is no need for the soul to have an ^C apology to speak to each power—for these people fabricate this as well, as has been said—but it is established through the kindness of the Lord through works and through faith, as the most holy Paul says, writing to Timothy in these words: "That you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth." Many, forsaking this, have turned aside to fables and foolish talk, not understanding what they say or why they speak so confidently; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes. But also in the second Epistle, he says that Hymenæus and Philetus have swerved from the truth; ^D who themselves also followed the heresy, proclaiming another God and endless genealogies, and sowing error among men, and saying that the world was not made by God, but by archons and powers. And they say that the resurrection has already occurred through the children born to each of those who beget them. But they say that there will be no resurrection of the dead. And see, brothers, the character of the truth and the refutation of their lawlessness.

I suppose that enough has been said regarding these matters too. Therefore, leaving this aside, I shall proceed to what follows, saying only this: that this [heresy] appears to be very similar to the convoluted and serpentine wickedness through the many-named appellation of the archons.

^A Some of the venom from many serpents is mixed together out of their own error: for instance, having the boldness of the dragon, the guile of the puff-adder, the drawing-in of the breath of the *baitton*, the arrogance of the javelin-snake, and the forwardness of the *ostrakites*. Having crushed the head of all these with the basis of the truth, let us move on to the rest, beloved, trying in God to uncover the error of each one.

AGAINST THE CERDONIANS

1. A certain Cerdo succeeded these and Heracleon, having come from their same school, and having received the seeds of error from Simon and Saturnilus. This man arrived in Rome from Syria as a traveler, and proved to be a bane both to himself and to those who were persuaded by him. For the nature of men is most miserable indeed when, leaving behind the way of God, it wanders away, and separates itself from God’s calling. For to such people the proverb of the dog applies, ^B who, paying attention to the shadow of what he was holding in his mouth, looking down into the water, and thinking that the shadow in the water was greater than the food he was holding in his mouth, opened his mouth and lost what he really had. So too these men, having found the way, and wishing to obtain a shadow that had formed in their own reasoning, not only lost the food—the nourishment provided by God—which they were (so to speak) carrying in their mouths, but also brought destruction upon themselves.

Cerdo, therefore, lived in the days of Bishop Hyginus, who held the ninth place in the succession of the apostles, including James, Peter, and Paul. His teaching, while agreeing with the nonsense of the aforementioned heresiarchs ^C and seeming to be the same, nevertheless differs somewhat and is of this kind. He too preached two principles to the world, and allegedly two gods: one good, and one unknown to all, whom he also called the Father of Jesus; and another, the Creator, who is evil, and who spoke and was known in the Law, and appeared in the prophets, and who frequently made himself visible. He denies that Christ was born of Mary, or that he had truly put on flesh, but that he existed in appearance only, and appeared as such, and did all things in appearance only. He also rejects the resurrection of the flesh; and he rejects the Old Testament ^D —that given through Moses and the prophets—as being alien to God. He thinks that Christ came down from above from the unknown Father in order to abolish, he says, the rule and tyranny of the world-maker and Creator here; just as, indeed, many of the heresies have stated.

^B II. But since this heresy, like the others, can be easily detected and refuted, I shall cover in brief what pertains to it, and I shall begin the refutation from the very decrees of those people themselves. For it is manifest that it is impossible for there to be two principles at once. For if the two are from some one source, either one is second, and the other is the cause and principle of the second. It must therefore be inquired which is the cause of the two, or which of these is the principle of the other, as I have said; and thus, in every way, the thought must be brought back to the one, which is found to be first, from which comes the second, or both, as has been shown, as I said. It is impossible for two principles to exist at the same time; nor indeed is it possible for one to differ from the other. For if they differ, they are indeed two. But being found as the number two, they have gone beyond the number one. And as the one and first number is being sought, the two are subject to the one number, which is also superior to the cause of the two. For the two that follow the one number, or the one and first principle, cannot be causes of themselves, because the singular and supreme number is always being sought. For if the two are found to exist in one concord, and rejoicing together, and agreeing with one another, how is there any contention between the two, while one remains and the other is well-pleased, and the one rejoices in the union of the other? But if they are in conflict and both are equally strong against one another, Christ, who came to abolish one of them, will no longer be able to destroy its tyranny; since it stands against him and is able to struggle against the upper, invisible, and unnamable one, and resists, and can never be destroyed, as it strongly opposes, and can be named, and fights, and struggles, so that in no way ^C can it be overthrown: since it is that which fiercely resists, and both can be named and fights, and struggles, so that no violence whatsoever allows it to be cast down.

III. But because that madman thinks that the Law and the Prophets are from a worse and contrary principle, and Christ from a better one: if this were true, how could the prophets have foretold the things pertaining to Christ, cloaked in certain coverings of figures, if there were not one and the same power, which spoke in the Law and in the Prophets and in the Gospels? Just as he says: ^D I who speak in the prophets, behold I am here, and what follows. And why does the Lord also foretell in the Gospel, saying: If you believed Moses, you would perhaps also believe me: for he wrote of me? And there is much I could say about such testimonies, by gathering which he built a school for himself—the one who blossomed by an unhappy fate to the ruin of the world, and pushed those who were his followers into deceit. But I shall pass over this also, after

having ^A consumed the destruction thereof through the most energetic faith in God and the saving doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ, who said, “Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many such shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ.” And the Apostle having spoken concerning these same false christs, and false teachers, and false brethren, and having secured us, I shall make my exposition regarding the rest, as they proceed in order.

AGAINST THE MARCIONISTS, Which is the twenty-second or forty-second heresy.

I. Marcion, from whom the Marcionites are named, seizing the occasion for his new dogma from that aforementioned Cerdon, himself also emerged into the world as a huge serpent. Having deceived an infinite multitude of people by various arts, he opened a theater of error that continues even to this time. And this heresy is found even now, not only in Rome and in Italy, but in Egypt and Palestine, as well as Arabia and Syria, in Cyprus and Thebais, nay, even in Persia and other regions, it has spread far and wide. In these places the most wicked demon has greatly advanced his deceit through his craftiness.

He was ^B a native of Pontus, from that part called Helenopontus, and from the city of Sinope, as the report about him widely attests. At the beginning of his life, he was ostensibly practicing chastity; for he was a monk and the son of a bishop of our holy Catholic Church. As time went on, however, he became infatuated with a certain virgin, and having deceived her, he cast both her and himself down from the hope of the heavenly life. Having committed this defilement, he was expelled from the Church by his own father. For his father was a man of extreme piety and clarity, and one who cared most intensely for the truth, being prominent in the administration of the episcopal office. Although Marcion supplicated him for a long time and asked for penance, he obtained it from his father by no prayers. ^C For a sharp pain held the excellent old man and bishop, that not only had his son fallen, but that he had also brought shame and disgrace upon him. Therefore, when he noticed that he could not achieve what he desired by any arts of flattery, and not enduring the insults and mockery of his fellow citizens, he secretly withdrew from that city and betook himself to Rome, after the decease of Hyginus, the bishop of Rome. This man was the ninth from Peter and Paul the apostles. As soon as Marcion arrived there, addressing the elders who were still alive, having been schooled by the disciples of the apostles, he begged to be admitted into communion; but no one granted it to him. Wherefore, ^D being goaded by envy, because he did not receive the primacy and the entrance into the Church,

^A he turned his mind to take refuge in the heresy of the impostor Cerdo.

II. Then, from the very beginning and, as one might say, from the very doors of these questions, he began to propose this issue to the presbyters who were there at the time, saying: Tell me, what is the meaning of this: *No one puts new wine into old wineskins, nor a piece of unshrunk cloth on to an old garment; else it takes away the filling, and it will not agree with the old. For a greater schism will be made.* And when those upright and most holy presbyters and teachers of the holy Church of God heard this, declaring the reasoning of the consistency and harmony ^B of it, and explaining to him with courtesy, they said: My son, these old wineskins are the hearts of the Pharisees and Scribes, which had grown old in sins and had not received the preaching of the Gospel. And to that old garment belongs the same—just as Judas, having grown old in avarice, did not receive the preaching of the new and holy and heavenly mystery, that of hope. Although he was joined to the eleven apostles, and was called by the Lord himself, he had a "greater creature" in himself, though no one else was the cause of it for him; for his mind did not harmonize with the heavenly hope and the heavenly calling of the goods to come, preferring instead the riches and pride of the present world, and the fleeting friendship, hope, and pleasure of men.

But Marcion, disputing this, said that it was not so, and that things were otherwise, because they had not wished to receive him. Therefore, he openly said to them: Why did you not wish to receive me? And when they replied: We cannot do this, since we have no permission from your venerable father. For there is one faith, and one harmony of minds, and we cannot act against our most respected colleague, your father. Then he, flaring up with greater heat, and being moved by pride and envy, created a schism, ^C and architected his heresy privately, and said: I shall rend your Church, and I shall cast a schism into it forever. Which, in truth, he did cast—not a small one, yet not rending the Church, but rather rending himself and those who were persuaded by him.

III. Now that nebulous deceiver and impostor, Cerdo, provided the argument for this schism to him. For while he himself asserts two principles, Marcion added a third principle to that man's dogma, so that there are altogether three: one that is supreme, which can neither be comprehended by name nor perceived by sight, whom he also wishes to call the good God, and who created nothing of those things which are in the world. He further says that there is another, a visible God, [who is] the creator and artificer. ^D And as a third, he posits the devil, as one might say, between these two—namely, between the visible and the invisible. But the creator and artificer and visible God, he says, is the God of the Jews, and asserts that he is a judge.

^A Furthermore, virginity is preached by Marcion. He also enjoins fasting on the Sabbath. Mysteria are purportedly celebrated by him in the presence of the catechumens. And he uses water in these mysteria. He has decreed fasting on the Sabbath for this reason: since, he says, that is the rest of the God of the Jews, who fashioned this world, and he rested on the seventh day, we must fast on this day, so that we may not seem to participate in the rites of the God of the Jews. He denies the resurrection of the flesh, as do many of the heresies. He says that only the soul has resurrection, life, and salvation.

Baptism is not given once among them, but up to three baptisms, and it is permitted for them to be given by anyone among them who wishes, as I have heard from many. ^B This custom of giving three baptisms came to be for him owing to the mockery he endured from his own disciples who knew him, because of that offense and the defilement of a virgin. For when he had defiled a virgin in his own country and discovered that he was convicted of a great wickedness, he fled; and this itinerant charlatan adopted a second baptism for himself, proclaiming that it is permitted for a person to be cleansed up to three times in total, and to be purified by the baptism of sins for their forgiveness—so that if someone should commit sin after the first baptism, he may flee to a second with repentance, and likewise to a third, if he should again become entangled in offenses after the second. He devised this as a remedy for his own infamy, so as to persuade people that he was purified again after his crime and should be numbered among the innocent. To this he also falsely applies a certain testimony, which can appear probable in its very appearance, even if it does not pertain to what he wishes. For thus he asserts: that the Lord, after he was baptized by John, said to the disciples: *I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how I am constrained until it is accomplished!* (Luke 12, 50). And again: *I have a cup to drink, and what do I desire, except that I should fill it?* Hence he invented those multiple baptisms. ^C

IV. Furthermore, he rejects the law and all the prophets, thinking that they prophesied by the inspiration of that prince who created this world. He says, however, that Christ descended from above from the invisible and unnameable Father for the salvation of souls, and for the refutation of the God of the Jews, and of the law, and of the prophets, and of those like them. And that the Lord descended even to Hades, so that he might bring salvation to those around Cain, and Core, and Dathan, and Abiron, and also Esau, and all the nations who did not know the God of the Jews. But he left those around Abel, and Enoch, and Noah, and Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and Moses, and David, and Solomon there; ^D because, he says, they knew the God of the Jews, who is the creator and builder of the universe, and followed his laws and institutions, and did not commit themselves rather to that other God who cannot be seen by the eyes. He also grants women the authority to baptize. For everything among them is full of mockery, and

^A they do not hesitate to perform even the mysteries themselves in the presence of catechumens. As for the resurrection, as I have said, he maintains that it is not of bodies, but of souls; and he limits salvation to these, not to bodies. He furthermore asserts the migration and passage of souls from one body into another.

V. But this vain and ridiculous opinion falls to pieces from every side, as I have already demonstrated in other heresies. For how can that soul rise again which never fell? How, I say, can a resurrection be attributed to that which has not fallen? For whatever falls stands in need of a resurrection. But it is not the soul that falls, but the body. Whence indeed custom rightly is accustomed to call it a corpse (*ptōma*), and the Lord Himself speaks thus: "Whererover the corpse (*ptōma*) is, there will the eagles be gathered together." For we do not shut up souls in tombs, ^B but we lay to rest bodies, burying them in the earth, the hope of whose resurrection the preaching has, just as the grain of wheat; even as the holy Apostle brought forth testimony concerning the grain of wheat and other seeds; and the Lord Himself in the Gospel says: "Unless the grain of wheat falling into the earth dies, it remains alone." The holy Apostle says—for he calls him foolish, the unbeliever who doubts completely, and says: "How does the resurrection come about? And with what body do they come?" And he immediately says to such persons: "Fool, that which you sow is not brought to life unless it dies." And thus the Scripture has shown that it is of the fallen grain, that is, of the buried body, and not of the soul, that the resurrection takes place. For how shall the soul come alone? How shall the soul alone reign, ^C which has performed either that which is just or that which is evil together with the body? For the judgment will be contradictory and not just.

VI. But how will that doctrine of the three principles attributed to Marcion hold together? How will the Good God be found performing any work in the parts of the Evil One, which relates to salvation, or other matters? For if the world is not His own, and He sent His Only-Begotten into the world to take from an alien world what He had not sown, nor made; he will be found either coveting the things of others, or suffering from want; and not having his own, he gives himself to the things of others, so that he may appropriate for himself what he did not have before. How, moreover, will the Creator become a judge ^D between the two? And then, whom has He to judge? For if He sits as judge of the things that belong to the "above" container, He holds power over the "above"; since He brings into the midst of His own tribunals the things that exist as belonging to the "above," as seemed good to Marcion. And if He is ever to be a judge, He is just. Let us show from the very name of "just" that the good and the just are the same thing. For everything that is just, this is also good. For from the fact that it is good, the good is bestowed justly with truth

^A it has this property: that it justly and indeed repays what is good to him who has done good. Therefore, what is good will not be contrary to the good; that is to say, it awards good things out of justice to the good, and ordains the due punishments and penalties for the wicked. Conversely, that one will not be good who, at the end, bestows the reward of salvation upon one who is wicked, unless he has repented; even though in the present time he makes his sun to rise upon both the good and the wicked, and grants his rain, because of the free will that is currently seen in both evil and good men. For he will no longer be a good and just nature who grants the reward of salvation in the coming age to the wicked, and does not rather hate the evil and the base. But the third one, who is found among them as the wicked one—if he has the power to do evil things and to prevail over those in the world, or over the good things above, ^B or over the just one in the middle—this one will be found more powerful than the two gods mentioned by Marcion, since he has the power to seize what belongs to others. And the two others will henceforth be judged feeble and impotent before the one wicked one, by not being able to withstand him, or to rescue their own possessions from the one who seizes them and turns them to wickedness.

VII. Another analysis of the trifler's nonsense

VII. But let us reflect in another way so that we may expose the absurdity of the deceiver’s folly. For if the wicked one is entirely wicked, yet snatches the good from the Good, and the just from the Just, and does not leave only those who are like himself, he will cease to be wicked—though he is called wicked—since he is seized by a desire for the good and strives to claim them for himself, as if they were better. But if he also holds judgment over his own, and demands ^C penalties from those who have committed injustice, he will no longer be wicked, being a judge of the wicked; and in every way his hypothesis will be found to overturn itself. But from where have they derived the idea that there are three principles? Tell me again: who is it who established the definition for these? For if each one is limited to its own place, the three will no longer be found to be perfect, being defined by certain circumscribed spaces; and that which contains will be found greater than that which is contained. And the one that is contained would no longer be called God, but rather the containing boundary. But even if, having come into the same place, each was allotted his own place by separation, and each, being in his own, does not encroach upon or overwhelm the other, then the principles will no longer be contrary to one another, nor will any one of them be found wicked, ^D because of acting according to what is just, and peaceful, and stable regarding their own domain, and not attempting to step further. But if the wicked one were to be prevailed upon and overcome and afflicted by the one above, being divided, and existing in his own place—to which place the good one above has no relation, nor does he possess anything in it (I mean in the place of the wicked one)—then the one above will be found to be more tyrannical, and no longer good, having sent his own Son, that is to say, Christ, that he might take what belongs to another.

And where is the boundary ^A that defines the three principles according to the argument of the impostor of this theory? For a fourth person will have to be sought, one most equitable, and wiser than the three, a judge of boundaries and a man of knowledge, who distributed the measures to each and made peace among the three. But if they were not to be at variance with one another, and none were to send his agents into the domain of another—and this one, having persuaded the three principles, will be found to be a fourth, and wiser, and more equitable—then he himself must again be sought in a place of his own, from which he came into the midst of the three, and wisely assigned to each his portion, so that they might not do injury to one another. But if the two principles are dwelling in the things of the one—I mean the creator—with the evil one dwelling in the regions and places of the creator, and the Christ of the good one arriving there, ^B then he will no longer be found to be judge and creator only, but also good, in allowing both to do in his own domain what they wish; or he will be found to be feeble, and unable to restrain the spoilers of his own property. But if he is also inferior in power, the creation will no longer be found to be standing; but it would have perished long ago, being snatched away each day both by the evil one to his own portion, and by the good one to the regions above. And where then shall the creation stand? But if you say it will end in time, and that it is possible for it to end completely through the care of the good one, then the good one will be the cause of the injury, for not having done long ago what he later seemed to do as a good deed, nor having done it from the beginning, before the majority had been wronged and had remained ^C below, and having allowed them to be held fast by the judge.

VIII. Again, by misunderstanding the things of the divine Scriptures, he brings them forward and deceives the simple-minded, distorting the saying of the Apostle that "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us." And he says: "If we had been his, he would not have redeemed what was already his own." But having redeemed, he came into a world belonging to another to redeem us who were not his. For we were the work of another, and for this reason he redeemed us to his own life. But the most foolish of men is ^D ignorant that Christ did not take away the curse that came by our sin by being crucified himself, and becoming death to death because of our sins, and a curse himself, having come to be a curse for the curse. Therefore Christ is not a curse, but the solution of the curse; and he is a blessing to all who have truly believed in him. Thus also, it says "redeemed" (*exēgorasen*), it does not say "bought" (*ēgorasen*). For he did not come into a foreign realm to plunder or to buy. For if he bought, he bought something he did not possess, and like a beggar he acquired what he did not have. And if he who possessed us sold us, he sold us because he was in need, being driven by some creditor. But it is not so. For it did not say "bought," but "redeemed." Similar to this, the same holy Apostle says: "Redeeming the time, because the days are evil." And not days 309 so that death might be in some way the punishment of our death, assumed by him, and the curse of the curse itself. Therefore Christ is not a curse, but the dissolution of the curse; on the contrary, he is a blessing to all truly and sincerely believing in him. Whence it is written "he redeemed," not "he bought." For he did not come into a foreign possession for the sake of plundering or buying. For if he were to buy, he would be buying what he did not have before, and would be acquiring for himself like a beggar the things he lacked.

^A And we do not redeem [days], nor do we give a price for days; but rather, by indicating patience and the future expectation of long-suffering, he said this. So the "he redeemed" revealed the purpose of the assumption, in the world, of the incarnate presence for our sake, which God, being impassible, undertook to suffer for us, remaining in his own impassibility of his divinity; and that which he undertook to suffer for us, he did not do by buying us from others, but by assuming the purpose of the cross for our sake by choice, and not by necessity. From this, Marcion's argument is refuted in every way. And there are many things to be said for the overturning of this man's contrivance and tragedy, stemming from a pious mind and reasonable expression in the refutation directed against him.

^B IX. For now I turn to his writings, or rather his wicked deeds. For this man accepts only the Gospel according to Luke, yet with its beginning cut away, which there clearly commemorates the generation of the Savior in the womb and his incarnate presence. Nor did he, who corrupted himself rather than the Gospel, merely cut off the beginning; but he also removed many true doctrines from the beginning and the middle, and inserted others contrary to what was written. He uses only this character of the Gospel according to Luke. He also has ten Epistles of the holy Apostle at his disposal—the only ones he uses—and not even those entirely, for he cuts out some chapters of them and alters others. He uses only these two books. But he drafted other compositions himself for those being led astray by him. ^C The Epistles which are held by him are: first, to the Galatians; second, to the Corinthians; third, the second to the Corinthians; fourth, to the Romans; fifth, to the Thessalonians; sixth, the second to the Thessalonians; seventh, to the Ephesians; eighth, to the Colossians; ninth, to Philemon; tenth, to the Philippians. He also has some fragments of the Epistle called "to the Laodiceans." From this same form—the one saved by him, both of the Gospel and of the Epistles of the Apostle—we can, with God's help, demonstrate that he is an impostor and deceived, and refute him most fully. For he will be convicted without doubt from those very books which he confesses to be genuine. For I say, from those remnants of the Gospel and the Epistles which he adopts and keeps, we will manifest to those who have even a little wisdom ^D that Christ in no way abhors the Old Testament or the prophets who came with his flesh; and that the resurrection of bodies is preached by the Apostle, and that Abraham and Isaac and Jacob are referred by the same to the number of those who attain salvation; and all the other things that are of the holy Church of God will be demonstrated.

^A [X.] I wish, however, to insert here a certain disputation which I had worked up against this heretic before I undertook this present work at your urging. For when, many years ago, I had examined the fictitious myths and most empty dogmas of this Marcion, and had unrolled the books which he approves as canonical—namely, the Gospel which they call by that name, and the one they also designate as the Apostolic—I excerpted in a continuous series some more select passages pertinent to refuting him, and laid the foundations of a more comprehensive work. I distributed the order of the individual chapters in such a way that I assigned to each thought its own place—first, second, third, and so on in order—and I noted individually until the end those passages in which he appears most foolishly to have retained the sayings of the Savior or the Apostle against himself.

For some of these have been altered and corrupted by him, and are not represented with that fidelity with which they are read in the copies of the Gospel according to Luke, or which the apostolic style seems to manifest. Others he left whole and incorrupt, such as are found in the authentic Gospel and Apostle; from these his lies can be refuted, inasmuch as they declare the agreement and harmony of the Old Testament with the New, and of the latter in turn with the former. There are also found in these books other passages by which it is shown that Christ came in the flesh and walked among us as a perfect man. Added to these are also those by which the resurrection of the dead is proclaimed; and the same God is declared to be the almighty Lord of the universe, the creator of heaven and earth and of all things that are on the earth. These neither adulterate the evangelical vocation nor deny the author and fabricator of the whole universe, but refer to the very One whom both the apostolic style and the evangelical preaching confess. Therefore, those things which we have elaborated in this manner, digested into their own arguments, are to be presented in their turn.

Preface to the little work, or refutation, concerning the books of Marcion.

^D [XI.] If anyone desires thoroughly to understand the adulterated inventions of Marcion and to recognize all the wiles and tricks of that beast, let him peruse this work which has been refined by me. For we have studiously selected from his Gospel those things which could be opposed to his own wickedness, entangled as it is with cunning, so that those who wish to take this little study of ours into their hands may have in it a certain exercise of keenness, by which they may refute the novelty of the foreign expressions invented by him. And indeed, that book of Marcion seems to mimic the Gospel according to Luke in its very style; but as it has been mutilated by him, curtailed at the beginning, the middle, and the end, it is most like a garment eaten through on all sides by moths. For from it

^A he has cut away and skipped all the matters which Lucas begins with, namely: *Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order*, and what follows; as well as the matters concerning Elizabeth, and the angel bringing the message to the Virgin Mary, the history of John and Zacharias, their birth at Bethlehem of the Lord, together with his genealogy and baptism: all these he has cut away and leaped over, and has taken this as the beginning of the Gospel: *In the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar*, and what follows. Hence, therefore, he begins, and he does not persist in the regular order, but, as I said before, he cuts away some parts, adds others, and turns everything upside down, as the saying goes; he does not proceed straightforwardly, but maliciously scurries here and there. Furthermore, the following points ensue:

1. *Go, show thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing, as Moses commanded, for a testimony unto you.* For what the Savior said: *For a testimony unto them*. 2. *But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power to forgive sins on earth.* 3. *The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.* 4. *Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.* For this, instead of *He came down with them*, he has, *He came down in them*. 5. *And all the multitude sought to touch him.* 6. *And he himself uplifting his eyes.* ^B *Thus did your fathers to the prophets.* 7. *But I say: Such faith not even in Israel have I found.* 8. The altered text: *Blessed is he whosoever shall not be scandalized in me.* 9. For he related it as concerning John: *This is he of whom it is written: Behold, I send my messenger before thy face.* 10. *And entering into the house of the Pharisee, he sat down. And the woman, standing behind, the sinner by his feet, washed his feet with tears, and anointed them, and kissed them.* 11. And again: *She hath washed my feet with tears, and anointed, and kissed them.* 12. He does not have: *His mother and his brethren*, but only: *Thy mother and thy brethren.* 13. *As they were sailing he fell asleep. And he, being awakened, rebuked the wind and the sea.* 14. *And it came to pass, as he went, that the crowds thronged him. And a woman having touched him was healed of the [issue of] blood. And the Lord said: Who touched me? And again: Someone hath touched me. For I know that virtue hath gone out from me.* 15. *Looking up to heaven, he blessed them.* ^C 16. *Saying: The Son of man must suffer many things, and be killed, and after three days arise.*

17. *And behold, two men were talking with him, Elias and Moyses in glory.* ^A 18. *From the cloud a voice: This is my beloved Son.* 19. *I besought thy disciples.* But it had, instead: *They could not cast him out.* And to them: *O faithless generation! how long shall I suffer you?* 20. *For the Son of man is meant to be delivered into the hands of men.* 21. *Nor have you read this, what David did? He entered into the house of God.* 22. *I give thanks to thee, O Lord of heaven.* But it did not have, *and of earth.* Nor did it have, *Father.* But he is confuted; for lower down he had, *Yea, Father.* 23. He said to the lawyer: *In the law what is written?* And to the one answering. After the lawyer's answer, he said: *Thou hast answered rightly. Do this, and thou shalt live.* 24. And he said: *Who of you shall have a friend, and ^B will go to him at midnight, asking three loaves?* And subsequently: *Ask, and it shall be given.* For what son, on asking his father for a fish, will receive a snake instead of a fish for him? or instead of an egg, a scorpion? If therefore you, being evil, know good gifts, how much more the Father? 25. The account concerning Jonas the prophet is cut away. For it had: *This generation, a sign shall not be given to it.* It did not have, however, concerning Nineve and the Queen of the South, and Solomon. 26. Instead of, *You pass by the judgment of God,* it had, *You pass by the calling of God.* 27. *Woe to you, because you build the tombs of the ^C prophets, and your fathers killed them.* 28. It did not have: *For this reason the Wisdom of God said, I will send prophets unto them,* and concerning the blood of Zacharias and Abel the prophets: *That it shall be required of this generation.* 29. *I say to my friends: Do not fear those who kill the body; but fear him who, after he has killed, has power to cast into hell.* But it did not have: *Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? and not one of them is in oblivion before God.* 30. Instead of, *He will acknowledge him before the angels of God,* it says, *before God.* 31. It does not have this: *God clothes the grass.* ^D 32. *But your Father knows that you have need of these* fleshly things. 33. *Seek therefore the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added unto you.* 34. Instead of, *your Father,* it had, *the Father.* 35. Instead of, *the second or third watch,* it had, *the evening watch.*

^A 36. The Lord of that servant will come, and shall cut him asunder, and shall appoint his portion with the unbelievers.

37. Lest he hale thee to the judge; and the judge deliver thee to the officer.

38. He had cut away from that place: *There were present some that told him of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices;* as far as those words where he speaks of the eighteen in Siloam who were crushed by the tower; and that, *Except ye repent;* and as far as the parable of the fig tree, of which the husbandman said: *I will dig about it, and dung it; and if it bear no fruit, cut it down.*

39. But this daughter of Abraham hath Satan bound.

40. Item, he cut away this: *Then shall ye see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God.* Instead of this, he wrote: *When ye shall see all the righteous in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrust out.* He added, moreover, *detained without; and there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.*

41. Item, he cut away this: *They shall come from the East and West, and shall sit down in the kingdom.* Then that: *The last shall be first.* Item: *The Pharisees came, saying: Get thee out, and depart, for Herod will kill thee.* And this: *He said: Go ye, tell that fox,* as far as where he said: *It cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.* That also: *O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee.* Item: *How often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood; and, Your house is left unto you desolate; and, Ye shall not see me, until ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh.*

42. Again he cut away the whole parable of the two sons, namely, of him who had taken a portion of the goods, and of the other.

43. The law and the prophets were until John; and every man presseth into it.

44. Concerning the rich man and the beggar Lazarus, that he was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom.

45. But now here the same Lazarus is comforted.

46. Abraham said: *They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them; for neither if one rose from the dead, will they hear.*

47. He cut away this: *Say: We are unprofitable servants; we have done that which we ought to have done.*

48. When the ten lepers met him. He cut away many things, and wrote: *He sent them, saying: Show yourselves unto the priests;* and he put other things in place of others, saying that *there were many lepers in the days of Elisha the prophet, and none was cleansed, save Naaman the Syrian.*

49. ^A *There shall come days when you shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man.*

50. *A certain man said to him: Good Master, what must I do to inherit eternal life? Why do you call me good; one is good.* He added further: *the Father.* And instead of, *You know the commandments,* he says: *I know the commandments.*

51. *And it came to pass when he drew near to Jericho, a blind man was shouting: Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me.* And when he was cured, he says: *Your faith has saved you.*

52. He omitted these: *Taking the twelve, he said: Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things shall be accomplished that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man; he shall be delivered, and shall be killed, and on the third day he shall rise again.* He omitted all these things. ^B

53. He omitted the chapter of the ass, and Bethphage, and the things concerning the city and the temple: *For it was written: My house shall be called a house of prayer, and you make it a den of thieves.*

54. *And they sought to lay hands upon him, and they were afraid.*

55. Again he omitted that of the vineyard rented out to the husbandmen. And what follows: *What is it then: The stone which the builders rejected?*

56. He omitted this: *But that the dead are raised, Moses indicated concerning the bush, as he says: The Lord God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob. But God is of the living, and not of the dead.*

57. He did not have these: *But that the dead are raised, and Moses indicated, saying: God of Abraham, and God of Isaac, and God of Jacob, the God of the living.*

58. ^C Again he omitted this: *A hair from your head shall not perish.*

59. Again he omitted these: *Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and so forth; because of what is added: until all things that are written are fulfilled.*

60. *He spoke with the generals.* And that, *How he might betray him to them.*

61. *And he said to Peter and the others: Go, make ready, that we may eat the passover.*

62. *And he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him; and he said: With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer.*

63. He omitted this: *For I say to you, I will not eat of it hereafter, until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.*

64. He omitted this: *When I sent you, did you lack anything? and so forth; because of this: For this that is written must also be fulfilled: And he was reckoned with the wicked.* ^D

65. *He was withdrawn from them about a stone's throw, and kneeling down he prayed.*

66. *And he drew near to kiss him, and said.*

67. He omitted what was done by Peter, when he struck and cut off the ear. 68. And those who were holding him mocked him, and beating and striking him said: "Prophesy; who is it that struck you?" 69. He added after this: "We found this man perverting our nation, and destroying the law and the prophets." 70. Another addition after these words: "Forbidding tribute to be given," he added: "and turning away wives and children." 71. And coming to the place called the place of a Skull, they crucified him, and divided his garments, and the sun was darkened. 72. He omitted: "Today you will be with me in paradise." 73. And crying out with a loud voice, he breathed his last. 74. And behold, a man named Joseph, having taken down the body, wrapped it, and placed it in a hewn tomb. 75. And the women having returned rested on the Sabbath according to the law. 76. Those in bright clothing said: "Why do you seek the living among the dead? He has risen. Remember how he spoke while being with you: That the Son of man must suffer, and be delivered up." 77. He omitted what was said to Cleopas and the other, when he met them: "O foolish ones and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not these things to have been suffered?" And instead of "in all which the prophets have spoken," he wrote, "in all things which I spoke to you." But he is refuted by the fact that when he broke the bread, their eyes were opened, and they recognized him. 78. "Why are you troubled? See my hands and my feet: for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see me having."

Furthermore, we also attach to this work of ours against the aforementioned author of the heresy these matters which we found used by him again, so that they might bear the appearance of the Epistles of the apostle Paul; which, however, he does not take entirely, but only certain ones, the names of which we have listed at the end of the whole work, as they are found in the book inscribed by them *Apostolic*. ^B And these same ones he also set forth mutilated by his customary wickedness: just as into that other book, to which he gave the name Gospel, to tell the truth, he cast remnants of the true Gospel, while nonetheless maliciously and cunningly depraving everything.

From the Epistle to the Romans, which is the 4th in his book, and the 1st in the Apostolic

1. As many as have sinned without law will also perish without law; and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law. For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law will be justified.

^A 2. For circumcision indeed profits, if you observe the law; but if you are a transgressor of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 3. Having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. 4. For still Christ, when we were yet weak, in due time died for the ungodly. 5. So that the law indeed is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. 6. That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us. 7. For Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness to everyone that believes. 8. For he that loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.

To the Thessalonians I, which is with us VIII; to the Thessalonians II, which is with us IX; to the Ephesians VII, which is with us V.

1. Remember that you were once the Gentiles, who are called uncircumcision by that which is called circumcision in the flesh made by hands, that you were at that time without Christ, being alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been made near in his blood. For he is our peace, who has made both one, and so forth. 2. Therefore he says: "Awake, you who sleep, and Christ shall shine upon you." 3. Instead of this, "A man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two into one flesh," instead of, "to his wife."

To the Colossians VIII, which is with us VII. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day, or of a New Moon, or of Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come.

To Philemon IX, which is with us XIII, or XIV; to the Philippians X, which is with us VI; to the Laodiceans XI. One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all.

From the Epistle to the Galatians I, which is with us IV and I.

1. But learn that the just shall live by faith. For as many as are under the law are under a curse. But he that has done these things shall live in them. 2. Cursed is everyone that hangs on a tree. But he who is of the promise is through the free woman. 3. I testify again, that a man who has been circumcised is a debtor to fulfill the whole law. 4. Instead of, "a little leaven leavens the whole lump," he wrote, "corrupts," he transcribed, "adulterates." ^D

^A 5. For the whole law is fulfilled in you: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 6. "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, anger, strife, dissensions, sects, homicides, drunkenness, revellings, concerning which I forewarn you, as I have also said before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." 7. "And those who are of Christ have crucified the flesh with its passions and lusts." 8. "For neither do those who are circumcised themselves keep the law."

320 To the Corinthians I, which is with Marcion as it is also with us II. 1. "For it is written: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent." 2. "That, according as it is written, let him who boasts, boast in the Lord." 3. "Of the princes of this world who are brought to nothing." 4. ^B "For it is written: He catches the wise in their craftiness; and again: The Lord knows the thoughts of men, that they are vain." 5. "For Christ our passover is sacrificed." 6. "Do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body? For they shall be, he says, the two into one flesh." 7. "He has changed the place, for concerning that which the law does not say, he has him say, Even if the law of Moses does not say these things." 8. "Does God take care for oxen?" 9. "For I do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, that our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food. For they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them; and the rock was Christ. But with most of them God was not well pleased. These things were made our examples, to the intent that we should not be lusters after evil things, as they also lusted. ^C Neither be idolaters, as some of them were, as it is written: The people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play. Neither let us tempt Christ, even to the words where he says: These things happened to them by way of example, etc." 10. "What then do I say? That what is sacrificed to idols is anything? But that what they sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God." 11. "A man ought not to wear long hair, being the image and glory of God." 12. "But God tempered the body." 13. "Erroneously: But in the Church I would rather speak five words with my understanding, ^D that he says otherwise, because of the law."

14. "In the law it is written: 'In other tongues and with other lips I will speak to this people.'" ^A

15. "Let women keep silence in the churches. For it is not permitted unto them to speak; but let them be in subjection, as the law also says."

16. "Concerning the resurrection of the dead: I declare unto you, brethren, the Gospel which I preached unto you; and that if Christ has not been raised, it is vain, and so forth. Thus we preach, and thus we have believed: that Christ died, and was buried, and has been raised on the third day. But when this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the word that is written: 'Death is swallowed up in victory.'"

Regarding the second Epistle to the Corinthians, which is the third for him as it is for us:

1. "For however many promises of God there are, in Him is the ‘Yea’; wherefore also by Him is the ‘Amen’ to God."

2. "For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. Because it is God who said that light should shine out of darkness." ^B

3. "But having the same spirit of faith, we also believe and therefore speak." He suppressed that which was written according to the text.

This is that adulterated compilation of Marcion, which indeed presents the character and form of the Gospel according to Luke and of the Epistles of Paul the Apostle, yet not of all of them, but only of that which was written to the Romans, and to the Ephesians, and to the Colossians, and to the Laodiceans, and from that to the Galatians, and to the Corinthians the first and the second, and that to the Thessalonians the first and the second, and that to Philemon, and to the Philippians, and that to Timothy the first and the second, and to Titus, and to the Hebrews, insofar as these are contained by him, not as being complete, but as in a corruption; and ^C everywhere [he has] manipulated the same compilation, and in some expressions having cunningly added [content], not for edification, but for base and harmful strange-wordings against the sound faith, originating from the same thunderstruck herd.

These things have been labored over and carefully investigated by us from the aforementioned writing of the Apostle and the Gospel according to Luke, which he uses; so that all who attempt to argue against his error may know that, on the one hand, altered words have been inserted by way of interpolation, and on the other, whatever is missing from their proper places has been purloined by his boldness. For this brutish man judged these alone to be contrary to his feigned invention.

Furthermore, a third labor has been undertaken by us: to gather together all things that are said by him and by us, so that with those whom

^A he praises, and who have an intimation of the incarnate presence of the Savior, and of the testimony of the harmony of the New Testament with the Old, and the confession of the Son of God—who in the Gospel confesses God to be the Creator of heaven and earth, and that He Himself spoke in the Law and in the Prophets, and that this same One is His Father—we may have this brief commentary, or rather a school of exposition, drawn up from the copies of Marcion, word for word, written down for us as a text. And so that things in it which are difficult to understand might not be obscured for some by the darkness of ignorance, I have resolved to explain, one by one, the chapters which I have proposed and marked with their own titles—the first, second, and third—demonstrating the reason for which each word was chosen and subsequently altered by him. I shall therefore begin the discussion as follows.

Scholion from the Gospel which Marcion uses.

1. "Go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your purification, as Moses commanded, for a testimony to you."

Refutation 1. Could the Lord, if He were, as you assert, hostile to the Law and the God of the Law, have issued such a mandate to those He cured—I speak of the leper—by saying, "Go, show yourself to the priest" (for in mentioning the priest, He does not abolish the priesthood of the Law) "and offer for your purification"? And although you introduce "gift" from the word ^B of offering, nonetheless it is clear that He spoke of a gift. "For your purification, as Moses commanded." Now, if He commands obedience to the precept of Moses, He does not in the least condemn the God of the Law, nor does He speak evil of Him. Rather, He confirms both that He Himself and His Father God delivered the Law to Moses. But you, Marcion, have corrupted the words of Scripture. For instead of "for a testimony to them," you have dared to write "for a testimony to you." In doing so, you have clearly lied to your own head. For if He said "to you," He proved by that testimony that He did not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them.

Scholion 2. "But that you may know that the Son of man has power to forgive sins on earth."

Refutation 2. Since, therefore, the Only-begotten Son of God calls Himself the Son of man, He does not deny that He is a man; and it is sung in vain by you that He appeared only in appearance. Furthermore, if He has power on earth, ^C the earth will not be alien to His works or those of His Father.

Scholion 3. "The Son of man is Lord, even of the Sabbath." ^D

^A Refutation 3. The Savior confesses two things simultaneously in this passage: that He is the Son of man, and that He is Lord of the Sabbath, teaching so that the Sabbath might not be thought alien to His own work; even if, at the last, He is called Son of man because of the assumption of flesh. Scholion 4. “Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.” Instead of, “He descended with them,” he reads, “He descended into them.” Refutation 4. Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor. Whose, I ask? Surely His who was seized, and indeed also crucified, and suffered many things. How, then, could He who was seized be crucified, being one who, according to your doctrine, O Marcion, does not fall under the sense of touch? For you say He is a mere appearance. But your suspicion will be refuted by the fact that it is written “Judas the traitor.” For he betrayed and delivered his own Master into the hands of men. Nor does it profit you at all to say, “He descended into them,” instead of, “with them.” For you cannot define a mere phantasm, when the one you hold to be wicked is shown later to be falling under the sense of touch. ^B Scholion 5. “And all the multitude sought to touch him. And He, lifting up His eyes,” and so forth. Refutation 5. How, then, could the multitude touch Him, who would avoid all touch? And toward whom did He lift up His eyes to heaven, had He not been framed from flesh? But this was to make plain that Christ Jesus is the mediator of God and men, being human, possessing both: from men, the flesh, and from God the Father, the invisible essence. ^C Scholion 6. “According to these same things did your fathers to the prophets.” Refutation 6. Since He makes mention of the prophets, He does not deny the prophets. And since He avenges the slaughter of those prophets, and reproaches those who killed and persecuted them, He is not alien to the prophets, but will be their God, from whom they derived their origin. Scholion 7. “I say to you: I have not found such faith, no, not in Israel.” Refutation 7. If not even in Israel was such faith found by Him, as was found in that centurion from the Gentiles, He is not therefore condemning the faith of Israel. ^D For if that faith were alien to God, and did not pertain to Him and His Father, He would by no means proclaim it. Scholion 8. This is changed: “Blessed is he who shall not be scandalized in me.” For it used to refer to John. Refutation 8. Whether it pertains to John or to the Savior Himself, He declares those blessed who have not been scandalized either in Him or in John, so that they might not invent for themselves things they have not heard from Him. But there is a certain...

^A point worthy of more attentive consideration, for the sake of which these things were said by the Savior: lest anyone, namely, should think that John—whom He had declared to be the greatest among those born of women—was to be preferred even to the Savior Himself, because he was born of a woman. For this reason He deliberately added this: *And blessed is he who shall not be scandalized in me.* Whence He also adds: *But he who is less in the kingdom, is greater than he.* For the Lord was indeed younger than him by a space of six months, according to the origin of the flesh; but in the kingdom He is greater, inasmuch as He is also his God. For the Only-Begotten did not come to speak anything in secret, or to proclaim anything falsely. He says, in fact: *In secret I have spoken nothing, but openly.* Since He is the Truth, as He asserts: *I am the way and the truth.* Therefore, the way has no error, nor does the Truth, in concealing itself, utter a falsehood. ^D For what is a greater contemplation, for which, He says, the Savior has spoken—that He might ensure that no one would think that John, who was appointed by Him to be the greatest among those born of women, was greater than the Savior Himself, because he too was born of a woman—He protects [the definition] and says: *And blessed is he who shall not be scandalized in me.* Whence He says: *But the lesser* (68) *in the kingdom is greater than he.* For the Savior was indeed in time, according to his birth from the flesh, younger than him by six months, but being greater in the kingdom, it is clear that He is his God. For the Only-Begotten did not come to speak anything in secret, or to falsely claim anything regarding his own preaching. For He says: *I have spoken nothing in secret, but with boldness.* For He is the Truth, as He says: *I am the way and the truth.* Therefore, neither has the way any room for error, nor does the Truth, by hiding itself, speak a lie.

Schol. 9. This is he of whom it is written: Behold, I send my angel before thy face.

^B Refut. 9. If the Only-Begotten Son of God acknowledges John, and foreknows him, and by foreknowing [him] demonstrates to those wishing to know the truth that this is he of whom it is written, "I send my angel before thy face"—then He who wrote, and said: "I send my angel before thy face," is the eternal God, who spoke in the prophets and in the Law, and was in no way alien to His own Jesus Christ. For He sends His angel before His face, before the face of the Son, who is honored by the Father. For He did not send His own angel to serve an alien, if indeed he was also contrary to Him, according to your argument, O Marcion.

Schol. 10. And entering into the house of the Pharisee, he reclined. And the woman who was a sinner, standing behind at his feet, watered them with tears, and anointed, and kissed them.

Refut. 10. The [phrase] "entering," points to a body; for it shows both a house and the measure of a body. And to recline is nothing else than for a corporeal body to be lying down. And that the woman watered the feet with tears is a demonstration that they were not empty phantoms of feet. For she anointed, and watered, and kissed, without any doubt touching a physical body.

Schol. 11. And again: She has watered my feet with tears, and anointed, and kissed them.

Refut. 11. Lest you might think, O Marcion, that the sinner woman only seemed to men to have watered and anointed and kissed the feet of the Savior, the Lord Himself comes forward as a witness; and He teaches that these things did not occur by mere appearance, but in reality, and not to the Pharisee...

^A but to you, O Marcio, and those of your party, asserting and saying: "She anointed my feet, and kissed them." What feet, I pray, if not those composed of flesh, bones, and other parts?

Schol. 12. There was missing in his codex: "His mother and his brothers"; but only: "Thy mother and thy brothers."

Refut. 12. Even if you cut away those earlier parts of the Gospel sentence, O Marcio, so that the writer of the Gospel might not appear to support the voice of certain people, "Thy mother and thy brothers," you cannot nevertheless pass over the truth itself. For tell me, why did he not name several mothers? Why did he not state several fatherlands? How many things do many say about Homer! Some claim he was an Egyptian, others a Chian, others a Colophonian, others a Phrygian, others ^B a Smyrnæan, the son of Meles and Critheis. Aristarchus declared that he was an Athenian; others held him to be Lydian, from Mæonia; others finally a Cyprian, from the outskirts of the Salaminian region, which is spread out at the roots of the mountain. And yet that man truly existed. But because he wandered through many cities, he led many into various opinions and views. Here, however, when they made mention of God and Christ, they did not commemorate several mothers of His, ^C but one only, from whom He was truly begotten; nor many brothers, but only the children of Joseph whom he had begotten from another, true wife of his; so that you cannot arm yourself against the truth. And let not the word deceive you, if the Lord said: "Who is my mother and my brothers?" For He did not say this to deny His mother, but to restrain the untimeliness of him who spoke, when so great a crowd was standing around, and His own saving teaching was being poured forth, and He Himself was occupied with healings and preaching. ^D For it seemed to be a distraction that the one who spoke should interrupt Him; because of the saying: "Behold thy mother and thy brothers." And if it were not that He felt joy, not as one ignorant that they had arrived, before he had heard, but as one foreknowing that they were standing outside; since otherwise He would have rebuked with punishment the untimely voice of the one who spoke; as He once said to Peter: "Get behind me, Satan; for you do not mind the things of God, but the things of men."

Schol. 13. While they were sailing, He fell asleep. And being awakened, He rebuked the wind and the sea.

Refut. 13. But come now, who is it who is said to have fallen asleep? Tell me: concerning the divinity

^A you will not dare to speak. But even if you should say it, these curses, O execrable one, will fall upon your own head. Yet there is no one who does not understand that He, who in truth became man, being in need of sleep, slept on account of the bodily state. For those who awakened Him did not see an appearance, but a true incarnation. Indeed, by shaking Him with their hands and crying out, they testify that they awakened Him. For, He says, the God who had fallen asleep, the bearer of flesh, who descended from heaven and for our sake was clothed with flesh, being raised, arose as man, but rebuked the sea as God, and performed that entirely wonderful work.

Schol. 14. And it came to pass as He went, that the crowds were pressing upon Him. And a woman having touched Him was healed of the issue of blood. And the Lord said: Who touched me? And again: Someone touched me. For I know that power has gone out from me.

Refut. 14. "As He went." He did not say "as they went," lest you might believe that He had a different manner of journeying than what is customary for others who are traveling. But that which is written, "the crowds were pressing upon Him," certainly the crowds could not press upon a spirit. But also the woman who touched Him and was healed, did not touch air, but she touched a human thing that could be handled. For in order to show that the touching of His body by the woman did not happen by appearance only, He teaches this by His own response, saying: "Who touched me? For I know that power has gone out from me."

Schol. 15. Looking up to heaven, He blessed them.

Refut. 15. If He looked up to heaven and blessed them, ^C He did not possess the forms of His eyes and other limbs merely by appearance.

Schol. 16. Saying: The Son of man must suffer many things, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Refut. 16. If the Only-begotten Son of God confesses that He Himself, the Son of man, must both suffer and be killed, this is surely that axe against you, which cuts off all your roots, O Marcion, sprung from thorns, a cloud without water, a fruitless and autumnal tree. For He immediately adds: "And after three days rise again." What else is meant by "to rise," if not that same body which suffered and was buried in the tomb? For a shadow, or wind, or spirit, or phantom, or smoke could not have undergone burial, nor could it have experienced resurrection. ^D

Schol. 17. And behold, men were talking with Him, Elias and Moses in glory.

Refut. 17. So far as I am concerned, I think that by these words that axe which the holy Zechariah commemorates is signified against you, O Marcion, cutting off all your false speech devised against the law and the prophets. For since you were going to cast aside the law and the prophets, calling them strangers to the Savior and His

of glory and of His own divine teaching, He brought both with Him in His own glory, and showed them to His disciples; and the disciples indicated them to us and to the whole world, that is, to every man who desires to live; so that through the first, like an axe, He might cut down your roots, and through the second, like a sickle of the word of truth, He might prune your branches, from which like hemlock a deadly juice and a most adhesive sap of blasphemy is pressed out. For if that Moses, who was long ago entrusted by Christ with the Law, were an alien, and if the prophets were alien, He would not have revealed them with Himself in His own glory. For observe the wonder, that He did not show them in the sepulchre, nor at the cross; but when He revealed a part of His glory to us as a pledge ^B and earnest, then He brought the saints, I mean Moses and Elias, with Him, so that He might show them to be partakers and associates of His kingdom.

Schol. 18. *From the cloud a voice: This is my beloved Son.*

Refut. 18. It is manifest to everyone, I think, that the cloud is not in the highest region, nor does it exist above the heaven, but it abides in this lower creation of ours; whence the voice was brought down to the Saviour. If, therefore, the Father speaks even in a cloud, pointing out His Son to the disciples, the Creator is not another, but the same One who even through a cloud bore witness to His own Son, ^C and who does not hold dominion only over things above the heavens, as you yourself claim.

Schol. 19. *I besought thy disciples.* And it had, besides, *they could not cast it out*, and He said to them: *O faithless generation, how long shall I suffer you?*

Refut. 19. The *how long* is indicative of the time of His presence in the flesh. And as for *O faithless generation*, it refers, of course, to the fact that the prophets performed certain miracles in His name and believed in Him; just as Elias is found doing, and Elisha, and others are read to have done.

Schol. 20. *For the Son of man is about to be delivered into the hands of men.*

Refut. 20. That Son of man who was to be delivered into the hands of men did not subsist in opinion ^D and appearance alone, but in the habit and formation of body and limbs.

Schol. 21. *And have ye not read this, what David did, when he entered into the house of God?*

Refut. 21. When He calls the tabernacle placed by Moses the house of God, He in no way rejects the Law or God Himself who spoke in the Law; for He calls Him God who is His Father, or the Only-Begotten Himself. For the Holy Trinity, Father and Son and Holy Spirit, is accustomed to perform Its works not only in the Law and the prophets, but in the Gospels and the apostles.

^A Schol. 22. *I thank thee, O Lord of heaven.* He did not add, *and of earth*; nor did he have, *Father*. But he is refuted; for lower down he had, *Yea, Father*. Refut. 22. Therefore he gives thanks to the Lord of heaven; although, Marcion, you may have removed *of earth*, and although you may have cut off *Father*, so that you might not manifest Him as His Father, the One whom Christ calls the Creator. For the limbs of the truth remain living. Just as if in a corpse you have left, through forgetfulness, O Marcion, the [phrase], *Yea, Father*. It is therefore proven entirely that Christ gives thanks to His own Father, and names Him the Lord of heaven; and great is your insanity, failing to understand the freedom of the truth.

Schol. 23. *He said to the expert in the law: In the law what is written? And answering. After the answer of the expert in the law, He said: Thou hast answered rightly. This do, and thou shalt live.* Refut. 23. Since the Son of God was the truth itself, He deceived none of those who questioned Him concerning how to obtain life. For He came to reconcile life to the human race. Therefore, since He took care of our life, and showed that life was to be present to him who kept the Law; and since He testified that he who had answered in accordance with the Law itself had spoken excellently, who would be so senseless and stupid as to cling to Marcion, who curses that God from whom not only the Law was derived unto men, but also the grace of the Gospel, so as to surrender himself to the errors of that man who has expressed not a single particle of his doctrine ^B either from the Law or from the Holy Spirit?

Schol. 24. *And He said: Which of you shall have a friend, and shall go to him at midnight, and ask him for three loaves? And thereafter: Ask, and it shall be given. For which of you is a father, of whom if a son ask a fish, will instead of a fish hand him a serpent? Or instead of an egg a scorpion? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts, how much more the Father*? Refut. 24. From this passage, the superstitious and affected religion of the crafty man is refuted. For he did not apply restraint regarding food for the sake of any excellent reward, or hope of attaining immortality, but out of impiety and the pestilential falsity of his opinion. For he forbids the eating of living creatures, and judges that those who taste meat are liable to judgment, as if they were eating souls. And this, indeed, is absurd in the first place. For the flesh is not the soul, but the soul is in the flesh. Nor do we say that the soul of brute animals is precious in the same way as that of humans, but [only] granted to the animals for life alone. But that miserable man, along with those who think as he does, imagines that the same soul exists in humans ^D and in the animals. For this is wrongly assumed by many of the corrupted heresies. For both Valentinus and Colorbasus, and all the Gnostics and Manichaeans, say that there are transmigrations of souls and reincarnations of the soul of those who—

are in the ignorance of men, as they themselves say according to some myth-making; they say that these [souls] return and are reincarnated into each of the animals, until it attains knowledge, and thus having been purified and dissolved, it departs to the heavenly places.

And first of all, his entire vain fabrication of the myth stands refuted. For no one else is able to know the truth of these things above our Lord Jesus Christ, who came for the sake of the lost sheep, that is, for the sake of the souls of men; He who, caring for these same ones, brought healing both psychically and bodily, being Lord of body and soul, and the provider of the life here and of the life to come. For having raised from the dead the one who had died—I mean Lazarus—as well as the son of the widow and the daughter of the archisynagogue, He did not lead them into some evil, as those people dogmatize the body to be a dungeon, but doing good, and knowing that both the stay here in the flesh is ordained by Him, and also the future resurrection of flesh and soul.

And if, again, He knew that the soul in animals and in humans is one and the same, and that He came to effect the salvation of the soul, He ought not—having cleansed one possessed by demons, I mean the one coming out of the tombs—to have ordered the demons to depart and kill two thousand swine, if the souls of men and of swine were equal. For why, while caring for one, did He cause the destruction of two thousand? But if again, like a serpent, he creeps in craftily and schemes, saying that He released them from their bodies so that they might ascend, it would have been necessary for Lazarus, released from the body, not to return again to the body; and much more, for that same one possessed by demons—to release him from the bonds of the body. But He did not do so; rather, He showed caution, knowing the benefit of the body better.

Your argument concerning the soul, O Marcion, and that of those stemming from you and from the other heresies, has fallen. And concerning your feigned mode of life, I will speak again, because you say that it ^C is evil and illicit to partake of flesh. But the Savior refutes you, knowing more than you and teaching what is better through such a saying. For He says: "What man is there of you, whom if his son ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?" And later He says: "If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father?" If, therefore, He has called a fish and an egg good gifts, that which is partaken of with thanksgiving, having been bestowed by God, is not evil, and your perversity is refuted from every side. ^D

Schol. 25. That which pertains to the prophet Jonah has been cut out. For it contained: "This generation shall seek a sign," and—

^A a sign shall not be given to it. And those things were desired, in which mention is made of the Queen of the South and Solomon.

Refut. 25. Nor, indeed, in those places which you corrupt by mutilation, Marcion, are you able to escape the power of the truth. Even if you were to subtract all that regarding the prophet Jonah, by which that entire economy of the Savior is expressed; if you were to take away also those things which pertain to the Queen of the South and Solomon, along with that saving mention of Nineveh, and the preaching of Jonah, nevertheless that very saying of the Savior which I have proposed strangles you. For he says: "This generation seeks a sign; and a sign shall not be given to it." By which he indicates that those generations which preceded this one had received signs from God from heaven. Of such a kind was that performed by Elijah, when fire fell from heaven and consumed the sacrifices; and Moses, in truth, divides the sea, strikes the rock and draws forth waters, and brings down manna from heaven. Joshua the son of Nun caused the sun to stand still, and the moon. Whence, however much the impostor may dissemble what is written, he will be able to do no harm to the truth, but will only alienate himself the more from it.

Schol. 26. In place of that which is, "You pass over the judgment of God," he had written, "You pass over the vocation of God."

Refut. 26. What is there that is not valid for your refutation? Or whence can testimony not be summoned against you? For the former things agree with the latter, that your wicked audacity might be convicted. For when he says: "You hold the traditions of your elders, and pass over the mercy and judgment of God"; learn, if you please, from what time he accuses them of observing these things; and when that tradition of the elders began. You will find indeed that which is inscribed to David after ^B the return from Babylon: but that Akiba’s [tradition] had its beginning a little before the Babylonian captivity. Furthermore, [that the tradition] of the sons of the Asamoneans [was] in the times of Alexander and Antiochus, one hundred and ninety years before the coming of Christ. Therefore, even then, the vocation was offered through the Law, and mercy through the prophets, so that the reasoning of this quack is overturned from its foundations.

Schol. 27. "Woe to you, because you build the sepulchers of the prophets, and your fathers killed them."

Refut. 27. Since he signifies that he cares for the prophets, by reproaching the murderers for their slaughter, it is apparent that the prophets were by no means alien to him, but were servants who both made ready a way in some measure for him who was to come, and bore witness to the New Testament. This Moses performed chiefly in these words: "The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet from among your brethren, like unto me." But even before Moses, Jacob, when he speaks thus: ^D "From the sprout, my son Judah, you have gone up; you have rested and slept. A ruler shall not cease from"

Judah," and a little later: "Until He comes, to whom it is reserved, and He is the expectation of the nations. And in Him the nations shall hope." ^A And Isaiah: "Behold, the virgin shall have in her womb." And Jeremiah: "And He is a man, and who shall know Him?" And Micah: "And you, Bethlehem," and after other things: "From you shall come forth unto me a leader," and so on. And Malachi: "The Lord shall suddenly come into His temple." And David: "The Lord said to my Lord," and so on. And many things can be said, since the Savior Himself says: "If you believed Moses, you would also believe me. For he wrote of me."

Schol. 28. It was missing: "Therefore also the wisdom of God said: I will send to them prophets," and concerning the blood of Zechariah and Abel and the prophets, that "it shall be required from this generation."

Refut. 28. Indeed, this passage brings great shame upon you, Marcion, since the integrity of the truth remains, and the places stolen and mutilated by you are easily found; and those things which are missing are read in all the copies of the Gospel according to Luke, so that what has been altered by you is exposed. ^B

Schol. 29. "I say to my friends: Do not fear those who kill the body; but fear Him who, after killing, has the power to cast into hell." And it did not have: "Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God?"

Refut. 29. These same words: "I say to my friends: Do not fear those who kill the body; but fear Him who, after having killed the body, has the power to cast the soul into hell," force you, O Marcion, to confess also the rest of the parable. For nothing at all happens without the will of God, even if you do remove what is written concerning the sparrows. You must therefore give an account, O Marcion, of those things left out by you in the text. ^C And answer us: what do you think of Him who is said to have the power? For if you say He is the Father of Christ, and the same God whom you preach to be good—even if you do wrongly separate Him—nevertheless, since He is endowed with power, you confess Him to be a judge who compensates each according to his merits. But if you judge that some other being is meant, namely the Creator, whom you yourself properly establish as judge, tell me who granted Him this power. For if He has it of Himself, He is surely great and endowed with power. And if He has the power to judge, He also has the power to save. For he who is able to judge is also able to absolve. Moreover, if when the judge casts souls into hell, that good God, who takes such care of ^D souls, does not deliver them, how can He be considered good? Either He is stronger than Him, and is unable to rescue them from his hands; or He is able, but does not wish to. And where is His goodness? But if, because He himself created them, He has the power to judge, how is the God above, whom you

^A invent, said to save some partially? If He saves by taking from what belongs to another, He is covetous, desiring what is another’s. But if you do not say it is covetousness, because the work is done for a good and saving end, you make Him a respecter of persons, not doing good to all, perhaps, but doing so partially.

Schol. 30. For these words: *He will confess before the angels*, he wrote instead: *before God*.

Refut. 30. It is perfectly apparent that he is not walking according to God, even if he changes the truth by a small word. For he who does not hesitate to corrupt any part of those things which were written from the beginning is not standing on the path of truth.

Schol. 31. It does not have this: *God clothes the grass*.

Refut. 31. Even if you do not relate the written words as they were spoken by the Savior, nevertheless those passages are preserved entire in the Gospel which the holy Church uses; however much you may deny that God who by His Word created all things, and embraces them with His same care and providence, not excluding even the grass—whom, moreover, the Savior confessed with His own voice to be God.

Schol. 32. *Your Father knows that you need these physical things*.

Refut. 32. The Father knows that the disciples are in need of the commodities of the body, and therefore He provides for them; not in some other age but in this world; and not in the possession ^C of another, but in those things of which He himself is the creator, governing His servants with singular providence.

Schol. 33. *Seek the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added to you*.

Refut. 33. If we are sustained by the resources of another, and there is another God of the heavenly kingdom, how can this saying any longer be coherent? For if the things here are His, and the kingdom is also His, then He adds all the things that are here for the sake of the labor of the desire for His kingdom. His is the kingdom, and the age to come, and the things here belong to the Creator; and the Creator concurs with the kingdom from above, taking responsibility for those who seek the righteousness ^D of the one above and His kingdom. Since there is but one will, and not a divided one, there are no longer two or three principles; for in truth there is one God who created all things; and He created them well, and not in an opposed manner. But it is ours to sin, and to err in choosing and in avoiding.

Schol. 34. For that which is: *Your Father*, he had: *Father*.

Refut. 34. In this place as well you do us no harm, but rather you support our cause, while you introduce the Savior confessing that the care of these inferior things is managed by His Father.

Schol. 35. For where it says, "the second or the third watch," he had written, "the evening watch." Refut. 35. From this passage, that beast is manifestly convicted of having perverted divine oracles to suit his opinions. For the watches are not daytime, but nighttime, extending from the evening to the first watch—not from the morning dawn to the evening, as he shamefully substituted.

Schol. 36. "The Lord of that servant shall come, and shall cut him asunder, and will appoint his portion with the unbelievers." Refut. 36. Who is the "cutter asunder" of the servant? Tell me. If it is the Creator and Judge, the God whom you name, who is about to do this, then the faithful are indeed His; for in rebuking the servant who does not act rightly, ^B He appoints his portion with the unbelievers. But if it is the Father of Christ, or Christ Himself, who is about to accomplish this, you clearly preserve evidence against yourself; for in confessing that either Christ or His Father is about to do this without question, you have acknowledged the same person as both Judge and good, a single being, providing for both the things here and the things hereafter.

Schol. 37. "Lest he hale thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer." Refut. 37. Here he calls the Creator the judge, and the officer any one of His angels, who are about to demand an account of their deeds from sinners. What are those deeds, if not the faults and sins which Jesus detests, and which you yourself say He forbids? If, therefore, the things which the good God detests are the same as those which the judge and Creator detest, He is shown to be one and the same by the very work and by the agreement of His will.

Schol. 38. He had cut out of that passage: "There came some reporting to Him concerning the Galileans, whose blood Pilate mingled with their sacrifices," down to where it speaks of the eighteen in Siloam who were crushed by the fall of the tower; and "Except ye repent"; and down to the parable of the fig tree, concerning which the husbandman said, "I dig about it, and cast in dung, and if it shall not bear, cut it down." Refut. 38. The plunderer made this removal of all these things, hiding the truth from himself, because the Lord agreed with Pilate, who had judged such men rightly, ^C and because those who died at Siloam had rightly died, being sinners and punished as such by God. But just as when some people tamper with royal decrees, the most faithful copies produced from the archives refute the madmen; so also the Gospel brought forth from the palace—that is, the holy Church of God—easily detects the mice that gnaw at the fine garments.

^A Schol. 39. *Hanc autem filiam Abrahae, quam alligavit Satanas.*

Refut. 39. When the Lord comes and takes care of the daughter of Abraham, Abraham will not be a stranger to Him. By this very act, He declares that he has pleased Him, because He is moved by mercy toward his daughter.

Schol. 40. He also removed this: *Then you will see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God.* In its place he wrote: *When you see all the righteous in the kingdom of God, but yourselves excluded.* And he added: *held fast outside; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.*

Refut. 40. How the traces of truth are revealed! For no one can hide a road. Although it is possible to lead men away from it, and to lead them into error, or to hide it from those who are ignorant of it, this cannot be done to those who have had experience of it. For the earth in which the road is imprinted cannot be entirely removed from the middle; and although someone may obscure it, since the place of it remains, he who has corrupted it is not difficult to convict by those who know it. Therefore, consider the traces and the consequences of the discourse itself. To whom, indeed, was He aiming this speech, if not to the Jews? And if He was speaking to the Jews, He had already shown them to be inside, and cast out from the company of the righteous. And who would these be, if not their fathers: Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the prophets? For He did not say: "You will see the righteous entering, and you not entering," but, "You will see the righteous in the kingdom, but yourselves cast out." ^B And concerning the fact that they were to be cast out, He spoke in the future tense; but He showed that the righteous were already there, no strangers to them by flesh, nor by calling, but those who were called with them, having been already justified before the coming of the Savior in the flesh. But if they remain outside, while their fathers are inside, whence, O most foolish man, comes that gnashing of teeth in the judgment, if there be no resurrection of bodies?

^C Schol. 41. He also removed this: *They will come from the east and the west, and will recline in the kingdom.* Then this: *The last will be first.* Likewise: *The Pharisees approached, saying: Depart, and go: for Herod wants to kill you.* And also that: *Go, tell this fox,* up to the point where He said: *It is not possible for a prophet to be killed outside Jerusalem.* That also: *Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you.* Likewise: *Often I wished to gather your children as a hen [gathers] her chicks,* and: *Your house will be left to you;* and: *You will not see me, until you say: Blessed.*

Refut. 41. See the audacity of the man, and how much he subtracts ^D from the Gospel. Just as if someone were to cut a certain animal into two parts, and show the half of it to the ignorant, and endeavor to persuade them that the animal is the whole of that kind, and that nothing has been taken away from it.

^A Schol. 42. Again he has cut away the whole parable of the two sons, of him who had taken his portion of the goods and spent it riotously, and of the other 1. Refut. 42. This new deed of his is very similar to, and indeed a twin of, those things which he committed in the same manner before. But this was a fraud peculiar to him alone, since the same divine truth nonetheless remains. Schol. 43. The law and the prophets until John... and everyone presses into it 2. Refut. 43. If he recounts the law and mentions the prophets, and neither ascribes wickedness to the former nor calls these latter false prophets, it must necessarily be admitted that Christ the Lord has confirmed the prophets by His own testimony; from which place it is gathered that they prophesied concerning Christ. Schol. 44. Concerning the rich man, and Lazarus the beggar, ^B that he was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom 3. Refut. 44. Do you see how, among the living and the blessed in that happy inheritance of eternal rest, Abraham is reckoned by the Lord, and Lazarus is deemed worthy of his bosom? Cease, therefore, Marcion, to blaspheme Abraham, who recognized his own Master and spoke to Him saying: “Lord, who judgest all the earth” 4. For behold, he is testified by the Lord Himself to be just, and not a stranger to the life which the Savior Himself commends. Schol. 45. Now, however, this same Lazarus is comforted here 5. Refut. 45. Since Lazarus is comforted in Abraham’s bosom, it follows that not even Abraham himself is devoid of this consolation. Schol. 46. Abraham said: “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them; otherwise, not even if one should rise from the dead will they be persuaded” 6. ^C Refut. 46. It is not as if he were still in this world, and as one deceived, that Abraham bears witness to the Law of Moses and the prophets, nor as one who does not know the things that are to come thereafter, but, rather, having experienced the rest that is there. For after death, he is testified by the Savior in the parable to have obtained salvation through the dogmas of the Law and the prophets; and this after having acted in accordance with them even before the Law. Likewise, that those who observed the Law after these things, and obeyed the prophets, are also in his bosom, and go to the life with him; of whose number was Lazarus, who through the Law and the prophets was deemed worthy of the life-giving bosom of Abraham’s blessedness. Schol. 47. He omitted the words: “Say: We are unprofitable ^D servants; we have done what we ought to have done” 7. Refut. 47. He also rejects the safeguard which the Lord’s teaching prescribes. For Christ, wishing to make His disciples cautious and prudent, lest they be deprived of the reward of their work because of pride, taught them to be humble. But this man rejects that instruction, inasmuch as he is lifted up by arrogance, and is not supported by truth.

^A

Schol. 48. "When the ten lepers met him." He cut out many things, and acted thus: "He sent them, saying: Show yourselves to the priests"; and he substituted other things for others, saying, "There were many lepers in the days of Elisha the prophet, and none was cleansed except Naaman the Syrian."

Refut. 48. Here also the Lord names Elisha as a prophet, and thereby shows that those things which were foreshadowed by him, as it were in figures, have been fulfilled in reality, so that he might refute Marcion and all those who reject the prophets of God.

Schol. 49. "The days will come when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man."

Refut. 49. If he counts "[the] days" and indicates a time, and calls himself the Son of Man, he certainly also pointed out the measure of a lifetime, and an example of the days of his preaching. Therefore, the Word is not without flesh, but the good pleasure is in the body. ^B

Schol. 50. "A certain man said to him: Good Teacher! What shall I do to inherit eternal life? But he said: Do not call me good; one is good, God." He added, "The Father." And instead of "You know the commandments," he says, "I know the commandments."

Refut. 50. In order not to show that the commandments had been written down beforehand, he says: "I know the commandments." But the whole chapter is clear from the context. And if he speaks of a good Father, and names God, he correctly instructs whoever wishes to inherit life from the Law of His Father; and he does not reject it, nor does he cast it away, but rather bears witness that those who have lived according to the Law have inherited eternal life, namely Moses and the other prophets. ^C

Schol. 51. "And it came to pass when he drew near to Jericho, a blind man was crying out: Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me. And when he was cured, he says: Your faith has saved you."

Refut. 51. There is no lie in faith. For if it is a lie, it is not faith. He says, therefore: "Son of David," and he is praised, and the one who confessed the name obtains what he had asked for. He is not rebuked as a liar, but is called blessed as a faithful man. The one who for that invocation of his name restored sight to the blind man was not, therefore, without flesh. For he was truly, and not by mere appearance, of the seed of David according to the flesh, born of Mary the holy Virgin, and fashioned by the Holy Spirit. ^D

Schol. 52. He mutilated these things: "Taking the twelve, he was saying: Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that have been written in the prophets concerning the Son of Man will be accomplished. For he will be delivered, and put to death, and on the third day he will rise again." He cut out all these things.

Refut. 52. So that he might nowhere walk straight. But by not walking straight, he is caught acting deceitfully in every way.

^A For he hid the sayings, so that he might, forsooth, deny the things concerning the Passion. But since he afterwards confesses that the same one was crucified, his effort at deceit will be in vain for him.

Schol. 53. He cut out the chapter concerning the ass, and Bethphage, and the chapter concerning the city and the temple. For it was written: "My house shall be called a house of prayer, but you make it a den of thieves."

Refut. 53. Every wickedness is blind; for it does not see those things by which it could be refuted, and it hopes that it can hide the way of truth, which is quite impossible. For he immediately leapt over, omitting all the aforementioned chapters because of the testified place of the temple, which was his own and built in his name. And leaving out from Jericho the whole sequence of the journey, [he omitted] how they came to Bethany and to Bethphage. For by nature there was an old main road leading to Jerusalem through the Mount of Olives, not unknown to those who record the place. But in order that he be refuted by his own mouth, he says: "It came to pass one of the days, as he was teaching in the temple, they sought to lay hands on him, and they feared," as is contained after this in chapter 54. How, then, he came from Jericho into the temple will be known from the same journey and the distance of the road. But this is to show the fraudulent man ^B concealing what happened on the road, and the words spoken by the Savior himself in the temple before this discourse, I mean, "My house shall be called a house of prayer," and the rest, as the prophecy contains it.

Schol. 54. "And they sought to lay hands on him, and they feared."

Refut. 54. The things which pertain to this passage were examined and explained in the preceding refutation, along with the wording, as briefly as possible.

Schol. 55. Again he cut out the things concerning the vineyard which was let out to the husbandmen; and that: "What therefore is this, The stone which the builders rejected?"

Refut. 55. This will harm us in nothing. For even if he cuts this out, he has not cut it out from us, but has injured himself and his own people. For the refutation against him is sufficient, by means of many testimonies.

Schol. 56. He cut out the [saying]: "But that the dead are raised, Moses showed at the bush, as he calls the Lord the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob. For God ^C is the God of the living, and not of the dead."

Refut. 56. Truly, the stupidity of the insane man is to be wondered at; how does he not perceive that this testimony is the same in value as that of Lazarus the beggar, and the parable of those who are not permitted to enter into the kingdom? The remains of which parables he left, and did not cut out, but left in his own shame, [and]

*There shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.* Now, the finger being dipped into water after the departure from here, and the tongue being cooled by water, as the rich man said to Abraham regarding Lazarus, and the gnashing of teeth and weeping occurring, is a sign of the resurrection of bodies, even if that beastly man perverts what was truly spoken by the Lord concerning the resurrection of the dead.

Schol. 57. He also omitted these: *But that the dead rise, even Moses intimated, saying, "The God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," the God of the living.*

Refut. 57. Since the same parable was repeated twice by the Savior, we have therefore set it forth twice, so that—unlike that mountebank Marcion—we might not be seen to have passed over any of the things that were written. Already, in the previous refutation, the contradiction against his trickery has been made.

Schol. 58. He removed this one furthermore: *A hair from your head shall not perish.*

Refut. 58.

Schol. 59. Again he took these away: *Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, etc.*, because of what follows, *until all that is written is fulfilled.*

Refut. 59. This forgetful man thinks that all others are like him, that is, foolish. And he does not know that if he leaves behind even a tiny word, he makes a case against himself. How much more when he cuts out many words from the sentence? Therefore, although these testimonies are mangled by him, it is permitted to set against them other things which he himself admits. For when these are taken away, it will be established that they are entirely consistent with the things cut out by him, such as those in which Abraham is introduced as speaking after death: *They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.* For what the prophets and Moses said was from God the Father, and from the Lord Himself, the Son of God, and from the Holy Spirit; and these commands needed to be fully fulfilled in Scripture.

Schol. 60. *He consulted with the magistrates, how he might deliver Him to them.*

Refut. 60. Oh, the madness of Marcion! Who else spoke but Judas? Or what else was he to do, if not to deliver the Savior? But if the Savior is delivered, He was surely not some empty phantom, but consisted of the solid nature of a human being. For if He were nothing but spirit, He could by no means be delivered to men endowed with flesh. Being God, therefore, He offered Himself to be handled, having put on flesh, and willingly surrendered Himself to the hands of human nature. They also speak the contrary things to their own selves out of folly. For indeed, once, when I was disputing with a certain disciple of Marcion, a Marcionite, and saying, as it is in the Gospel, that the Spirit took Him into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil, I heard from him, saying: "How could Satan tempt the One who is God, and who is greater than he, and his Lord, as..."

you say, Jesus—that is, the Christ?" I, however, relying on the help of God, which at that moment came to my mind, replied to these [things], saying: "Do you believe that Christ was crucified?" And he said: "Yes," and he did not hesitate to acknowledge it. "By whom, then, was He crucified?" I asked. "By men," he replied. Then I said to him: "Who of the two is more powerful, man or the devil?" The devil, he replied, is far more powerful than men. I then rejoined to these things: "If Christ was crucified by men, who are far weaker, what is it to be wondered at that He was also tempted by the devil?" For Christ gave Himself up for our sake to suffer all these things according to His will, and not by necessity; He suffered in truth, not out of weakness, but by choice, as an example for us, as well as for our sake in the struggle against the devil, and for our salvation in the passion of the cross, for the condemnation of sin and the abolition of death. ^B

Schol. 61. And He said to Peter, and to the rest: "Go and prepare so that we may eat the Passover." ^C

Refut. 61. A great cloud of missiles against you is contained in this one testimony, O Marcion. For since He orders the Passover to be prepared for Him, and it was celebrated before Christ suffered, surely it must have been because this prescription existed by the Law. Since, therefore, Christ ordered the course of His life according to the commandment of the Law, it is evident that He did not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it. And if a king does not destroy the Law, then the ordinance ^D within the Law (76) is not [made] *kathosiotos*. [index: entries preserved]

For when the law and the regulation are acknowledged, if a king adds anything to the regulation for a greater gift, the splendor of the addition comes by his authority. Since the framing of the law and the gift by way of addition are one and the same, it is plain and clear to everyone that he who has made the addition does not oppose the law. Therefore, it has been demonstrated that the Old Testament is not contrary to the Gospel, nor to the succession of the prophets. By your own actions, however, Marcion, you have brought upon yourself a manifold refutation, or rather, you are compelled by the Truth itself. For the ancient Pascha was nothing other than the slaughter of a lamb, the eating of meat, Partaking of a living thing, and unleavened bread. And what compelled you not to destroy the refutation against you completely, if not, as I said, the truth itself? For the very thing you abhor—flesh-eating—the Lord Jesus ate with his disciples, celebrating the Pascha according to the Law. And do not say that because He was about to perform the mystery, He was prefiguring this by saying: "I have desired to eat this Pascha with you." For in order that the Truth might put you to shame in every way, He does not perform the mystery at the beginning, so that you might not deny it; but He says after they had supped, taking this and that, He said: "This is this and that"; and He left no room for wily tricks. For He showed that after having eaten the Pascha, that which is according to the Jews—that is, after having supped—He came to the mystery ^B.

Schol. 62. *And He reclined, and the twelve apostles with Him; and He said: With desire I have desired to eat this Pascha with you before I suffer.*

Refut. 62. The Savior reclined, Marcion, and the twelve apostles with Him. If He reclined, and they reclined together with Him, one word cannot have this meaning. ^C

On the meaning of *kathosiotos* and related terms

^D

^A nor that, even if there be a difference in their dignity and manner. For you must either concede that even the twelve reclined only in appearance, or that He who truly assumed flesh truly reclined as well. "And with desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer," in order that He might show the Passover 79 to have been prefigured in the Law before His Passion, and that this served as the confirmation of His very Passion, calling us to it more perfectly and pointing it out, just as the holy apostle says: "The law has been our tutor unto Christ." But if the law is a tutor unto Christ, the law is by no means foreign to Christ.

Schol. 63. He omitted this: "I say to you, I will not eat of it again until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God."

Refut. 63. He removed this in bad faith, so that he might ensure that no food or drink be expressed in these words as being in the kingdom of God. Nor did this stupid man recognize that there can be something resembling earthly things in spiritual and heavenly realities, the method of our participation in which is hidden from us. For the Savior himself again bears witness and says: "You shall sit at my table, eating and drinking in the kingdom of heaven." But he deleted these passage again, so that he might pretend that those things which pertain to the Law have no place in the kingdom of heaven. How then did Elijah and Moses appear with Him on the mountain in glory? But there is no one who can succeed against the truth.

Schol. 64. He omitted this: "When I sent you, did you lack anything?" and what follows, because of the passage: "And this which is written must be fulfilled: And he was reckoned with the lawless."

Refut. 64. Even if you omit the words, the reality itself will reveal their proper places, since the Law came before, and the prophets announced, and the Lord finally fulfilled.

Schol. 65. "He withdrew from them about a stone's throw, and kneeling down he prayed."

Refut. 65. "Kneeling down," he says. He knelt in such a way that it could be seen, and he performed this in a sensible manner. But if he bent his knees in such a way that it could be perceived, and as the nature of this action demanded, then certainly the Only-Begotten did not dwell in this world without flesh. For to Him "every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth." Of those in heaven, the spiritual; ^D of those on earth, the sensible; of those under the earth, in their own manner. Here, however, He performed all things in truth, being seen, and being found by the disciples to be tangible, and not merely appearing as a specter.

Schol. 66. "And he approached to kiss him, and said."

^B Schol. 67. That which is said to have been done by Peter is omitted, when he struck and cut off the ear of the servant of the high priest.

Refut. 67. Although he may seem to have suppressed these things in order to consult the honor of Peter, by this very fact that it was truly done, and pertains to the honor and glory of the Savior, he has attempted to hide it. But he has achieved nothing at all. For even if he has removed the mention of this event, we nevertheless know the miracles of God. Therefore, the Savior immediately taking the severed ear, restored it whole, that He might show himself to be God and had performed a divine work.

Schol. 68. And those who were holding him mocked him, beating and striking him and saying: "Prophesy, who is it that struck you?"

Refut. 68. All these things—those who were holding and mocking, likewise the beating and the striking, and the "Prophesy to us, who is it that struck you"—these, I say, do not refer merely to a shadowed appearance, but signify a certain contact and a corporeal and fleshly substance. And this is so manifest to anyone: even if, Marcion, because of the blindness of mind that is in you, you refuse to confess the clear truth of God.

Schol. 69. After these things: "We found this one subverting our nation," he added, "and destroying the law and the prophets."

Refut. 69. Are you not everywhere detected and convicted of perverting the ways of the Lord? For when you add to this passage what is by no means written, and bring slander upon yourself—for I would not say upon the Lord—by writing thus: "We found this one destroying the law and the prophets," the contrary speech of the Savior will slay you, O madman: "I did not come to destroy the law or the prophets, but to fulfill." Therefore, that same one who testifies that he did not come for the sake of destroying cannot be accused of having destroyed. Nor indeed do we read it thus in the Gospel, but rather: "We found this one subverting the people, saying that he himself is Christ the King."

^C Schol. 70. He also added after these words: "And forbidding to give tribute," he added: "And turning away wives and children."

Refut. 70. Who is pushing himself into the precipice and fulfilling what is written: "To whom will he be good who is wicked to himself?" For this is indeed an evident argument of a certain unheard-of temerity and wickedness, or of a dangerous and rugged path, to delete what is written, and to add what was never written: and to commit this especially in the Gospel, which ought to be stable and firm forever. Add to this that those very things which are added have neither a place nor do they signify anything like a riddle. For Christ did not turn away wives or children, when He himself ^D said: "Honor your father and mother," and "What God has joined, let no man put asunder." But even if he should say: "If anyone" ——

if anyone leaves father and mother, and brothers, and wife, and children, and so forth, he is not my disciple; not so that we should hate our parents, but that we should not be driven by the command of parents into a different faith, or in a way contrary to the Savior's teaching.

^A Schol. 71. And coming to the place called the skull-place, they crucified him, and divided his garments, and the sun was darkened.

Refut. 71. Thanks be to the merciful God, who bound your chariots, O Pharaoh Marcion! and while you were attempting to flee, He drowned them in the sea. For although you grasp at every opportunity for evasion, you will be able to bring forward no excuse here. For he who has no flesh cannot even be crucified. How did you not escape this great saying? How did you not attempt to conceal this great business, which has undone all the wickedness you have devised from the beginning? For if he was truly crucified, why do you not see him who was crucified having tangible form, and having his hands and feet pierced with nails? And this could not be a phantasm or an apparition, as you say, but a body in truth, which the Lord took from Mary, flesh, our nature, and bones, and the rest; ^B since it is acknowledged even by you that the Lord was nailed to the cross.

Schol. 72. He cut out: "Today you will be with me in paradise."

Refut. 72. You have cut this out well and fittingly, O Marcion; for you have taken away from yourself the entrance to paradise. For neither will you enter, nor will you allow those with you to enter. For by nature, those who deceive and those who are deceived truly hate what is good.

Schol. 73. And crying with a loud voice, he breathed his last.

Refut. 73. If he breathed his last, O Marcion, and gave forth a loud voice, whence did he breathe his last, or what was it that breathed forth? It is clear, even if you do not say it. The truth holds ^C that it was the soul, along with the divinity, departing from the body, with the body remaining breathless.

Schol. 74. Behold a man named Joseph, having taken down the body, wrapped it in a linen shroud, and placed it in a hewn tomb.

Refut. 74. If "having taken down," and "having wrapped," and "placing in a hewn tomb," does not persuade you, O Marcion, who could be more foolish than you? What else could the Scripture have indicated more clearly, since ^D it has shown the tomb, and the place, and the form, and the three-day stay of the body, and the wrapping of the linen shroud, in order to show the whole truth?

^A Schol. 75. And returning, the women rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment. Refut. 75. Whence, I ask, did the women return? And why is it written that they rested? It is so that the Scripture might show their testimony, which refutes your insanity, O Marcion. For behold, women bear witness, and apostles, and Jews, and angels, and Joseph himself, who took down the truly tangible body from the cross and wrapped it. But who can correct him who perverts himself by his own judgment and will? As it is written. Schol. 76. They said, who were in white clothing: Why seek you the living among the dead? He is risen. Remember what he spoke while he was still with you: "That the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be delivered." Refut. 76. Not even these angels can create faith in you, O Marcion! While they declare that he was for three days among the dead, and thereafter living, and no longer dead; for while he always lives in his divinity, and has not been dead at all, he did lie dead for three days according to the flesh, and began to live anew. For thus they address the women: "He is risen; he is not here." But what else does the voice of his rising signify, if not that he had slept? Which indeed they declare more clearly afterwards. For, they say, remember that while he was still living he said these things to you: "That the Son of Man must suffer." Schol. 77. He cut out what was said to Cleopas and his companion, when he met them: "O foolish and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not these things to have been suffered?" And instead of "all that the prophets have spoken," he wrote, "all that I have spoken to you." But he is refuted by this, that when he broke the bread, their eyes were opened, and they recognized him. ^B Refut. 77. Whence came that breaking of bread? Tell me, I pray, Marcion. Did it come from some empty phantom, or from a body of some solid mass, and truly acting as such? For when he rose from the dead, he rose in that very same most holy body in truth. ^C But you, for these words: "Ought not these things be what the prophets have spoken?" have dared to rewrite: "Are these not the things which I have spoken to you?" Yet if he had said this to them: "I have spoken to you," they must surely have recognized him from those words. Why then does he add, upon breaking the bread, "Their eyes were opened, and they recognized him; and he vanished"? For thus it behooved God, who had converted his body into a spiritual one, to show it indeed to be a true body, but to withdraw it from the eyes of mortals as often as he pleased: since there is nothing that can escape his power. ^D For even the prophet Elisha, when he was, and had received grace from God, asked of God that those seeking him might suddenly become blind; and they were struck, and could not see him as he was. Moreover, in Sodom, the angels were able to hide the door of Lot from view, so that the Sodomites could not see it. Or was the door of Lot also a mere semblance, O Marcion? Not even one argument remains for you.

^A For He clearly broke the bread, and distributed it to His disciples.

Schol. 78. Why are you troubled? See my hands and my feet, because a spirit has no bones, as you see that I have.

Refut. 78. Who would not mock this most foolish man, who in his stupidity drags himself and others' souls down to hell? For if he did not acknowledge all these things, his error would have some color of excuse, and those who allowed themselves to be deceived by him would be in some way worthy of pardon. But now, since he himself accepts those very words as genuine and has not removed them, and they are read by his disciples, the sin of both remains, and that fire of his and theirs remains, which no shuffling can avoid, since for them all excuse is taken away. For the Savior openly taught that after the resurrection He consisted of bones and flesh, as these His words demonstrate: *As you see that I have*. ^B

And this is the argument of that work which I had elaborated against Marcion, which I had gathered piecemeal from those remnants of the Gospel which he still retains. This I believe to be sufficient to refute his error. I come now to the remaining sentences of the Apostle which he thought should be accepted in the same way; I, for your sake, have excerpted them primarily, and in presenting these I have kept the same order and sequence that he used, so that I might make a beginning from that which is written to the Galatians. For he placed this first. We, however, formerly made our arrangement ^C not as he did, but as the apostolic writings represent it, namely, that the work written to the Romans should take the first place. But now we shall present all things adjusted to his own form and example.

From the Epistle to the Galatians

Schol. 1. Learn that the just shall live by faith. For as many as are under the law are under the curse. But he that does these things shall live in them.

Refut. 1. This very statement, *Learn that the just shall live by faith*, used by the Apostle, confirms the Old Testament. For these things were pronounced by Him from the law and the prophets for our sake to procure life for us concerning the New Testament, and they are indeed consistent with our hope. But what he says, *are under the curse*, ^D refers to the fact that divine threats were contained in the law against the sin of Adam, until Christ, sent from heaven, arrived, who, clothing himself in a body formed from the mass of Adam, converted the curse into a blessing.

Schol. 2. Cursed is everyone that hangs on wood. But he who is of the promise, is of the free woman.

Refut. 2. Since the Apostle here again signifies the entire administration of the flesh he took upon himself, and that the cross pertained to the taking away of the curse; this—

that what was written in the Law had been foretold, and then was fulfilled in the Savior, he clearly declares that the Law is not alien to the Savior, inasmuch as it had prophesied all things that were to be achieved by Him and corroborated them by its testimony.

^A Schol. 3. I testify again, that every man who receives circumcision is a debtor to keep the whole Law. Refut. 3. When he says, "he is a debtor," he does not speak as if of something prohibited, but of a heavier burden that can be lightened. For there is one Lord, who is able both to burden and to lighten, according to the will of those who have not refused to accept the salvation offered through His grace at His coming in the flesh.

Schol. 4. For that which is written: A little leaven leavens the whole lump, he has written "corrupts." Refut. 4. So that no vestige of truth might remain with him, he hardly ever touches the Scriptures without maliciously altering something. But from the sequence of the discourse itself, it is made manifest. For leaven is a type of the action of the lump, and from the lump itself the leavening occurs; nor did he who prudently applied that similitude and comparison destroy the original form.

^B Schol. 5. For the whole Law is fulfilled for you in this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Refut. 5. What need was there for the Apostle to use the Law, if the New Testament were abhorrent to the ancient ordinances? But it was to show clearly that those two Testaments have flowed from one and the same author, God, and that there is a supreme concord between both; that in both, the fulfillment of the Law is signified by the love of one's neighbor, which constitutes a good that is perfect and absolute in every respect. Therefore, the Apostle defines love as the perfection of the Law.

Schol. 6. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are: fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, contentions, emulations, angers, quarrels, dissensions, ^C sects, homicides, drunkenness, revelings: which I foretell to you, as I have foretold, that they who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Refut. 6. O admirable mysteries of God, and dogmas adverse to the errors of Marcion! For all evils are attributed to the flesh. Yet the flesh has not existed for all time; but it began to exist only on the sixth day, when Adam was formed. From this, those are refuted who preach that evil has existed from the beginning and always. For neither did the flesh commit sin as soon as it was formed, lest the Creator should be considered the author of sin, as having fashioned ^D sinful flesh; nor did evil exist before the creature. But some time after, Adam, having fallen away from obedience to God and being endowed with liberty, by himself, and of his own accord and certain purpose—

^A acted; and I mean by this, his having brought about the rejection of the Lord Himself through disobedience. Where, therefore, was the evil, before the flesh existed? And why, as soon as it was fashioned, did it not work evil, but rather some time later? So then, the argument concerning the origin of evil is destroyed. For it cannot be ancient, since evil has its state of existence—or non-existence—in the flesh, which is later; and again, the flesh is not excluded from the inheritance of heavenly things. Let no one misunderstand the holy Apostle when he says: "Flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God." For he does not accuse every kind of flesh. For how could the flesh be accused, if it has not done the things aforementioned? And I shall demonstrate what is being investigated by other proofs as well. For he says, "Who shall lay any charge against God's elect?" How shall Mary, the holy one, not inherit with her flesh the kingdom of heaven, she who did not commit fornication, did not act licentiously, did not commit adultery, and who neither performed any of the heinous works of the flesh, but remained immaculate? It is not, therefore, concerning flesh that he says it shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven, but concerning carnal men who do base things through the flesh—things which are fornication, idolatry, and the like. And by all means your stratagem, O Marcion, you who are led astray, has been exposed, the truth having anticipated you on all sides ^B and protected the firmness of the preaching of life.

Scholion 7. But they that are of Christ have crucified the flesh with the passions and lusts.

Refutation 7.

Scholion 8. For neither do they who are circumcised themselves keep the law.

Refutation 8.

^A a guarding. The law, therefore, is good, and circumcision is good, through which we have known Christ, and His more perfect law, and His more perfect circumcision.

From the Epistle to the Corinthians; for it is the second among them, as it is among us.

Schol. 1 and 9. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will set aside the prudence of the prudent."

Refut. 1 and 9. Since the Apostle draws authority from the things written in the prophets for the sake of establishing the faith of truth and good doctrine, the prophets are by no means separated from the truth, and from the Good, and from His good doctrine.

Schol. 2 and 10. And so that, as it is written: "He who glories, let him glory in the Lord."

Refut. 2 and 10. Since he who glories in the Lord is held worthy of praise by the prophets, and Scripture understands Him to be the Lord who is the God of the Law—whom you, Marcion, call judge and creator and just—He cannot be anyone other than the Father of Christ, whose disciple Paul is; since Paul, having been established by Christ as teacher of the Gentiles from the doctrine of the prophet, ^B drawing from the same fountains of doctrine as if from clearest water, waters the Church entrusted to him.

Schol. 3 and 11. Of the princes of this world, who are being brought to nothing.

Refut. 3 and 11. If the princes of this world are many, and they are indeed being brought to nothing, you are compelled, Marcion, no longer to search for the roots and origins of three principles; but having devised another fable of many principles and many roots, you turn yourself to the investigation of some vast tragedy. And whenever you fabricate slanders—for you will not find that those words, "who are being brought to nothing," meet you—because from the very word that says "being brought to nothing," that root of the principles ^C which you imagine to be without beginning will necessarily be destroyed. For everything that ends does not exist eternally; but if it had a beginning of its existence, it will also meet with an end. For it is impossible for that which has had a beginning to exist eternally, unless one would wish the existing Cause to be the cause of that which was not at one time, but began to be. But that which IS is the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit; but that which is not is everything that has been brought into existence, having had a beginning of its being, among which even that which is called evil is to be referred. I say evil, which flowed as from a beginning from men who were brought into the light: since they themselves at one time did not exist, and evil began to exist at the time ^D when man, who before was not, received his origin. Wherefore the time will come when evil will no longer exist; when it does not please the Beginning Himself that that which had its birth from a beginning should be in the number and order of evils.

And that it will cease, the same word of the Apostle will testify, saying: "Of the rulers of this world who are coming to an end." And thus, Marcion, your hypothesis is destroyed on every side, being a certain phantasm, false, unstable, and irrational.

^A Schol. 4 and 12. For it is written: "Who catches the wise in their craftiness." And again: "The Lord knows the thoughts of men, that they are vain."

Refut. 4 and 12. That very phrase, "It is written," when brought forward for use, and also "The Lord knows," when acknowledged, are not considered foreign to him who collected the saying of the Word—I mean to the holy Apostle, by whom the usage is introduced. From this usage the character of the Apostle’s preaching is shown to be not foreign to that of the Old Testament; whence the testimony is established for him.

Schol. 5 and 13. "For even Christ our Passover has been sacrificed."

Refut. 5 and 13. Since the Apostle both acknowledges the Passover and does not deny that Christ was sacrificed, the Passover is not to be alienated from Christ, who, according to the law of the Passover, sacrifices the true Lamb—not merely in appearance; and whose lamb-form, Christ, being sacrificed, did not express merely in appearance, nor did He suffer without flesh. For how could a spirit be sacrificed? Clearly, it could not. But since it could not be sacrificed without flesh, and yet was sacrificed in truth, this is acknowledged through the indisputable confession of the Apostle. Therefore, it is clearly proven from everything that the law is not foreign, as it was carried through in shadow and time until the more perfect and manifest Lamb, who was sacrificed in truth, was Christ, whom the sensible lamb, sacrificed in former times for others, preceded. But our Passover is Christ, who was sacrificed.

^C Schol. 6 and 14. "Do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body? For the two, he says, shall be one flesh."

Refut. 6 and 14. If the law is not true, why is it that those who are zealous for the truth draw authorities from it? Of this number is the holy apostle of God, Paul, who, along with countless others, did not hesitate to bring forward this testimony also to clearly assert the truth and the preaching of the good God.

^D Schol. 7 and 15. The place is changed; for instead of "in the law," he says "in the law of Moses." But he said before this: "even if the law does not say these things."

^A Indeed, it is written in the law: "You shall not muzzle the ox that treads out the grain." But you have harmed us in nothing, even if you added the name of Moses; rather, you have benefited us, and have established the testimony more clearly against yourself; and you have confessed on all sides, unwittingly, that the law of Moses is from God, by the very fact that you wrote "in the law of Moses." Also, the law says so. For the Apostle also concurs, adding afterwards: "Is it for oxen that God is concerned? Does he not certainly speak for our sake?" If, then, the law—and the God who spoke in the law—said these things for the apostles, then he who takes care of the apostles of Christ, by commanding that their mouths not be muzzled—that is, that they are not to be hindered from speaking the teaching of Christ, or to be without the daily food provided by the liberality of the people—clearly does not consider the apostles to be strangers to his own divinity, nor do the apostles consider ^B him to be a strange God. From this testimony, common to all, the holy Apostle draws his conclusion, saying: "Is it for oxen that God is concerned? But he said it for the sake of the apostles."

If, therefore, he utilized this for the sake of the apostles, he is surely the Creator of men and of beasts, among which are oxen, sparrows, serpents, wild animals, fish, and the rest of the living creatures; it follows that he takes care of all things according to the nature of each. That he has care for all things is sufficiently shown by what is written: "Men and animals you will save, O Lord." Also from this: "Who provided food for the raven?" and "The young of the ravens cry out to the Lord, seeking food"; and, "You give timely food to all." ^C And he does not simply forbid muzzles to be tied on oxen treading out grain; otherwise, he would be showing that God is unable to provide food for the creatures he has made, and that he cannot provide fodder except through the help and assistance of men. But the Apostle declares that it was not because of a lack of food that God wished to provide for the oxen at the time of threshing, and forbade them to be bound; rather, this whole enigma is to be referred to the apostles by a certain correspondence. For God embraces with his providence all things that can be perceived by the senses, and equally undertakes the care of the universe. For the Apostle did not write things contrary to the Savior, that many might seek this as a hiding place for their excuses. ^D For sparrows are much smaller than oxen, about which it was said by the Savior: "Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies?" And again: "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny, and not one of them will fall into a snare without your Father who is in heaven?" Thus, therefore, God governs all things by his providence. But the things that are greater, he attends to in a higher…

^A care, and the spiritual concern which follows their nature. It must be concluded, therefore, that he is the founder, and the maker, and the legislator of the Old and New Testaments, the good and just God, and Lord of all things.

Schol. 8 and 16. Doth God take care for oxen?

Refut. 8 and 16.

Schol. 9 and 17. For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant, how that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all drink the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased. Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Neither let us tempt Christ, onward to the words: Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, etc.

Refut. 9 and 17.

^A For the Scripture is truly verified, from which the Apostle draws his refutation against the wicked. Then again: "Nor let us tempt the Lord." But Marcion, instead of "the Lord," substituted "Christ." Yet Christ and the Lord are clearly the same thing—even if it may not seem so to Marcion—for the title of Christ was prefixed in the words: "The Rock was Christ"; and "With most of them God was not well pleased." And the holy Apostle, running through the entire argument of the chapter, says: "Now these things happened to them by way of figure; and they were written for our admonition." If, therefore, what happened to them by way of figure was written for our admonition, He who wrote what happened then for our admonition was concerned for those whom He was admonishing, that we might not become desires of evil things. Now, He who does not wish us to be desirous of evil things is surely good, and not evil. For in whatever things He exists, in those things He exhorts us to be; the same Being who is both a good God and just, the God of those mentioned before, and the Creator of those later admonished, the Creator, Lawgiver, and Author of all things, who also bestowed the Gospels and acted as the leader and guide of the Apostles.

Schol. on 10:18

Refutation of 10:18

^A And everywhere your false-speaking judgment falls to the ground, once the truth has been demonstrated: that those who sacrifice to idols—or, according to their own term, what they made or do make [iερόθυτον] (sacrificial)—are in fact doing a false work, sacrificing to demons and not to Christ. But this is not the case for those who at one time sacrificed according to the Law most justly. ^B Now that this is no longer the case, with His own consent—just as He spoke from of old through the prophet Jeremiah: "For what purpose do you bring me frankincense from Sheba, and cinnamon from a land far away?" (Jer. vi, 20) And again: "Your sacrifices were not pleasing to me." (ibid.) And at another time: "Take away your sacrifices, O Israel, and eat the flesh. For I did not command your fathers in the day in which I took hold of their hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt concerning sacrifices; but this I commanded them, that each one should do justice toward his neighbor." (Jer. vii, 22-23) Since He Himself says that ^C He did not command it, and yet the same One in the Law also commands Moses that "any of the sons of Israel, if he offers a sacrifice of oxen or sheep, let him offer a male without blemish" (Levit. i, 2) and again, "If anyone sins and becomes guilty of some transgression, let him bring a sheep" (Levit. v, 6), and again, "If the people sin, let them offer a calf" (Levit. iv, 3)—He showed that the sacrifices once fulfilled for the salvation of the people were acceptable to Him. Not that He was in need of these, nor that He wished for them, but that He was accommodating Himself to their weakness and to the preoccupation of human nature, so that from polytheism He might translate the mind of men to the knowledge of the one God. ^D For since their mind was strongly established in sacrifice, as if these were offices of piety which they rendered to idols for their own expiation and salvation, and lest, because of custom, they should bear it too harshly if they were suddenly forced to abandon this—He desired these things to be done in His own name for some time, so that through the imaginary worship of many gods they might transfer those annual ceremonies to His allegiance, and so that at last, having known the one God and having been securely strengthened in faith toward Him, we might thereafter hear from Him: "Shall I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?" (Ps. xlix, 13) And, "Did you offer me sacrifices in the desert for forty years, O house of Israel?" (Amos v, 25) Although many sacrifices were then offered, He shows that they were not offered to Him. Yet...

even if He Himself accepted them, and they offered them in His name, this was done because of the inveterate custom in such matters among them, until He should gradually lead them away from the use of many gods to the worship of the One. ^A From that point forward, they might understand that He neither needed such rites then nor needs them now; and thus finally, through the coming of His Christ, He might circumscribe the whole business of sacrifices, after the one and singular sacrifice had brought to completion all those which preceded it: namely, the sacrifice of Christ. For as it is written, "Christ our Pascha has been sacrificed" (1 Cor. v, 7). Of this sacrifice, and of the Pascha, and of the doctrine, the Law was a pedagogue, leading by way of types, and bringing them over to that other mode of discipline.

Schol. 11 and 19. "A man should not let his hair grow long, since he is the glory and image of God" (1 Cor. xi, 14). Refut. 11 and 19. The Apostle defines man not only as the image of God, but also as His glory. But when he speaks of hair, he refers to it as being corporeal—as belonging to the body and not to the soul. Thus, he does not define the creation as alien to the good God, because he admits that the things contained in the Old Testament are fulfilled in the New.

Schol. 12 and 20. "But God tempered the body" (1 Cor. xii, 24). Refut. 12 and 20. If the body was tempered by God, and if the Apostle preaches no other than the true God, and further confesses that this same God tempered and formed the members of the body; he certainly acknowledges no other God than the Creator Himself—who is indeed good, and creator, and just, and the maker of all foundations. ^B From all of which it is to be understood that man has been aptly tempered by Him in his own parts and members.

Schol. 13 and 21. Marcion conceives of this wrongly: "But in the Church I would rather speak five words with my mind" (1 Cor. xiv, 19). He added this, for he wrote differently, and [only] for the sake of the Law. Refut. 13 and 21. Languages, therefore, are derived from the grace of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, the languages of which the Apostle speaks are such as not only to include Hebrew, which exhibits a certain excellent and wise variety in its individual words, but also other distinctions of idioms—which some who were skilled in the Greek language, in whom there is a certain innate pride and vanity, boastfully paraded. ^C Such is the proprietary character of the Attic, Aeolic, and Doric dialects, relying on the knowledge of which some had stirred up those troubles and seditions at Corinth, to whom for this reason the Apostle sent this Epistle. In which, first...

^A he teaches that the benefit is of a singular kind, showing that he was able to speak in the Hebrew dialects and to teach the Law. Then, in order to repress the swelling pride and arrogance of the Greek language, he warned them that he was more instructed than they themselves in the use of those tongues, because he was a Hebrew born of Hebrews, and trained at the feet of Gamaliel. Thus he placed the knowledge of the Hebrew language among his praises, and numbered it among the gifts of the Holy Spirit. ^B Whence also, writing to Timothy concerning the same things, he said: "From your youth you have learned the holy Scriptures." And in that he added those [sayings] derived from the Greek poets and orators, asserting the same things, he said likewise: "I speak with tongues more than you all," in order to show that he had also become exceedingly experienced in Greek learning. For his very character signifies that he was provided with that preliminary education against which the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers were unable to stand, being overturned by the inscription of the altar, which had been read by him, inscribed *To the Unknown God*, ^C and immediately rhetorically read by him and translated: "Whom you ignorantly worship, this one I announce to you." And again, he says: "As some of their own prophets have said:

Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies."

He intends to point to Epimenides, who was an ancient philosopher and a priest of the idol of Mithras among the Cretans. From this, Callimachus the Libyan poet also drew the testimony toward himself, speaking falsely about Zeus:

"Cretans are always liars. For they even fashioned a tomb for you, O King; but you did not die, for you are..."

^D And you see how the holy Apostle speaks about tongues: "But I wish to speak five words in the Church with my understanding, that is, through interpretation"; so that the prophet, bringing to light into the mind the things provided by the Holy Spirit, might benefit his hearers through prophecy. "So I also," he says, "wish to speak for the hearing and edification of the Church, and not through the pride of Greek or Hebrew [tongues] to edify myself, as one who knows [them], and not the Church, by means of a language he understands." But you, O Marcion, added "for the sake of the law," as if the Apostle were saying: "I wish to speak five words in the Church for the sake of the law." Repent, you second Babylon, and new confusion of Sodom. How long will you confound the languages? How long will you dare to act against those who are in no way wronged by you? For you seek to force angelic powers, casting out the words of truth from the Church, saying like Lot to the holy one: "Bring out the men." And although you attempt this, you are attempting it against yourself; you will not cast out the words of the truth, but you strike yourself in blindness, and you pass your time in a night that is growing dim, feeling for the

door, and not finding it until the sun has risen and you behold the day of judgment, in which ^A the fire will also meet your falsehood. For this awaits you, as you see. For it is not written by the Apostle "because of the law," but that has been falsely added by you. But if he had added this, it would be consistent with what had been said by his Lord: that He did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it.

Schol. 14 and 22. In the law it is written: "Because by other tongues and by other lips I will speak to this people."

Refut. 14 and 22. If the Lord had not fulfilled those things which were predicted in the law, what need was there for the Apostle to mention those things which had been fulfilled from the old law in the New Testament? Just as the Savior Himself also demonstrates that He is the same one who then spoke in the law, and threatened them in this manner, saying: "Therefore I was offended with this generation, and I said: They always err in their heart; and, If they shall enter into my rest." Therefore He also announced that He would speak to them in other tongues, as He indeed spoke; and they did not enter. For something of this kind is read to have been said to His own disciples: "To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God; but to them in parables, that seeing they may not see," etc. ^B Since therefore in the New Testament those things which were contained in the Old are everywhere fulfilled, no one can doubt that both Testaments are of the same God, not of another and diverse one.

Schol. 15 and 23. "Let women keep silence in the church. For it is not permitted to them to speak; but let them be subject, as also the law says."

Refut. 15 and 23. If the holy Apostle of God establishes order and discipline for the holy Church of God according to the prescription of the law, the law will not be devoid of order, from which the Apostle transferred the order; nor will it proceed from a strange God, since it commands the woman to be subject to the man. For this also pleased the Apostle in establishing the laws of the Church, as he himself testifies: "As also the law says." But where at last does the law say this? Doubtless in that place where the Lord thus addresses Eve: "To your husband shall be your turning, and he shall rule over you." For although it may have been repeated in many other places, yet it is first used there. Now, since from that time onward the woman began to be subject to the man by divine command, and the Apostle, following that, subjected her, and he himself did not command anything contrary to the God who created man and woman, it clearly indicates that the Apostle is the apostle and legislator of the same God, from whom the law itself and the entire Old Testament is derived: to whom also the New, and thus both Testaments, should be attributed, which prescribes that the woman, as of old, so also now, for pious and equitable moderation, should be subject to the man. ^{C D}

Schol. 16 and 24. Concerning the resurrection of the dead. "Now I make known unto you, brethren, the Gospel, which..."

I preached unto you." If he preached it, and again makes it known, there is no Gospel derived from elsewhere, nor any other knowledge ^A besides that one, and that single thing which is found throughout the four Gospels and all the Apostles; so that he might refute Marcion, who appeared after so many years, surely after the time of the one called Anicetus, the bishop of Rome, who is numbered as the ninth in succession from the death of the apostles Peter and Paul. Wherefore the same Apostle, ensuring our safety, said: "Even if we, or an angel, should preach a gospel to you besides that which you have received, let him be anathema." For he knew by the Holy Spirit that Marcion and his followers would come, intending to subvert the way that has been well established. Wherefore he no longer said, "I preach the Gospel to you," but, "I make known to you the Gospel," which is none other than what I have already preached to you, the remembrance of which I am now making for you. I make known to you with what word I preached to you, if you keep it, unless you have believed in vain. For if you do not hold fast as I preached to you, you have believed in vain without it. For I preached to you ^B that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that on the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures, and not according to some fable, nor according to the teaching of those who intend to speak from themselves things that are not written. For the Jews say from themselves that He has not risen; Marcion and others say from themselves that He suffered and was buried only in appearance. But I confirm you according to the Scriptures. For he immediately adds, saying: "Thus we preach, and so you believed, that Christ died, and was buried, and rose again on the third day." And immediately: "If the dead are not raised, neither is Christ raised; and if Christ is not raised, our preaching is vain." And after all these things: "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."

And he did not say, "For this mortal to contain immortality, or this corruptible to contain incorruption," but "for the mortal and corruptible to put on incorruption and immortality." ^C But what is the mortal, if not the body, which not only contained immortality within itself, but also dwelt in it, and was destined to put on immortality? This is not by the body being cast aside, and the soul, which is not subject to death, putting on immortality, but by the mortal putting on immortality, and the corruptible putting on incorruption, that is to say, the body itself. For death and corruption are its own, being temporary ^D on account of the dissolution.

^A brought upon it through the transgression of Adam.

But concerning future benefits, he says that in Him they are to be fulfilled, indicating through the promise that they are to be realized when he says: "Then shall come to pass the word that is written: Death is swallowed up in victory," in order to signify the resurrection of the dead that is to occur at that time. Since death was swallowed up in the midst, at the resurrection of Christ, of those also who rose with Him—for "many bodies of the saints arose," as the Gospel says, "and entered with Him into the holy city"—but it is swallowed up in victory then, when it is utterly vanished from all bodies without exception.

366 From the Second Epistle to the Corinthians

Marcion placed this third in order, and that with a changed sequence; for that which was written to the Galatians, he placed in the first position.

Schol. 1 and 25. "For all the promises of God in Him are yea: wherefore also through Him is the Amen to God."

Refut. 1 and 25. Open your eyes and be saved, Marcion. But if you can no longer do this, because you are dead, at least let them open their eyes whom you have led into error, that they may flee from you as from a deadly serpent that harms those who approach it. ^B For if "all the promises of God are in Him," and the Apostle knows the promises of God to be those contained in the Law and the Prophets, it follows that the fulfillment of the prophecies was confirmed in Christ. Therefore, Christ is not alien to the old Law and the Prophets, nor to the God who spoke in the Law and fulfilled His promises in Christ. Nor is Christ opposed to the God who gave the Law and the Prophets. For because the promised pledges were to be realized in Him, for this reason he says: "And through Him the Amen to God," God the Father having promised, but Christ the Lord having made those things valid and having added the Amen to those whom that promise confirmed; and who acknowledged that Father of His, who spoke in the Law and bestowed life-giving gifts upon those who believed. For He used these words: "Yea, Father, for so it was well-pleasing before Thee."

^C Schol. 2 and 26. "For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who said light should shine out of darkness."

Refut. 2 and 26. The apostles do not preach themselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord. Therefore, there is no sect, nor any Church named after the apostles. For we have never heard of any Petraeans, or Paulians, or Bartholomew-ites, or Thaddaeans; but from the beginning there was one proclamation of all the apostles, not preaching themselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord. Therefore all acknowledged the name of the Church as one, ^D not...

of their own, but that of their Lord Jesus Christ, since they began to be called Christians at Antioch. This title belongs to the one Catholic Church alone, which possesses nothing else, but is the Church of Christ—a Church of Christians, not of Christs; for while He is the one, many are called Christians from that One. When you have departed from this Church and its heralds, all the rest no longer bear the same character, being distinguished by ^A added names and epithets: the Manichaeans, the Simonians, the Valentinians, and the Ebionites; to whom you also, Marcion, must be numbered. Those whom you have led into error have inscribed your name upon themselves, inasmuch as you have preached yourself and not Christ.

Then they say: "God who said that light should shine out of darkness." But what God is this, if not the one who, through the prophet, showed light out of darkness? That is to say, from the infidelity and ignorance of men, He caused light and knowledge to shine in our hearts ^B through Christ, who were once idolaters among the nations, but now worship the very God who promised through the prophet that He would shed His own light into the world. You should understand that He is not alien to either the Old or the New Testament, as we are accustomed to persuade you, Marcion, from those very remnants of the Gospel which you possess in writing, and we do not suffer ourselves to be deceived by your fraud.

Schol. 3 and 27. "Having the same spirit of faith, we also believe, wherefore we also speak." He cut out the words, "according to what is written."

Refut. 3 and 27. In whatever direction you turn your audacity, you shall find no entrance ^C by which you may insert yourself. For even if you strike out the words "according to what is written," the order of the preceding sequence remains apparent. For after these words, "I believed, therefore I have spoken," the Apostle immediately adds the corresponding words, saying: "Having the same spirit of faith, we also believe, wherefore we also speak." Now, no one is ignorant that those words are taken from the one hundred and fifteenth Psalm, which has the inscription Alleluia, and which is read in the book of David and is counted among his oracles. Whence the Apostle took that passage and similarly expressed it: "Wherefore we also believe, and we speak"—namely, that Paul ^D who stood as one of the number of the apostles. Therefore he did not say: "Wherefore I also believed, and I have spoken," but "We believe, wherefore we also speak," so that he might join himself with the rest of the apostles. Wherefore he wrote, "Having the same spirit," so as to show that the same Spirit who spoke through David was the Spirit who spoke through the apostles also; by whose impulse he once prophesied and believed, and to whom those men also now belong, who in the same manner believe and speak. But in this passage there is a certain perverse way of understanding and disputing, full of fraud. For when the Apostle defines that there is one and the same Spirit, with what face does that witless Marcion, who admits that this holy Apostle spoke these words, dare to say that the Spirit was one thing then, and another thing in the apostles?

Epistle to the Romans, which is fourth in order.

Schol. 1 and 28. *Whosoever have sinned without law, shall also perish without law; and whosoever have sinned in the law, shall be judged by the law. For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.* ^A

Refut. 1 and 28. If whosoever have sinned without law, are to perish without law, clearly the law, when observed, conciliates salvation, nor does it allow those who keep it to perish. Item, if those who have sinned in the law are to be judged by the law, then the law is the judge of transgressions, not being a bringer of destruction, but exercising legitimate judgment, and instituting a just investigation concerning those who have violated the commandments. *For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.* But if, when the law is fulfilled, it justifies the one who performs it, the law is not unjust, nor is it worthless, on account of which those who follow the law are made just. Moreover, faith in Christ, which is also foretold in the same law, pertains to the law; without whom no one can be justified; and whoever believes in Him, he cannot be justified without that testimony of the law; because Christ is the complement of the law, as the Apostle declares in these words: *Christ is the fullness of the law for righteousness.* By which he indicates that without the law and Christ there is no righteousness. For neither will the Jews who reject Christ be justified without Him; nor will you be justified, Marcion, who deny the law. ^B

Schol. 2 and 29. *For circumcision indeed profits if thou keep the law; but if thou be a transgressor of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.*

Refut. 2 and 29. Since the Apostle pronounces that circumcision will be profitable, who would dare to construct a calumny against fruitful things? This man must indeed be like the serpent, from whom you, Marcion, do not shrink. For that one, perverting the words spoken by God, deceived Eve with his persuasion, saying: *You shall not die.* For the Apostle bound the law to circumcision, and showed that circumcision was consistent with the law, and that the commandment was of the same God who both instituted circumcision of old and brought forth the law for the sake of protection, by whose benefit Christ, being believed in, grants to believers to speak and do every perfect thing. ^C

Schol. 3 and 30. *Having the information of knowledge and of the truth in the law.*

Refut. 3 and 30. If knowledge contains information, and form truly arises from information; the apostles, moreover, being endowed with knowledge and truth, obtain the form itself from the information of the law, that is, they possess the knowledge and the truth; then the law is by no means to be seen as alien to knowledge and the truth. For through the information of the law ^D

the heralds of the truth have attained knowledge and truth.

^A Schol. 4 and 31. For while we were still weak, Christ died in due time for the ungodly. Refut. 4 and 31. These words, "still" and "died," prove not a mere appearance, but the truth. For if it were an appearance, what need was there to say "still," seeing that Christ can always and even now appear in an appearance, without it being said that we were "still" weak? For from the word "still," he indicates that he died at that time, and justified by his death, so that there is no longer a need for him to die, who died once for sinners and no longer dies in himself.

^B Schol. 5 and 32. Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. Refut. 5 and 32. The Apostle attributes this to the law, that it is holy, and to the commandment in it: which he confirms by a triple testimony, declaring it to be holy, just, and good, in order to refute you, Marcion, and to teach us that the law belongs to a holy author, whose commandment is holy, and that he himself, who is holy, is also good. Therefore, since the commandment has proceeded from the good, it is called good; and since it is from the holy, it is holy; and since it exists from the just, it is called a just commandment, there being one and the same who was then and is now, who is holy and just and good. Wherefore his commandment, both that which was of old and that which is now in the Law and in the New Testament, is holy and just and good.

Schol. 6 and 33. That the justification of the law might be fulfilled in us. Refut. 6 and 33. If the justification of the law is fulfilled in the apostles and in us, how do you, Marcion, dare to say that the law is alien to the apostles of God who are justified by the fulfillment of the law?

Schol. 7 and 34. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believes. Refut. 7 and 34. If Christ came for the righteousness of all who believe, so that the law cannot otherwise be perfected unless Christ perfects it by his advent, you cannot in any way be perfected, O Jews, if you remain in the law, unless you are willing to receive Christ, who has already come, by believing in him. But neither can you, Marcion, attain salvation in Christ, since you have cast away the beginning and root of the proclamation, which is the law, from which Christ is known to perfect him who does not reject the law as being alien to Christ.

^{C D} Schol. 8 and 35. For he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. Refut. 8 and 35. Since the law is fulfilled through the love of one's neighbor, the law is not to be alienated from Christ and the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which commands to love

one's neighbor. For God is love, and all things preached by Him are always preached in the same way, both then and now, and in the Old and New Testaments.

Excerpts from the fifth Epistle to the Thessalonians: since it is placed in this way in Marcion’s version, while being the eighth according to the Apostle, and since all that Marcion has from it is distorted, we have cited nothing from it.

From the second Epistle to the Thessalonians, which Marcion places sixth in order, while it is the ninth according to the Apostle, and which has been similarly distorted by that same Marcion, we have again cited nothing.

From the Epistle to the Ephesians, which is the seventh according to Marcion but the fifth according to the Apostle, we have collected the following:

^A Scholion 1 [and] 36. *Remember that you, who were once Gentiles, who are called the uncircumcision by what is called the circumcision in the flesh, made by hands, that you were at that time without Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus, you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of His. For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one*, etc.

Refutation 1 [and] 36. That expression, *Remember*, signifies the aspect of time. Then, those words, *who are called* and *by what is called*, express the figures of things. Furthermore, the phrase *in the flesh* looks to this: to show the mark and image branded upon the flesh, which was awaiting the time of the coming Spirit, in order to signify more perfect things through the figure. For without Christ, the uncircumcision was ^B separated from the commonwealth of Israel; and consequently it was a stranger to the promise and the covenant. And those who were counted in that condition lacked all hope and were without God in this world, as the Apostle’s words declare. But you, Marcion, see nothing, hear nothing; otherwise you would perceive how many good things the holy Apostle says have flowed from the law, which were administered by the singular providence of God in those times. *For in Christ Jesus, those who once were far off are now near, in His blood. For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one.* Because if He made both one, so that one was not destroyed while the other was established, then the former did not exist as alien to Him, nor did He separate the latter from the former; but He fused both into one, not in some haphazard way or merely in appearance, ^C but clearly in His own blood, as the certain and solid doctrine of the Apostle demonstrates.

Scholion 2 [and] 37. Therefore He says: *Awake, you who sleep, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine upon you.*

Refutation 2 [and] 37. From where did the Apostle draw these words, *Therefore He says*? Certainly from nowhere else than the Old Testament. For these things are read in Elijah. But from which company did Elijah come? Was he not one of the prophets who lived according to the prescription of the law, as he also adhered to the law and the prophets? If then He prophesied ^D the *Awake* in Christ, or

^A in Christ it has been prophesied: *Arise, you who sleep, and rise from the dead, and Christ will shine upon you*; truly, the prototype had been fulfilled through Lazarus and the others. Regarding them, Martha and Mary themselves were in doubt, saying, *He is already rotting; he has been dead four days*. And those of the synagogue leader’s household said, *Do not worry the teacher*. But the Lord himself replied, *Do not be afraid; for she is not dead, but sleeps*. For even then, the resurrection to come through Christ was being celebrated by the proclamation of the divine Word. And he also demonstrated his own power and the facility of his acting, so that he might show how powerful Christ was, in that, as it is very easy for a man to wake not a dead person but a sleeper by his voice, so it was most prompt for Christ to say, *Lazarus, come out*; then, *Kumi, Kumi Talitha*, which means, *Arise, girl*. And through these evident proofs, the Word indicated our calling from dead works and from the heavy sleep in which we were once asleep, by Him who raises up Christ, and through the calling illuminates us—which has become this second relationship. But the perfect and universal one is expected, when he himself who said, ^B *I am the resurrection*, shall call all and raise them in body and soul, and shall illuminate them in his future coming.

Schol. 3 and 38. On that which is written: *A man shall leave his father and mother, and shall adhere to his wife; and the two shall be one flesh*, he has removed the word *wife*.

Refut. 3 and 38. We have often shown that the things in the Law are not foreign to those things which the Apostle taught, even if you, Marcion, have erased the word *wife*. For those very words, *shall be into one flesh*, expose your fraud sufficiently and more than enough.

Of the Epistle to the Colossians, which Marcion places eighth, but the Apostle places seventh.

Schol. 1 and 39. *Let no one therefore judge you in food, or in drink, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of a Sabbath, which is a shadow of things to come*.

Refut. 1 and 39. A shadow is cast from nowhere else but from a body; nor can there be a body without a shadow emanating from it. Wherefore, from those very ^C remains of the sacred Scriptures which you retain with you, those who have been deceived by you should learn that the commands which were prescribed for that time concerning food and drink, and the observance of feasts and new moons and Sabbaths, were in no way foreign to those goods that were to be revealed. The above-mentioned things were a shadow of those goods, through which shadows we have attained the body of present goods—those things which were sketched out in the Law, but were brought to completion in Christ.

Concerning the ninth epistle, which is to Philemon.

This is how it is placed by Marcion. But by the Apostle it is placed last; and in three manuscripts

^A it is counted as the thirteenth before the Epistle to the Hebrews, which is the fourteenth. Other manuscripts again place the Epistle to the Hebrews tenth, before the two to Timothy, and to Titus, and Philemon. But all the sound and authentic manuscripts have the Epistle to the Romans as the first, not as you, Marcion, have ordered the Epistle to the Galatians as the first. However, we have noted nothing from this Epistle to Philemon, because it is read in his version as utterly depraved.

From the Epistle to the Philippians X

Thus far extended the work of Marcion, woven together from the remnants of the Gospel of Luke and the writings of the Apostle, and finally from the remains of the sacred volumes. From the fragments left by him, we have selected those which were able to serve for his conviction. Besides these things, from the Epistle which is inscribed to the Laodiceans, he transferred certain things into that book which he calls the Apostolicon.

Scholion 1 and 40

Refutation and 40

These things, therefore, collected by us from the remnants of the Holy Scriptures which are still found among Marcion—if anyone considers them, he will be astonished at the magnificence of divine providence. For since every matter is wont to be approved and held as certain by three testimonies, it has happened by the singular benefit and administration of God, as we have said, that in this affair seventy-eight testimonies from the Gospel have come to our aid, and forty from the Apostle. All of which, preserved among him to this very day and not brought into controversy, exist to the number of one hundred and eighteen in total. And these indeed contradict the opinions of Marcion, as though they were brought forth from the person of the Lord. But another thing besides the testimonies of the Gospel and the Apostle was added ^C

for these people, outside of those, for the miserable Marcion did not see fit to cite this testimony from the Epistle to the Ephesians, but from the one to the Laodiceans, which is nowhere to be found in the Apostle. Since that brute, in his supreme stupidity, does not encounter these things, and because the wretch has fallen into so many errors, he does not see his own refutation being confessed at every step. And let no one wonder at this. For how could this man, having professed to possess a portion of the Gospel and the Apostle, not preserve even a few words of Scripture? For since the entire body of divine Scripture is, so to speak, living, could he find any limb that was dead, according to his own judgment, such that he could introduce a falsehood against the truth? Otherwise, he mutilated it, and having amputated, he cut away many of the limbs, yet kept hold of certain ones for himself. And ^B even those things that were retained, being still alive, cannot be put to death; but the vital force of their expression remains there, even if it were to be divided and cut into minute pieces infinitely by him through his own craft.

XIII. Furthermore, after all these things, we have also mentioned how some from the same sect of Marcionites, having fallen into an abyss of blasphemy and having become completely thunderstruck by their own demonic teaching—even concerning the one whom they appeared to remember, at least by name, as Lord—have perverted his very divinity with an unheard-of petulance of tongue, and have not feared to revile the name of the generation from above. For some of them have dared, as I said, to speak of the Lord himself as the son of the Evil One, not blushing to do so. Others, however, do not say this, but that he was less merciful than the judge and Creator, but that being good, he left his own Father below—some saying the Creator, others the Evil One—and fled up toward the good God who resides in ineffable places, and adhered to him. And that Christ, having been sent by him into the world and having come for the sake of opposing his own Father, destroyed all his things, as many as the Father in accordance with his nature had ordained, that is, he who spoke in the Law, or rather the God of malice, who is ranked by them in the third principle. For they set these things forth in one way and another, as I said, considering one the Creator and another the Evil One.

^C These things are clear to anyone possessing understanding: that the reasoning and the teaching are from an unclean spirit; and there was no need to apologize about this hypothesis, or to present a refutation directly against Marcion, who has made himself in all things forgetful of life. For his blasphemous nonsense, and the daring operation of his perdition, will be detected by all who are sensible. But since we are accustomed not to leave a place of thorns, but to cut it down with the sword of God, which is sharper than any two-edged sword and which reaches to the division ^D

of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, as Scripture says, we shall not be reluctant to say a few things about this matter.

^A XIV. First of all, one must object that if a good being can come from an evil one, that whole argument regarding the principles is overturned. For his own Father, too, if he were evil—which God forbid we should ever say, for He is good—could change his mind, just as the Son born of him has been changed. Furthermore, if the Only-Begotten descended at all to save men, and to bring a thief into paradise, and to call a tax collector from the toll-booth to repentance, and to heal of wickedness the harlot who anointed his feet—and if the good God also does good things, ^B and is merciful and kind—then it would have been all the more fitting for him to show mercy toward his own Father, and to be the first to turn him toward salvation. In this way, by first changing his Father, he would have fully demonstrated his perfect goodness by having compassion on his Father, as it is also written: "Let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith"—how much more, then, is it fitting to have mercy on one's own parents?

There is another thing that must be added to this refutation of Marcion. For if, being the son of one, he betook himself to another, he will not appear trustworthy to the other. For he who did not show himself faithful toward his own parent, judging by his past actions, will not be deemed worthy of trust by the other ^C either. Furthermore, I can refute your error, Marcion, by another argument, namely, from the point that you deny that the good God could save those who needed to be saved and to whom he granted mercy through Christ, owing to a lack of someone to be sent. For unless Christ had fled to that highest God, according to the opinion of Marcion, the good God would have had no one to send, unless the Father of Christ had, as Marcion says, fallen into a dispute with his own Son. And also, if he is the son of the Creator and is an enemy to the creation itself and to the works of his Father, as soon as he had descended into this world, he ought in the first place to have exterminated the human race, ^D so as to destroy the work fashioned by his own Father, being an adversary of the Father's design. Or, if he wished to exercise the power of healing, of curing, and of saving, he ought to have performed this very office of human kindness toward his Father before all others, and to have persuaded him to choose to be like the Son, so that, by becoming good both to himself and to his Father, one and the same goodness might exist for the salvation of men. But things are not at all as his empty, mythical story suggests. For there are neither three principles, nor is there another Father of Christ, nor was he the progeny of wickedness—God forbid that we should ever think such a thing! For he himself testifies: "I am in the Father, and the Father is in me."

But when he teaches ^A that his genuine and natural Father is always good, always God, and the Creator of all, and that he himself exists in himself and with him; and when, being truthful, he refutes the threat of Marcion, who says: "He who does not honor the Son, as he honors the Father," the wrath of God remains upon him. Now, through many testimonies, we have already shown that there is one God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is good and has begotten the Good; who is Light and has begotten Light; who is Love and has begotten Love; who is a Source and has produced a source of life (for "With thee is the fountain of life," says the Scripture); who is Truth and has begotten Truth; who is Light and has begotten Light; who is Life and has propagated Life—and this without any beginning, from eternity, and regardless of time. By this reasoning, the error of Marcion is overthrown in every respect.

Since these things are so, and the lies of this scoundrel having been refuted by many ^B and most certain arguments, and the whole matter settled, let us pass on to other things; and having crushed this business, as if it were some monstrous viper, by the most truthful words of the Savior, who said: "I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and upon all the power of the enemy," let us turn ourselves to contemplate and refute the delusions of others: that we may implore God for help and protection in all things.

AGAINST THE LUCIANISTS,

I. There was a certain ancient Lucian, not the one who lived in our times under Constantine the Elder, whom ^C the Arians rank among the martyrs. For that Lucian, too, was recent, and infected with the errors of the Arians, concerning whom we shall speak later, when he must be refuted. Now, our discourse must be directed against that aforementioned ancient Lucian. For he, having followed the aforementioned Marcion, and having later separated from him, and having gathered a group for himself, became the leader of a sect, from which the ancient Lucianists received their name. He, therefore, held to the dogmatas of Marcion in every respect; and he used them in the way that rumor and report have brought down to us. For, since they existed in ancient times, and were very quickly extinguished, the investigation of them, as everyone can understand, has been very difficult for us. But what we have been able to discover about him is of this nature: ^D

After he had established—in his own estimation—one being as Creator, judge, and just; another as good; and, likewise, a third as evil; he wishes to employ certain testimonies against Marcion, according to his own interpretation of the writings of the prophets—I refer to the saying, "Vain is he who serves the Lord," and to that which is said: "They have withstood God, and have been saved." In addition to the dogmas of his teacher, he also [speaks of] marriage...

and professes chastity, not through a love of virtue, but so as to overturn the works of the Creator. For this reason he forbids conjugal unions. From these, he says, when offspring is propagated, a greater abundance and plenty are supplied to the Creator in the world. He undertakes this out of hatred for the Maker and Creator, so that the latter’s resources may not be increased by the procreation of children. But this man’s error can be detected and refuted without difficulty by that very refutation which we previously proposed against his own teacher. His opinions we have overcome through lengthy disputation; and we have shown this very thing, how and how great are the matters in which there is agreement between the Gospel and the Old Testament. Just as the Lord Himself confesses His own fabrication of the world, and that whatever has been created is to be attributed to His Father. And John has summarized this most elegantly in these ^B most excellent words: *In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made* (John 1, 1 sqq.), etc.

II. But such a man will be most easily refuted forthwith. For if he should wish to reply that he condemns the unions of marriage so that he might hinder and destroy those things which are here said to be the Creator’s own, lest he should appear to favor the Creator, and so that he might keep himself completely alien to the Creator’s work, does not this opinion abhor from reason entirely, and can its falsity not be easily detected and refuted? Look, this most wretched ^C charlatan uses things created by the Creator—such as foods, clothes, ointments, drink, and edible items—and he cannot escape otherwise than by admitting he uses them. For God is the Lord of all and the Creator, who takes care of all things and makes His sun rise upon the good and the evil (Matt. v, 45). Then, indeed, He sends rain equally upon those who heap insults upon Him and those who praise and preach Him, and He nourishes everyone. This is not established by some rash law, nor one determined without reason and sense, but it is, quite clearly, because the time for punishments from Him is reserved for the future judgment; He waits patiently, and governs all things with His own laws and wisdom, as befits that beneficent providence towards all, so that if any should accept repentance, they may obtain salvation, having received from Him the oblivion of all their sins. But if they persist in those blasphemous ^D opinions and errors concerning the Divine, of which God is not the author, then they shall pay the deserved penalties after this life, when the freedom of their will shall no longer remain to them. Yet He does not ordain that future judgment out of some impotence of mind, nor does He inflict those future evils led by any anger. For He declares all these things in accordance with that divinity with which He is endowed, which is free from all perturbation. But He does so for the very reason that anyone who contrives something to their own detriment, willfully draws evil upon their own head, while all the while...

^A Truth itself manifests this, and the light of the Gospel brightly illuminates the whole world, leading the sons of the true faith to salvation by the benefit of the truth. Having, therefore, briefly and for the purpose of our inquiry, surfaced the serpent from its lair and dispatched it with a small weapon, leaving that heresy dead, let us proceed to the rest, having first invoked the help of God, as we have often professed, that we may be able to explain His truth.

AGAINST THE APELLEIANS,

^B I. Lucian, previously mentioned, is succeeded by Apelles—not that holy man commended by the holy Apostle, but another, different from him, from whom the Apelleians are named. He was a fellow student of that same Lucian and a disciple of the aforementioned Marcion, just as it often happens that many thorny bushes sprout luxuriantly from a single root. Yet he chooses to teach many things different from the others. For he seems to have armed himself against his own teacher, and against the truth itself, in order to gather for himself a private school of people living in error, and he wishes to teach such things: affirming, that is, that it did not happen as Marcion defined it, but that Marcion was mistaken—so that folly and lawlessness might appear on all sides to be ^C crushed within itself and to refute itself, inciting its own destruction, while the truth remains ever steadfast, needing no help, but being self-subsistent and abiding forever with the God who truly is.

Apelles, therefore, and his faction, claim that there are not three principles, nor two, as seemed fitting to the followers of Lucian and Marcion. But, he says, there is one good God, and one principle, and one power that is nameless. This one God, or rather this one principle, has no concern for the things that have occurred here in this world. But that same holy and good God, who is God and good from the beginning, produced another God. And this other God who came to be created all things—heaven and earth and all things that we see in the world. But he turned out not to be good, and the things that were made by him, he says, were not made well, but have been created by him according to his own evil mind.

II. But who could patiently listen to such things, and not rather laugh at such vain labor? For in two ways it will be found that he is not speaking appropriately, using such a supposition. And through ^D

^A this I will speak to him as if he were present: Tell me, I pray, Apelles. For you will grant, I suppose, either that the supreme God, being ignorant of future events, sent forth the God whom you say has badly fashioned his works, or, foreknowing that he would be such, brought him forth for this end, so that he might be the cause of those things which were later badly created by him. From which it follows that that supreme God is clearly the Creator, who procreated that one from whom all things were founded. Wherefore he also will be the cause; not he who brought forth the created things, but he who is the supreme author of the Creator himself, and who is the artificer of all things.

Moreover, you further affirm that in the last times Christ, the Son of the supreme and good God, and his Holy Spirit alike, arrived for the salvation of those who might come to the knowledge of him; and that he came not appearing in appearance only, but in truth assumed flesh, not however deriving it from the Virgin Mary, ^B but that he truly possessed flesh and a body, having assumed it neither from the seed of a man, nor from a woman, a virgin; but that he had truly compared for himself flesh from some other source. And he explains this in this way. When, he says, he had descended from the heavens to the earth, he fashioned for himself a body from the four elements. But does not this man also seem to hasten to cause his impious and wicked opinion to appear as something to be ascribed to the dreams and trifles of the ancient Greek poets? For he proposes things exactly like them, and even more ridiculous, that Christ fashioned a body for himself. Thus from the dry he expressed the dry, from heat the hot, from moisture the moist, and from cold the cold. And with a body formed for himself from all these, he was truly seen on earth, and brought to us the knowledge of celestial things, so that we might despise the Creator and deny his works, in such a way as to indicate to us which things in sacred Scripture were either pronounced by him personally or brought forth by the Creator. For thus, he says, he said in the Gospel: ^C *Be good money-changers*. Use, he says, all things, selecting useful things from any Scripture. Then, he says, Christ offered himself in the body to suffer punishment, and was truly affixed to the cross, and showed that same flesh to his disciples. And having dissolved, he says, that incarnation of his own, he distributed it back to each of the elements, restoring what was proper: the hot to the hot, the cold to the cold, the dry to the dry, the moist to the moist; and thus having dissolved from himself again the incarnate body, he flew up to heaven, from whence he had come.

^D III. O, the great fabrication of those who utter such things! As it is clear to everyone, they seem to open a workshop of mimes rather than a profession of obtaining life or possessing the character of intelligence. For if he completely dissolved the body which he had assumed, for what reason did he fabricate it for himself from the beginning? But if he fabricated it for some use, and performed the task of that use, he ought to have left it behind on the earth; especially since, according to your opinion, the very form of the resurrection of the flesh...

^A should by no means be desired. Yet he even stirred it up again, in order to impose upon himself a greater labor, and to weave a work without any fruit, and then afterwards to unravel what had been deposited in the sepulchre, and, like the most just of debtors, to restore to each element with the best of faith what he had taken from it. For once he had rendered to each its own—that is, the cold to the cold, and the heat to the heat—it might well have remained hidden from the disciples, but the dry body certainly could not. For the dry body is plainly flesh, I mean, and bones. Similarly, the moist is sanies, and flesh that dissolves into moisture. All of which, when he was manifestly putting it aside, he had signified to his own apostles, just as he had done before when his body was consigned to the sepulchre. For then it was permitted to Joseph of Arimathea to wrap it in a linen cloth and place it in the monument. Moreover, the women would have been able to observe the place to which the remains had been entrusted, so that they might honorably have seasoned them with perfumes and aromatics. But this lie of yours, O Apelleians, not even one of the apostles has recorded. For indeed, that event never so came to pass. Truly, they beheld two men, not at all visible by their own nature, yet appearing in outward form, and him ascending into heaven and being taken up by a luminous cloud, but his remains were nowhere left behind. For it was not necessary, nor was it even possible. And Apelles lies, as do the Apelleians who follow him.

IV. Furthermore, he professes things consistent with his teacher Marcion ^C regarding the other flesh and other matters of that kind; asserting that there is no resurrection of the dead, and the rest that he saw fit to teach in like manner while he was upon the earth. But this reasoning of his shall be overturned, being mere nonsense and wayward in every respect. For darkness shall not prevail where the light shines forth, nor shall a lie stand when the truth is present. For if you would only make use of the Scriptures, O Apelles, and you Apelleians, you shall find yourselves refuted by those very Scriptures: first, because God made man according to the image of God; and he who made him said: "Let us make man according to our image and likeness." Wherefore, if someone should turn from your most false heresy ^D to the truth, and should emerge as if from night and darkness, he would run into the light of divine knowledge, which will shine for him like the sun, or even more brightly than the sun itself.

For it will be evident to anyone who possesses some share of reason, that the One who said, "Let us make man," is God, the Father of all. And He calls to Himself, with Him, God the Word, His only-begotten Son, who is eternally with Him, begotten of Him without beginning and timelessly; and at the same time also His Holy Spirit, who is not foreign to Him, nor to His own Son. For if the one who fashioned man and created the world were different from the supreme and good God above, from whom Christ descended, Christ would never have taken to himself a body, nor would he have fashioned the image of the Creator into

^A himself, reproducing himself. But it is manifest that he is the Creator of man and of the world, to whom the Father said: "Let us make man according to our image and likeness" (Gen. I, 26). From this one work, the Craftsman is clearly shown to be the one who then created man, having formed from the earth the body of Adam, and having made him into a living soul. Therefore, the holy John also bore witness in the holy Gospel, saying: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him not one thing was made" (John I, 1-3), and so on.

If then all things were made in him and through him, he it was who then formed Adam, and he it was who, conversely, refashioned for himself the body from the Virgin Mary; and he perfectly united his whole incarnation, the one that was formed by him then and is now united within himself. If, however, he took unto himself the work of another — of the one who fashioned the creation badly and is, according to your teaching, evil — and if he has used in any way the evil works which the evil craftsman according to you fashioned, then he has mingled himself with the wickedness of the craftsman through this use and beneficence, and with his own image; but this is not possible. For if he became man, he took not only flesh, but also a soul. ^B For this shall be clear. For whence was he saying: "I have power to take my soul, and to lay it down" (John X, 18)? Having therefore gathered up the entire undertaking, the image mentioned by the Creator, he took up the whole task, the Word having come in body and soul, and in all those things in which man consists. And these things having been thus accomplished, your poison ^C is entirely darkened, and your foundationless position has fallen, having no grip upon the stability of truth.

V. Furthermore, since from the holy Scriptures you select whatever you please, and omit whatever you wish, you are clearly making yourself a judge of the laws, and not an interpreter; and you are a chooser of those things which, according to your own opinion, are not written, things which, although they are perfectly true, are nevertheless falsely changed by you, and accommodated to your own error and that of your followers. But if some evil craftsman fashioned these lower things and this world, why did he descend hither after being sent from the good Father? If it was to rescue the race of men, then he took care of them as his own, and no other is to be thought of as the Creator. But if he cared for those that were not his own, and wished to usurp and keep things that had nothing to do with him, then he must have been either a flatterer, who clung to what belonged to another, or one ambitious for glory, who, to show himself more excellent than the Creator, held fast to the things ^D of others which he had resolved to preserve, not being held by any desire for his own things: whereby he ceases to be true and sincere. But neither is he endowed with moderation of mind, he who, since he has no created thing of his own, covets what belongs to others and strives to divert them, that is, the souls which

^A neither pertain to him nor to their Parent, and claims them in defiance of law and justice. But if they are his own souls, and seem to have fallen from heaven, it follows that they were sent by the supreme and good God, and introduced into a good world. And if you admit that they were sent for some purpose that you yourself have invented, but that having entered, they turned aside to something else—suppose, for instance, that they were sent to do something just, but committed some crime—the one who sent them would appear to have had no foreknowledge at all. For since he sent them for one thing, they were found to have done another. Or again, if you say that they did not come according to his will, but through the tyranny of one who snatches them away, then the evil creator, fashioned by the good God, is considered stronger than the good God himself, since he violently snatched what belonged to the other and used it for his own purposes. But how will you not be refuted, when the Savior himself says: "I have power to lay down my soul, and to take it again"? As if he himself had received a soul, and laid it down, and taken it again; so that the soul does not seem to be foreign or to be attributed to another creator.

It also follows that this good being possessed a body. For no good person can be persuaded to employ a bad thing for a purpose, lest, by partaking of a portion of the evil, he himself become defiled by the wickedness of the association. But if he himself raised up his body, tell me, why did he, after the resurrection, abandon it again, having divided it into the four elements, restoring the hot to the hot, the cold to the cold, the dry to the dry, and the moist to the moist? For if he raised it up merely to dissolve it again, this act would seem to be a performance, and not a matter of truth. But our Lord Jesus Christ raised it up, and took to himself again the body which he had fashioned for himself, together with the soul and all that constitutes human nature, most perfectly. For since he sat down, according to the apostolic word that "God raised him up, and made him sit in the heavenly places," as testified by the two men in shining garments who appeared to the apostles, as they say: "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? He will so come in like manner as you saw him taken up into heaven."

^C 6. And that no pretext for wickedness against the truth might again be given to you, a long time after the ascension of our Savior, Stephen, the holy martyr of God, being stoned by the Jews, made answer, saying: "Behold, I see the heaven opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of the Father"; that he might show that this very body truly rose again, changed into a spiritual state, and joined with the divinity of the Only-Begotten, all united into a spiritual state, and joined into divinity. And this holy body, together with the divinity on high, is whole God, one holy Son of God, sitting at the right hand of the Father; just as the Gospel of Mark and the other evangelists also have it: "He ascended into heaven, and sat at the right hand of the Father." Thus those opinions of yours and your [followers']

and the deceptive discourse [associated] with you, shall fall away on every side.

Now, concerning the resurrection of the dead, hear what the Apostle says: "This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality." ^A For if that which is mortal were not destined to put on immortality, and that which is corruptible to put on incorruption, the Immortal would not have come to die, so that in His own person He might suffer, and having slept the three-day sleep, might rise again, and bring together in Himself both his divinity and his glory; so that from His kindly coming to us we might firmly possess all hope in truth, since He showed Himself a pattern to us, and a pledge in the hope of the entire life's attainment.

VII. Since these things are thus, and have been discussed by us in this way, what need is there for me to waste time any longer, or to occupy my mind with the task of refuting that most vile hornet, which some call the "zopyrus"? ^B It has lost its sting of its own accord, and its doctrine—a fabrication of the charlatan—is shown to be indistinguishable from the other errors. For they say that that most troublesome species of hornet, which they call the zopyrus, is armed with a sting that is indeed poisonous, though small, and which does not inflict a great deal of pain, yet in its own way it is poisonous. And if any traveler, in passing by, should happen to break down its nest or hive—for it makes for itself, among bushes and thicker herbs, [something] like a honeycomb, in which it deposits its offspring and breeds—but if any traveler should, as I said, demolish the honeycomb with a staff or a rod, ^C that fierce but feeble hornet rushes out immediately. Finding some nearby stone or piece of wood, it rushes and carries itself with such fury that it beats against the flint or the wood. Although it harms nothing, and does not even harm a man, no matter how much it stings, but inflicts only the slightest pain, and the stone is not damaged at all, it meanwhile loses its sting, and thus it dies. Thus, that heresy which is much like the zopyrus hornet, having inflicted slight pain, and rushing against the "stone"—that is, the Truth—breaks its own sting and is destroyed. Having therefore passed beyond this, I shall turn my discourse to others, trusting in the certain hope in God that I shall bring the work I have undertaken to its conclusion.

AGAINST THE SEVERIANS,

I. He who is to be placed by me immediately after those mentioned above, either lived in the same times as them, or at least was of a similar age; for I cannot accurately recount the time itself, except that they were neighbors in order of time. ^D And as the reports concerning them have reached us, I shall relate them as faithfully as possible.

A certain Severus arose, from whom the Severians are called...

followed, succeeding the aforementioned Apelles. ^A His dogmas, filled with fables and lies, are these: he attributes the origin of the world to I know not what principles and powers; he holds, moreover, that there is a certain good God in the highest heaven and aeon, who cannot be named. He asserts that the devil is the son of the great prince who presides over the order of powers, whose name he gives as Jaldabaoth, and at other times as Sabaoth. He says that the serpent was begotten from him, and that it was cast down from the heavenly power onto the earth; having descended in the likeness of a serpent, he was driven by libidinous stings and coupled with the Earth as if with a woman. From this sowing, the vine sprouted. Hence, to win faith for their nonsense, they explain the winding, circular, and serpentine twists of the vines as a reference to that. For they say that the white vine represents the likeness of a serpent, and the black one that of a dragon; and that the berries of the vine are like drops or beads, because of their roundness and the clean separation of each berry, so that ^B they are seen as small orbs pulled apart separately from one another. They hold that wine, from this premise, disorders the minds of men, and acts partly to excite the allurements of Venus, partly to stir the stings of frenzy, and partly to provoke to wrath; because by that power of wine—that is, the venom of that dragon—the body becomes light and carried away. For this reason, those who profess this sect abstain entirely from all use of wine.

II. They say, moreover, that *woman* is the work of Satan, as the Archontics also claimed; and therefore they say that those who join themselves in marriage are fulfilling the work of Satan. They even maintain that half of man is of God, and half of the devil. For they say that the formation from the navel upward is the work of the divine power, while the formation from the navel downward is of the evil power. Therefore they say that all titillations of pleasure and libidinous desires are stirred from the navel and the parts below. This was also the dogma of other heresies.

From this it is clear that he has clung to nothing but the tracks of other deceivers who have poured pernicious and deadly poisons into the human race. But he will be refuted with no difficulty and with no great labor. For the whole body is composed of those things which were rightly fashioned by God—I mean natural appetites—which God did not implant for any absurd use, but for an honest and necessary purpose: namely, that we should desire sleep, food, drink, clothing, and all the other things that fall to us in our own lives and are pleasing to God. I could demonstrate that even the desire of physical lust is not absurd. For it was given for the sake of procreation in modesty, and for the glory of Him who made all things, just as seeds are given to the earth for the overflowing of the bounty of the goods created by God, I mean both fruits of the tree and ^D crops. Thus also for mankind...

^A to fulfill that, "Increase, and multiply, and replenish the earth."

Such men make use of certain apocryphal books, as we have heard; but also in part they use the canonical books, harvesting only those things which, by weaving them according to their own mind, they handle in a different way. For the vine was by no means planted by the devil, nor was it begotten from the seed of the serpent, as is evident to everyone. For how could this be, when the Savior Himself testifies to the contrary in these words: "I will not drink of this fruit of the vine, until I drink it new with you in the kingdom of heaven." And because the truth, radiating its own beams in accordance with God’s foreknowledge of the evils to come, adapted its own words everywhere for the refutation of errors, it came to pass that the divine Scripture often predicted the fall and destruction of those who would rise up against the truth. Thus, in a certain place, the Lord clearly ^B declares Himself to be the vine, in order to refute that wretched man and impostor, Severus. "I am," He says, "the true vine." But if the title of "vine" were altogether worthy of blame, He would never have extended the likeness of it to Himself. Moreover, the apostles also, in the book which is called the *Constitution* (Διάταξις), declare that the Catholic Church is the planting of God and a vineyard. And what is more, the Lord Himself again in the Gospel set forth the same thing, where He proposed the parable of the vineyard: "A certain householder had a vineyard, and he let it out to husbandmen, and sent servants seeking fruit, and they gave none." Likewise: "A certain householder having a vineyard went out seeking laborers into the vineyard, and [did so] about the third hour, and the sixth, and the ^C ninth, and the eleventh." Thus, from every side, the fraud and wickedness of a crafty man is wounded by the discourse of truth. For as darkness may appear in some way when light is absent, as soon as even the smallest spark begins to shine, those shadows vanish immediately and are utterly dissipated.

I, however, have traversed this heresy lightly because, as I warned at the beginning, it is easy to refute, and the truth to the contrary can be affirmed without great labor. Added to this is the fact that today, perhaps, no remains of that sect survive, or only very few are left in the upper provinces.

Wherefore, having passed over these—having suddenly trodden upon them like a dangerous scorpion—let us proceed to the others. ^D But before all things, divine help must be implored, so that we may both speak the truth and that the handling of these matters may not be a snare to us ourselves, especially when we strive to pursue such a nefarious and atrocious wickedness of pestiferous dogmas.

AGAINST THE TATIANISTS,

1. A certain Tatian arose, who succeeded these, whether he lived during their times, or after them,

^A again setting forth the teaching of his own vacuous utterances. At first, as one who was educated in the learning of the Greeks, he flourished alongside Justin the philosopher, a man who was holy and a friend of God, who had believed in Christ from among the Samaritans ^B. For this Justin was a Samaritan by race, who had believed in Christ, and having greatly disciplined himself and manifested a life of virtue, he finally witnessed for Christ and was deemed worthy of the perfect crown under the Roman prefect Rusticus and the emperor Hadrian ^C.

^D

Notes on Column 837

(91) *Under the prefect Rusticus and the emperor Hadrian.* The hallucination is manifest and indeed double. For Justin did not die while Hadrian was emperor, but under Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, as Eusebius asserts in *Hist. eccles.* lib. IV, c. 15, and he must have been older than thirty, as can be gathered from the ration of time in which he published his apologies for the Christians. Although it is difficult to determine when they were written, or in what order. Eusebius in *Hist.* book IV reports that Justin wrote two in total, the former of which he presented to Antoninus Pius, as he testifies in chapters 8 and 10. Where he also cites certain words of Justin from that which is numbered second, in which he made mention of Antinous, Marcion, and the Jewish war: and, which is the capital point, he submits the beginning of this in chapter 11. But in chapter 15, or 16, he affirms another apology was written under M. Aurelius and L. Verus: "Under these also, Justin, who was made known to us a short time ago, having presented a second book concerning our dogmas to the aforementioned rulers, was adorned with divine martyrdom." Therefore, under Aurelius and Verus, whom he had signified in chapters 15 or 14 as having succeeded Antoninus Pius, he presented the second apology and Justin suffered. Jerome in *Script. eccles.* and Photius agree with Eusebius. Today two apologies of Justin are extant. The former of these is inscribed to the senate; the latter carries the same title which Eusebius attributes to the first apology, namely, "To the Autocrat Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Pius, Augustus Caesar, and to Verissimus the son, the philosopher, and to Lucius the philosopher, son of Caesar by nature, and adopted by Pius." Neither of these is inscribed to Antoninus alone. Furthermore, that which is considered in the latter place can not undeservedly appear to be the first of the two presented by Justin: first, because he showed the former to Antoninus Pius by the authority of Eusebius, Jerome, and Photius; and the latter after his death to the emperors Aurelius and Verus. Then since Eusebius in chapter 15 commemorates certain words from the latter apology, in which he says that death hangs over him from Crescens the Cynic; which indeed are read in that which is today put in the first place. Furthermore, that which is commonly called the second seems to have been written at the beginning of the reign of Antoninus, and immediately after the death of Hadrian: for in it he mentions Antoninus as if recently consecrated, *τῷ νῦν γεγενημένῳ* (the newly made); likewise the Jewish war, which he similarly calls *νῦν γεγενημένῳ* (recently taken place): the author of which war and defection was Barchochebas. In addition to this, the inscription itself, which we brought forward a little above, can suggest the same thing; naming him whom he calls Verissimus not yet Caesar. Although he distinguishes the father of Lucius Verus, who had first been adopted by Hadrian, by that name. But after the death of Hadrian, Aurelius obtained the name of Caesar. Wherefore, immediately after the death of Hadrian, a little before Aurelius was called Caesar, he seems to have had the first apology (which is incorrectly put in the second place). Moreover, it appears that the name Verissimus remained with Marcus Aurelius even after the manly toga, although Capitolinus wrote that before he took the manly toga he was named Verissimus; after it was used, he was subsequently named Annius Verus. But he took the manly toga in the fifteenth year of his age, as the same testifies. Which was done while Hadrian was still alive. Since indeed Hadrian died in the consulship of Camerinus and Niger, the 6th day before the Ides of July in the year of the city 891. But Marcus was born in the consulship of Verus and Augur in the year 874. Therefore he was in his eighteenth year when Hadrian passed away. The things we have said about the time and order of both apologies would not have been doubtful, if certain things from Eusebius and others had not intervened, which caused some difficulty. And first, Eusebius chapter 16 or 17 recounts a certain history of a Christian woman from the former apology of Justin, which is contained in the first one today. Then the same Justin himself in *Apol.* 1, remembers Christ was born one hundred and fifty years before that year in which he was writing that defense. When therefore Antoninus Pius entered in the year of Christ 138, in the consulship of Camerinus and Niger, it follows that in the thirteenth year of Antoninus, this apology, which is numbered as the second and which is constituted by us as the first, was written. Furthermore, he makes mention of the heretic Marcion in two places. But Tertullian confirms that this man emerged under Antoninus Pius, about 116 years after the death of Christ, in *lib.* I *contra Marcion.* c. 19. Therefore that defense could not have been written by Justin in the first year of the emperor Antoninus. But so that the truth may extricate itself somehow from these trifles; it seems to me very probable, unless Justin published more than two apologies for the Christians, that it is altogether the first which is commonly numbered second; and thus was written under the beginning of the reign of Antoninus; which we conjecture from those arguments which were proposed before. But 150 years from the birth of Christ until that time are counted. Thus indeed Justin, but since perhaps more than 140 years had passed, he said "before 150 years," with a round number, as is usual. The matter will be expedited concerning Eusebius, if we say that *τῇ δευτέρᾳ* (in the second) had crept in for *τῇ προτέρᾳ* (in the first) by his own fault or that of the copyist. For he clearly signifies that *δευτέραν* (second) which we make the first; but the first is that which is the second to us. The last and most difficult of all is what is objected to us concerning Marcion. Whom, that we may speak consistently, it must be affirmed did not begin finally under the emperor Antoninus, but under Hadrian. And I do not know whether his two times should be distinguished, as happens in many heresies, so that under Hadrian he first erupted, but later under Antoninus, with the errors propagated far and wide, he earned a celebrated name for himself. And Tertullian indeed, although he writes that Marcion exhaled his error under Antoninus, yet denies that he knows in what year of him it began. In what year indeed, in the

thirtieth year of his age, standing in his full maturity. ^A To him, the aforementioned Tatian, having flourished at the first, was well-regarded and was firm in the faith, as far as he was with the holy martyr Justin. But when the holy Justin died, just as ^B a blind man led by a guide would be abandoned by his guide, and being abandoned, delivers himself to a precipice because of the blindness that possessed him, and is carried down headlong until he descends to his death, so also did he. And he was by nation a Syrian, as the knowledge that has come down to us contains. He established his own school at first in Mesopotamia, around the twelfth year ^C of Antoninus, who was called the Pious. For after the perfection of the holy Justin at Rome, having passed over into the parts of the East, and dwelling there, having fallen into an evil mindset, he himself introduced certain aeons according to the myths of Valentinus, and certain principles and emanations. But his dogma, especially from Antioch which is near Daphne, was derived and took hold particularly in the parts of Cilicia and Pisidia. For from this man by succession exist those called Encratites, who have partaken of that poison. It is said that the work which is composed from ^D four Gospels was made by him, which some call "according to the Hebrews."

II. But he also dictates the same things as the ancient heresies. And first he says that Adam is not saved. He preaches continence and a celibate life. He considers marriage to be mere adultery and corruption; he says that marriage does not differ at all from fornication, but is one and the same. Whence, in the guise of continence and the encratite character, he held a deceptive manner of life; like a ravenous wolf putting on the skin of a sheep, and by this guise, which he had assumed for a time, he lured miserable men into fraud. Similarly, he also instituted certain mysteries in imitation of the holy Church; but he used nothing in those same mysteries except water. But not even he will be able to stand on any account, whose dogma is so weak and so little coherent. And, if I am not mistaken, at this time he has been extinguished and has perished with all his school. For what can not be brought against him for his refutation? But that which we previously proposed against similar heresies prevails in the first place: that it is impossible that there be many generative principles of the things

^A that come into being by succession. For indeed, if there were many things, while being one, they would be found to have flowed from one single cause of the passions; and there would no longer be many origins, but rather one single cause of these things would have come into being; and all things would be led back to the one monarchy. Thus, the plausibility of such a person collapses; it is not truth, nor is it even capable of possessing plausibility. For the whole proclamation is foolish. And if Adam is not saved, he who is, in a way, the very mass of the nature, then no particle of the mass is saved. For if he who was first of all formed, and fashioned from as-yet-untouched earth, is not a participant in salvation, how will those born from him obtain salvation?

^B III. Therefore, he contradicts himself in two ways: for he denies that marriage is to be attributed to God the author, and calls it a crime and adultery; and yet he trusts that he himself, though born from a woman and procreated from the seed of men, can be saved. By this line of reasoning, he retracts that former insult he had leveled against marriage. For if he himself, drawing his origin from marriage, attains salvation, then marriage is not to be detested, for it generates those to whom salvation is to be granted, whichever side they may choose. But if that opinion of theirs were true, that marriage is illicit, then how much more fitting is it that Adam himself should be a participant in salvation, he who was not propagated by any marriage, but was fashioned by the hand of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, according to what is written by the holy Father himself to the Son: "Let us make man according to our image and likeness" (Gen. 1, 26). ^C But how can it be that Adam, whom you consider a lost cause, is excluded from salvation, when our Lord Jesus Christ himself, coming into this world, raises up men who are already dead, in the body itself, as he did Lazarus (Joan. xi, 43), and the widow's son (Luc. vii, 14), and the daughter of the synagogue ruler (Marc. v, 41)? For if he were not the one who had formed Adam from the dust in the beginning, why, spitting upon the ground, did he make clay, and apply it to the eyes of the man blind from birth, and make him see (Joan. ix, 1 ff.)? By this act, he clearly declared himself to be the Creator together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, when, by sprinkling the clay, he restored the missing part in the man born blind; for he seems to have done this in order to correct that missing member. ^D But if indeed it is the Lord himself who formed Adam, and yet he destroys that first-formed man while saving the others, what great foolishness is yours, Tatian! For you attribute weakness to the Lord, to the extent that it lies in you; for he, having created man before all others, and having cast him out of paradise for the single crime of violating the command—having punished him with no small severity, so that he should spend his life in perpetual sweat and labor, and live in the region of paradise, so that through the remembrance of his happy home he might vehemently repent—he, I say, would by no means fail to save him.

^A And that he might rule over the dead and the living? But what kind of dead and living, if not those who are in need of his help both above and below? How shall those things that come from the lump be holy, if the lump itself is not holy, as is also set forth by the holy Apostle? For the same Apostle speaks also concerning Eve, that she will be saved through the bearing of children, if they abide in faith and righteousness.

^B IV. There are many things that could be said on these matters, as will be obvious to anyone possessing understanding, concerning the reckless license for blasphemy and the darkened mind of Tatian and those called Tatianists after him. Having briefly addressed these, we have applied the soothing oil of the Lord’s teaching to those bitten by the stinging, gnat-like tongues of the Tatianists as a medicine, relying on the truth and power of the Lord who said: "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Wherefore he also said in the parables: "A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho"—the one whom he narrated as having fallen among thieves—in order to show that the sheep, and the man who had descended from Jerusalem to Jericho, was that very person who had fallen from greater dignity, and, having been torn away from the one command of his own shepherd, had wandered astray. From this we reckon holy Adam, our forefather, among the living; for whose sake Christ came, and for all of us his descendants, in order that to those who had known him of old, and had not wandered from his divinity, but were detained in Hades ^C on account of various transgressions, he might grant an amnesty for their wrongs, and bestow mercy and salvation both upon those still living in the world through repentance, and upon those dwelling in Hades.

V. There is indeed something wonderful to be seen by the intelligent, as we have learned from the records of books, that our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified on Golgotha, in that very place where the body of Adam lay. For having gone out of paradise, he dwelt for a long time opposite it. Then, after a long time had passed, he departed into that place of which I spoke, Jerusalem, and there finished his life and was buried in the place called Golgotha. Whence the place rightly received its name, being interpreted as the "place of a skull"; yet the form of the place does not show any resemblance to that name. For it lies upon no such height as to be named for a skull—the seat of the head in the human body—nor does it have the shape of any elevated watchtower; nor does it rise higher than the other surrounding places. ^D For opposite it is the mount of Olivet, which is higher, and at a distance of eight stadia, Gabaon is most exalted. But even...

the height which once existed in Sion, but is now cut away, was itself higher than that spot. Whence, then, the name of "the Skull"? But because the skull of the first-created man is said to have been found there, and his remains were laid to rest there, for this reason the place was called the place of the skull; upon which our Lord Jesus Christ, having been crucified, through the water and blood which flowed from his pierced side, enigmatically showed forth our salvation, having begun from the beginning of the lump to sprinkle the remains of the forefather, that he might also point out to us the sprinkling of the same blood, for the cleansing of our communion and of the repenting soul, and that the water poured down might become an example of the tempering and cleansing of the filth of our sins upon the man underlying it, and buried there in hope of him and of us who are born of him. Wherefore also here was fulfilled that which was said: "Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall shine upon thee." For even if it speaks about us who are dead in works, and of those sleeping in the depth of the sleep of ignorance, nevertheless the beginning of the enigma contains the manner from thence, and not simply, nor idly: "For," it says, "many bodies of the saints arose" (as the Gospel has it), "and went with him into the holy city," and the rest. ^C Having, therefore, from every side repelled the bites of this gnat, by the oil of the philanthropy of God, and of the advent of our Lord, and the light of the Gospel of truth, let us hasten to proceed to the following ones, according to custom, again by the power of God.

THESE THINGS ARE CONTAINED IN THIS THIRD TOME OF THE SECOND BOOK, WHICH IS THE FOURTH,

According to the order of numbering from the beginning of the tomes; in which there are eighteen heresies.

396 SYNOPSIS OF TOME III OF BOOK II,

Which is the fourth in the series constituted at the beginning of the tomes, and contains XVIII heresies.

I. Encratites, a sort of appendix of Tatian. They condemn marriage, which they attribute to Satan. They believe in abstaining from the use of all animate things.

II. Cataphrygians, and Montanists, and Tascondrugites, who accept both the Old and New Testament; but they introduce other prophets after the prophets, boasting of a certain Montanus, and Priscilla, and Maximilla.

III. Pepuzians, who are also called Quintillians, to whom the Artotyrites are joined. Of these, they are ^D of those who according to

the Phrygians—but they teach doctrines other than theirs—exalt a certain desolate town, Pepuza, situated between Galatia and Cappadocia, and claim that this is Jerusalem; and they concede to women the right to rule and to exercise the priesthood. They are initiated into certain mysteries, during which they pierce a young child. And they actually fashion a myth that Christ once appeared to Quintilla there in Pepuza in the form of a woman. They make use of both the Old and New Testaments, albeit in such a way that they change most things according to their own caprice.

IV. Tessarescaedecatitae, who celebrate the Pasch on a fixed day of the year. On whatever day of the lunar fourteenth the day falls, whether it be a Sabbath or a Sunday, they fast on that day and celebrate their vigils. ^B

V. Alogi, so named by us, who reject the Gospel of John and the divine Word, who is always begotten from the Father and sent from heaven, who is mentioned in that Gospel; and they reject not only the Gospel of John, but also his Apocalypse.

VI. Adamiani, so called from a certain living Adam, profess a dogma that is ridiculous rather than credible. For, naked as they came from their mother’s womb, men and women gather together, and thus they perform their readings, and prayers, and every other religious duty; they claim to be monks and continent, they condemn marriage, and they call their own church a paradise. ^C

VII. Sampsaei, or Elcesaei, still dwell to this day in Arabia, in the region lying above the Dead Sea; they are disciples of a certain false prophet named Elxai. From his lineage, Marthus and Marthina, two women, appeared in our own age; this heresy worshiped them as if they were goddesses. Furthermore, they hold entirely the same views as the Ebionites.

VIII. Theodotians, named after Theodotus the tanner, from Byzantium. He was highly trained in Greek arts. Having been arrested, along with others, during the persecution that was raging at that time, he alone abjured the faith when all his companions had suffered martyrdom. Being reproached for this, he devised the theory that Christ was a mere man, so that the charge of having denied his divinity might not be held against him; and this is what he taught. ^D

IX. Melchisedecians, who so venerate Melchisedec that they claim he is a power [of God] and not merely a man; and they do not hesitate to do and say everything in his name.

X. Bardesianistae. This Bardesianes, hailing from Mesopotamia, initially embraced the true faith and excelled in wisdom. But later, departing from the truth, he taught doctrines similar to those of Valentinus, except for a few points in which he differs from Valentinus.

XI. Noetians. This Noetus was from Smyrna in Asia. Having been raised on high along with certain others,

^A he dared to assert that Christ is the Son-Father, claiming that he himself is the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. He said that he himself was Moses, and called his own brother Aaron.

XII. Valesii. These people, as we suppose, dwell in Bacatha, which is a principal village of Philadelphia in Arabia. They are accustomed to castrate those who join them. Most of them are eunuchs, having been mutilated. They teach other things also, full of error, rejecting the Law and the Prophets, and introducing certain other disgraceful practices.

XIII. Cathari. These followed Novatus the Roman. They utterly reject those who have been married twice, and they do not accept repentance.

XIV. Angelici. These have completely disappeared. But they claimed to have an angelic order, or at any rate that they invoked angels. ^B

XV. Apostolici, who are also called Apotactici or "Renunciants," are found only in Pisidia. They admit only those who have renounced all their goods. For the rest, they are similar to the Encratites, although they maintain some different views.

XVI. Sabelliani. These hold the same opinions as the Noetians, except that they deny that the Father himself suffered, saying that the Word emanates from Him only as a spoken word.

XVII. Origeniani, named after a certain Origen. These people are most base, committing unspeakable acts and delivering their own bodies to corruption.

XVIII. Other Origeniani, from Origen Adamantius, the writer. ^C They reject the resurrection of the dead; they count both Christ and the Holy Spirit among created things; they allegorize everything, including Paradise, the heavens, and all other things. They foolishly claim that Christ's kingdom will come to an end, and that the angels will likewise cease to exist; and they say that Christ himself will be subjected to the kingdom of another, along with the devil.

BOOK TWO, VOLUME ONE.

AGAINST THE ENCRATITES, which is heresy XXVII or XLVII.

I. The Encratites, so called, are the successors of Tatian, being naturally misled and deceived by him. They have devised opinions other than his, and have again surrendered themselves to greater nonsense. Their number is immense even today in Pisidia, and in that part of Phrygia that is called "Adusta" (or "The Burnt"). ^D There are those who believe this name for the region truly refers to the Phrygia of the gods. I find mention of a place with the surname "Adusta" in Lycaonia, or Galatia, not far from Isauria.

^A And it is by the providence of God that their homeland has come to be called by this name in the world, because its inhabitants have been scorched by the perversion of such and so great a deception. For there are many heresies in that region. They also exist in parts of Asia, and in the land of the Isaurians, and the Pamphylians, and the Cilicians, and in Galatia; and now even in the Roman territory, and also in the territory of the Antiochenes in Syria. Yet this heresy does not exist everywhere. ^B These people also assert that there are certain "principles," that the devil is opposed to the works of God and is not subject to God, but possesses a special power to do whatever he wishes, not being depraved by malice—a view in which they do not at all agree with the Church, but wander far from the teaching of truth. Among their primary Scriptures they hold the Acts of Andrew and of John, and also of Thomas, and other apocryphal works. From the Old Testament they select whatever they fancy. They clearly designate the devil as the author of marriage. They abominate the eating of living things, prohibiting it—not out of a desire for temperance or a particular rule of life, but out of a false and affected fear, lest they draw condemnation upon themselves by the consumption of animate things. They use only water for their mysteries. They abstain entirely from wine, calling it diabolical; and those who drink it, or use it, they declare to be wicked and sinners. They do, however, believe in the resurrection of the dead, to such an extent that this heresy seems full of a kind of mad insanity. It is truly worthy of observation and wonder for any wise person that, of all the things we see said and done by heretics, nothing is constant or consistent with itself, or plausible with any appearance of truth.

^C II. For if they accept both the Old and New Testaments, how can these diverse "principles" of theirs be maintained, when both Testaments agree concerning one Divinity and proclaim the knowledge of it? And if there is to be a resurrection of the dead, how can honorable marriage be attributed to the devil—especially when God has said, "Increase and multiply," and the Lord in the Gospel has commanded, "What God has joined, let no man put asunder," and the Apostle says, "Marriage is honorable, and the bed is undefiled"? But to assert their own opinion, or rather their fable, and to condemn those who use wine, they abuse certain passages of Scripture and hunt for expressions by which they might demonstrate that this thing in particular proceeds from the demon. For, they say, Noah after drinking wine was uncovered. ^D Lot, they say, while drunk, unwittingly slept with his own daughters. The same drunkenness prompted the making of the calf. To this pertain those words of Scripture: "Who has woe? Who has strifes? Who has troubles and complaints? Who has wounds without cause? Whose eyes are bloodshot? Is it not those who linger over wine, those who search out where drinking parties are held?" And they search out and heap up other such things on account of their own persuasiveness, not knowing that everything immoderate is everywhere harmful, and outside entirely.

^A of that which was proposed—it is forbidden. For one might say this not only concerning wine, but also concerning much insatiability. For the Lord also taught this, saying: "Let not your hearts be weighed down with surfeiting and drunkenness, and cares of this life" (Luc. XXI, 34); and, "If thou art insatiable, do not desire his rich meats; for they are joined to a lying life" (Prov. XXIII, 3). But the holy Apostle more abundantly, mocking the gluttonous and voracious, and cursing the desires of the throat, said: "Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats; but God shall destroy both it and them" (1 Cor. VI, 13). But also Esau lost his birthright through a [(96)] pottage of lentils, as the Scripture says, calling the same thing a pottage of lentils and pulse. I think, perhaps, that it was not of "wheat," that is, of grain; but perhaps as a remnant of lentils already cooked, and still placed upon the fire, the Scripture described it as "lentil" because it was heated again after having cooled. And as that man was stripped naked because of wine, though suffering no injustice, so rather did he lose his birthright because of hunger and insatiability, and suffered more harm than he who was harmed by wine. And a distorted word, nor any fictitiously devised drama, has no strength at all near the truth.

^B Γ. They boast, ostensibly, of continence, while acting dangerously in all things, being found in the midst of women, and deceiving women from every side; and they travel with women, and live together, and are ministered to by such persons, being outside of the truth, and possessing rather a semblance of piety, while having denied the power of it. For of whatever work a man might abandon a part, he has abandoned the entire fullness through that one abandoned part. Whence the mysteries among them are performed by water alone, and are not mysteries, but are falsely performed in imitation of the true. Whence also in this they shall be refuted by the straightforward word of the Savior, saying: "I will not drink of this fruit of the vine, until I drink it new in the kingdom of heaven with you" (Matth. XXVI, 29).

Again, having thrust this aside with the mighty hand ^C of the truth, as a troublesome beast with its teeth removed, let us proceed to the next things, habitually invoking God, the God of all, as our guide and avenger against evils, and helper of prudence, and the giver who is the source of wisdom; so that we, having learned the truths from Him, might be able to uncover those of the others, and the medicinal antidote for them out of many aromatic ^D

^A simple substances, so that we may be able to prepare it for the benefit of those who have already been struck, that the remedy might be applied to them once our own works have been read through; or, if they have not yet had any knowledge of this matter, that having finally grasped it, they may be able to guard themselves, and he may procure for us salvation, and for God a reward and recompense, ^B generously bestowed, and the same both salvation for us and an abundant reward from God.

AGAINST THE PHRYGIANS,

I. From these another heresy arises in turn, called that of the Phrygians, having been contemporary with them and succeeding them. For they came into being around the nineteenth year (98) of Antoninus Pius, who reigned after Hadrian. But Marcion, and those around Tatian, and the Encratites who succeeded from him, appeared in the times of Hadrian, and after Hadrian. For these so-called Phrygians themselves accept the entire Scripture, both the Old and New Testament; and they likewise speak of the resurrection of the dead. But they boast of having a certain prophet, Montanus, and prophetesses, Priscilla and Maximilla; by attending to whom, they have turned aside from the straight path. Concerning the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, they think likewise ^C with the holy Catholic Church. But they severed themselves, attending to spirits of error and doctrines of demons, saying, "We must," they say, "also receive the gifts." And the holy Church of God likewise receives the gifts; but the truly genuine gifts, and those approved in the holy Church of God through the Holy Spirit by the prophets and apostles, and by the Lord himself; as the apostle John warns us in his Epistle, saying: *Test the spirits, whether they are of God* (1 John IV, 1). And again saying: *You have heard that Antichrist comes, and now many antichrists have arisen. They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but that they might be made manifest, that they are not of us, therefore I write to you, little children* (1 John II, 18 sqq.), etc. In truth, therefore, they are not of them, the saints. For they departed through their own contentiousness, ^D following after spirits of error and mythologies.

II. For behold, by this very thing which they have set before themselves, they are openly convicted of being in no way able to obtain that which they put forward with such contentious ambition. For if those heavenly gifts were to be received, and if gifts were to be in the Church, how is it that, after Montanus...

and Priscilla, and Maximilla, they have no more prophets? Is the divine gift exhausted? But in the Catholic Church it is by no means exhausted. Far from it! But if prophets prophesied to a certain extent, and now have ceased to prophesy, it follows that neither Priscilla nor Maximilla, according to the oracles of the apostles which are accepted in the Church, have delivered any oracle. ^B Wherefore the insanity of those people is constrained on both sides. For let them either show some prophets after Maximilla, so that the grace which they boast of may not seem to be extinguished; or else Maximilla and her followers must be judged under the name of false prophetesses, who, after the time prescribed for the prophetic gift and office, did not fear to admit an inspiration—not of the Holy Spirit, but sent by demons of error—and to deceive their hearers. For even from those very things which they assert, their lies are refuted. For thus their prophetess Maximilla declares: "After me there will no longer be a prophetess, but the end will follow." You see how on every side the spirit of error betrays itself. For whatsoever the prophets have uttered, they spoke being knowing and understanding, and the things they announced have plainly come to pass, and are fulfilled even today. But she predicted that after her there would be the end of all things; which, as we see, has not yet come to pass, especially since so many emperors have succeeded one another, and so much time has elapsed. For up to this present time, being the twelfth year of the reign of Valentinian, Valens, and Gratian, more or less 290 years are counted; ^C and yet that predicted end of all things, [announced] by the empty and self-displaying prophetess, has not yet arrived, although she did not even know the day of her own death. From this one may see that all who separate themselves from the truth have no consistency in their words, but, like infants, deceived by the impostor serpent, they cast themselves voluntarily into destruction and ruin; for when they wish to wander far from the fold to be devoured by the wolf, and to perish, not holding fast to the beginning, but having repudiated the truth, they have cast themselves into a shipwreck and a tempest of every error. For if Maximilla has said that there will no longer be a prophet, she utterly takes away this divine gift from them, so that it does not endure to this present day. But if, as we said before, the same grace was propagated up to her, then she herself has not become a possessor of such gifts.

^D III. But she surely errs vehemently. For God has, as it were, sealed His Church and rendered those divine gifts complete. For as long as there was need for prophets, and, by the instinct of the true Spirit, with firmness of mind and constancy, and with an understanding of the things they spoke, the most holy men gave all their responses and oracles—and they were the same ones for whose sake...

the analogy of faith was given for the common good. ^A What profitable thing, then, have these people spoken? Or what is in accordance with the analogy of faith? And are these not rather those of whom the Lord spoke: "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves"? For by comparing what is said by them with what is truly contained in both the Old and New Testaments, and what has most certainly come to pass and been prophesied, let us discern which is true prophecy and which is false.

A true prophet, indeed, being in possession of his faculties and understanding what he was saying, announced the future; and according as the Holy Spirit impelled him, he was accustomed to prophesy with a special strength of soul. Thus that servant of God, Moses, who was "faithful in all his house." Whence, in the Old Testament, the prophet is also called a "seer." "The vision," he says, "which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw." ^B "I saw," he says, "the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up. And I saw the seraphim and the cherubim; and I heard the voice of the Lord saying to me: Go, and tell this people: By hearing you shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing you shall see, and shall not perceive." ^C And when he had heard this from the Lord, then going to the people, he said: "Thus says the Lord."

Do you see that these things are said by someone who is understanding, not by one who has gone out of his mind? For a voice of this kind signifies that there was no disturbance of the mind. So also the holy prophet Ezekiel, when the Lord said to him, "Make yourself bread over human dung," replied: "Far be it, Lord; nothing common and unclean has ever entered into my mouth." For when he perceived that this was said to him by the Lord for the sake of a warning, he did not immediately set out to do this as if he were thrown out of his state of mind; but, endowed with a constant strength of soul, and being present to himself, he answered: "Far be it, Lord." For these things are truly characteristic of prophets, who maintain a firm and stable mind in the Holy Spirit, and possess the faculty of teaching and discerning. ^D For was not Daniel himself full of all wisdom, and does he not appear to have understood clearly the things he had conceived in his mind? He who both solved the riddles of Nebuchadnezzar, and recalled to memory the things that had been presented to him through dreams, but had escaped the very man who had seen them; and with the same firmness of soul, being abundantly replenished with that heavenly gift, interpreted them without any delay, excelling other men in wisdom and understanding because of that grace of the Holy Spirit with which he was endowed—grace which not only informs the prophet, but also all of us, to whom God imparts the doctrine of truth by his aid. But on the contrary, those things which these men boast of prophesying, they neither proclaim with certain firmness of mind, nor do they follow what they say with understanding. But their words are crooked and winding, and contain nothing upright at all.

^A IV. For Montanus says this, for instance: "Behold, man is like a lyre, and I fly like a plectrum. The man sleeps, and I wake." "Behold the Lord is the one who casts the hearts of men into a trance, and gives hearts to men." Who, then, among those who follow through and receive with understanding the word of profit, and who are concerned for their own lives, would not condemn such a fabricated hypothesis, and the word of one who prides himself on being counted among the prophets, yet is unable to speak as the prophets did? For neither did the Holy Spirit speak in him. ^B For to say, "I fly, and I strike, and I keep watch," and "The Lord casts hearts into a trance"—these are words of one in a state of trance, and not of one who is following along, but rather of one who shows forth a character different from the character of the Holy Spirit who spoke in the prophets.

But if they wish to interweave falsehood with the truth, and to ignore the mind that is concerned with accuracy, and to heap up for themselves words by which they fabricate their own error, they will try to demonstrate some likeness to it from the saying of Holy Scripture: "God cast a trance upon Adam, and he slept." But this is not at all like that other case. For here, God was not intending to fashion a new body from which He brought forth a trance, ^C so as to inflict similar things out of excess of loving-kindness; for upon Adam He brought the trance of sleep, not the trance of the wits. But "trance" is a word that has many different modes. A trance is spoken of by way of excess of wonder. A trance is also called madness, from the fact that one has strayed from his purpose. But that trance of sleep was spoken of in another way, in accordance with natural operation, and especially because it was brought upon holy Adam, who had been fashioned by the hand of God, in the most profound manner.

^D V. For indeed it is possible to see how justly Holy Scripture has used this term "trance." For when a man sleeps, all the senses are shifted and turned to rest. As one might say, the visual faculty is present, but it does not see; for the eye is closed, and the spirit which moves within the man, or the soul, is at rest. Even if there be an odor or a fragrance in the house, although the sense of smell is present, it does not perceive it; for such a sense has been cast into a trance in being turned to rest. If there are bitter tastes in the mouth, or salt, or sweet, the sense of taste does not perceive them; since it lies in a trance of rest, not working as it was working while he was awake. Hearing is present, but the faculty of hearing is idle in its perception; and often, when people are speaking in the house, unless the man is awakened, he does not hear the things said by some, because the operation has, for that moment, departed. When some creatures pass through our...

body, their touch is not perceived by us at all, unless perchance they prick us quite severely. The reason for this is that the seat of our senses has ceased from all operation in that quiet of sleep. And indeed this instrument of the senses, since it is by nature earthly, and yet endowed with an excellent soul—a thing which God has constituted for the sake of our utility—has its own time assigned to sleep, through which it is resolved from the keenest function of sensing into rest and numbness. Meanwhile, that principal part of the soul and its power of understanding is free from such stupor. For often it presents itself to itself as if it were awake, walking, doing something, sailing; and it imagines itself to be engaged in many and greater affairs during sleep. Although this is done in a way far different from that of a raving and fanatical person, who, while awake in body and soul, performs certain atrocious acts and is a danger both to himself and to all others; for he knows not what he says or does, since he has been cast down from the state of reason and turned into madness. ^B

VI. We have discussed all these things on the occasion of that passage: *God cast a stupor upon Adam, and he slept*, and we have proposed the different modes of stupor; and we have explained for what reason that sleep injected by the Lord is called a "stupor." This was doubtless accomplished by the singular caution and kindness of God, which He has bestowed upon the human race, so that man might betake himself to the rest of sleep from the daily care and anxiety of business. Yet in that instance the term "stupor" attached itself with better right, ^C because for some time it exempted him from all sense of pain when He was about to remove a rib from him, which He was to turn into a woman. It was not a stupor of the mind or soul. For as soon as he was awakened, he acknowledged what had been done and said: *This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of her man.* You see, I suppose, how he knew both the past and the present, and predicted the things to come. For he understood the past, which had been done while he was sleeping, as is gathered from those words: *Bone of my bones.* He understood the present, that is, the creation of the woman following thereafter; for he noticed that she had been transferred from his own body. Finally, he prophesied also the things to come, when he thus pronounced: ^D *For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh.* These, therefore, are not the words of a fanatic man, or of one who knows not what he says, but of one endowed with strength and firmness of mind.

VII. Now, then, as to that passage: *I said in my excess: All men are liars*, let us say something; there is another meaning to this word, not, clearly, that which is attributed to an insane and raving person. Far be it that we should admit such a thing into our mind. But it signifies a man becoming stunned in an incredible way, and [far removed] from the usual and

daily thoughts of those things which are seen or done. For when the prophet was astonished by a miracle, he spoke out of admiration. ^A Yet, that the prophets are said to be "carried out of themselves" is not to be understood as if they had lost the use of their reason. For Peter is also said to have been "carried out of himself," not because he was ignorant of the conversation going back and forth, but because he perceived some things happening among men beyond their daily custom. For he saw a sheet let down, and all quadrupeds, and creeping things, and the birds of the air contained in it. And observe that he follows along, and the holy Peter was not in a state of mental derangement; for when he heard, "Arise, kill, and eat," he did not comply as if he were not in command of his mind; but he said to the Lord, "By no means, Lord; nothing common or unclean has ever entered into my mouth." Now, the holy David said that, "Every man is a liar." But he who said, "I said in my haste," spoke privately and from his own person, so that while he affirmed that men lie, he himself was free from lying. But he was vehemently marveling at the kindness of God; and because he had predicted many things that were to come by the inspiration of the divine power; and since he perceived that the mercy of God was necessary for all men, he attributed truth to the Lord alone, and pronounced all mortals subject to blame; in order to show that ^B the true Spirit spoke in the prophets, and communicated to them the depths of the divine knowledge and accurate science. Abraham is also recorded to have been "carried out of himself," not so as to be powerless in mind, but only struck with fear. For he saw a furnace and torches as the sun was setting. And the other prophets, too, when they saw the things presented to them, remained in the same vigor of mind. For thus Moses said: "I am exceedingly afraid and trembling." But Abraham understood what was said by the Lord: "Know that your seed will be a sojourner in a foreign land for four hundred years." And you see how all things said by the prophets are seen in truth, and in a sound mind, and with sober reasoning, and not in insanity. ^C

VIII. But if they wish to say again: "The former gifts are not similar to the latter," from where do they have the means to prove this? For the holy prophets and the holy apostles prophesied in a way similar to one another. First, indeed, when the Savior was ascending into heaven, and they saw those two in white garments, they did not see them in a state of insanity; but they heard them with a sound mind: "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come," and so forth. Then also Peter, as I said, seeing and hearing and answering and saying, "By no means, Lord," was stable in his mind. For the holy man was prophesying as he spoke, and with a kind of ^D remarkable bearing and gesture

^A hinting at the future, he took Paul’s girdle and bound his own feet, and spoke as follows: "The man whose girdle this is, they shall bind him and lead him away to Jerusalem." But it is also narrated that certain prophets came to Antioch and announced that a famine would occur over the whole world. And the faith of those who had predicted it was not in vain. And to show that they were true prophets, Scripture immediately adds: "Which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar." But Paul, the most holy apostle, speaking prophetically, said: "But the Spirit says expressly: In the last days grievous times shall come," and so forth. And again in another place, that "some shall depart from the healthy faith, giving heed to spirits of error and doctrines of demons, ^B forbidding to marry, and to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by us who use them"; this is a thing which the matter itself declares to be fulfilled in you and those like you. For most of those heresies forbid marriage and command abstinence from meats, not in order to establish a manner of life more holy, or to procure a more excellent virtue and heavenly rewards and crowns, but because they consider detestable the things that were created by the Lord.

IX. But the holy Church ^C exalts virginity, and commends the single life, and purity, and widowhood; and she honors and approves of honest marriage; but she forbids fornication, and adultery, and wantonness. From which it is possible to perceive the character of the holy Catholic Church, and the adulterated ways of the others; and how she avoids the proven matters of every error, and a crooked path, and a steep track, ^D prepared for them. For I said before that this had been predicted by the holy Apostle, and I will say it again, in order to make us more cautious, and to distinguish the sacrosanct Church by certain proper marks from the error of the heretics, that he spoke thus: "With incredible audacity forbidding those things which were rightly established by God, and enacting certain private decrees." And this pertains to those who forbid marriage and command abstinence from meats. And yet God, the Word himself, in the Gospel, placed a certain moderation upon this matter: "Do you wish," he says, "to be perfect?" in which he desired to accommodate himself to human condition and weakness. For he delights indeed in those who have the power to provide a specimen of piety of this kind, so that they profess virginity, purity, and continence; furthermore, he commends single marriage: since he has shown, as in a certain pattern, that sacerdotal duties and ornaments are to be communicated to those who after one marriage have preserved continence, or have remained in virginity: a thing which the apostles, and then the ecclesiastical rule of the priesthood, have honestly and religiously ordered. But if anyone, through weakness, should need, after the death of his own wife, to be joined in a second marriage, the rule of truth does not forbid this, that is to say, the one who is not...

a priest. But these men forbid it, and so they are caught by that statement of Paul ^A regarding those who forbid to marry. For they expel those who have become involved in a second marriage, and they apply force and necessity so that they might not dare to do such a thing. We, however, do not constrain anyone with necessity, but we exhort them, urging with good counsel those who are able; yet we do not impose necessity upon those who are not able, nor do we cast them out from life. For the holy Word has proclaimed to everyone that one ought to bear the infirmity of the infirm; just as the holy Apostle himself shall be found saying, and reproving such as these who are not of the same gift: "The younger widows refuse: for when they have waxed wanton against Christ, they will marry; having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith." For those who have made a vow and then broken it have damnation. But those who have not made such a vow, but are joined [in marriage] ^B through weakness, do not have damnation. And if they were about to have damnation, why did he say: "I will therefore that the younger women marry, guide the house"?

X. Every prophet, therefore, both in the Old Testament and in the New, follows with understanding what he says. Whence also blessed John in the Apocalypse spoke saying: "These things the Lord revealed to His servants through His servant John," and, "Thus saith the Lord." He who said these things was surely endowed with sound judgment, and understood in his mind what he was speaking. Hence that formula: "Thus saith the Lord," and, "The vision which he saw." But this Montanus, who boasts himself to be a prophet and has led those who ^C are deluded by him astray, speaks things which are in no way consistent with the holy Scriptures. For he says in his so-called prophecy: "What do you call him who, being above man, obtains salvation?" "For the just," he says, "shall shine an hundredfold more than the sun." "But the little ones among you who are saved shall shine an hundredfold more than the moon." But the Lord refutes such a one, He who possesses the power to grant that the faces of the saints shall shine, and who made the face of Moses radiant, and who shall transform the saints in His holy resurrection of the bodies—those sown in dishonor and raised in glory—not other bodies than those that exist, but the very ones that exist being raised up ^D entirely; receiving however glory from Him after the resurrection, from Him who provides the glory abundantly to His own saints; since He has the power to give and to grant, as God and Lord. And having the power to grant, He did not promise according to Montanus; but He says: "Your faces shall shine as the sun." If therefore He who has the power, and who truly is the Lord and our Master Jesus Christ, says that the faces of the just shall shine as the sun, how does Montanus promise something more, an hundredfold? Unless perhaps he is like that one who promised to those around Adam, that "Ye shall be as gods."

Which, having seduced them from the glory they had attained and from the paradise of delight, he caused to fall into the corruption of death.

^A XI. But Montanus adds this further: "I am the Lord God, who dwells in man." Rightly does the Holy Scripture, and the teaching of the Holy Spirit consonant with it, prepare us that we may discern what are the imitations of the alien spirit and what are contrary to the truth. For as soon as Montanus said this, it brought to our memory those things which are read as having been pronounced by the Lord. For so the Lord testifies in the Gospel: "I came in the name of the Father, and you did not receive me; another will come in his own name, and him you will receive." Montanus is therefore proved to be in total disagreement with the divine Scriptures, and this is clear to everyone who has read his writings with judgment. If this is so, it remains that he himself should be considered as alien to the Catholic Church, as is his heresy, which boasts of having prophets and those heavenly gifts which it has by no means received, but rather has departed from them. Who then, if he understands even a little of what is said, would think that these men should be called prophets, and not rather deceivers and tricksters? For Christ taught us, saying: "I will send to you the Spirit, the Paraclete." And by performing miracles, he said: "He shall glorify me." Which we see to have happened in reality, because the holy apostles, having received the Spirit the Paraclete, glorified Christ. But this Montanus glorifies himself. The Lord glorified his Father. The same Lord Christ also glorified the Spirit, when he taught that it is the Spirit of truth. But Montanus glorifies only himself, and says he is the Father Almighty, and that he dwells within himself; so that it may be demonstrated from all sides that he is not who he claims to be, nor was he sent by Him, nor did he receive anything from Him. For it pleased the Lord that all the fullness of the Godhead should dwell in him bodily; and from his fullness all the prophets have received, as John affirms. You see indeed how all the ancients preached Christ, and those who followed afterward celebrated Christ by their proclamation and confession. But Montanus has broken in violently, boasting himself to be some marvelous man; so that by this very thing it is shown he is not of that kind, as he was neither sent by Him, nor received anything from Him.

^C Montanus, that miserable little man, continues: "I am not an angel," he says, "nor some messenger; but I, the Lord God the Father, have come." By this statement of his, he is found to be an alien, since he did not celebrate in his preaching Christ, whom every ecclesiastical gift bestowed from God upon the holy Church has truly, ever, and magnificently preached. Wherefore he shall be found to be outside the body of the Church and the head of the whole body: and not holding the head, from which the whole body is joined together and increases.

For indeed our Lord Jesus Christ has shown himself to be truly and in reality the Son of the Parent, that he might prove himself to be the genuine Son of the Parent; while Montanus, on the contrary, boasts that he himself is the Parent.

XII. On the Folly of the Phrygians and the Falsehood of Maximilla

^BXII. Since these things are so, how then, O Phrygians, who rise up against us again as new enemies, and masking yourselves with a certain external appearance of the Christian name, do you mock us, and imitate towards us the hostile hatred of the Trojans and Phrygians? I ask, how can we have faith in you, when you boast that you have departed from the Church on account of heavenly gifts? For those things cannot be heavenly gifts which are so alien to such gifts, and which show a character and a method unlike those promised by the Lord, just as your prophets profess. Again, you bring before us Maximilla; and indeed, your names are also strange and very fearsome, having nothing pleasant or sweet about them, but are savage and barbaric. For hear, O children of Christ, what this Maximilla—she who is called thus among those who are so-called Phrygians—says: "Do not listen to me, but listen to Christ." But in the very thing in which she thinks she is glorifying Christ, she is deceived. For if she were of Christ, she would speak as the holy apostles do, as each one says: Peter in the first place, saying, "We have heard from him"; and the Lord himself saying, "He who hears you, hears me"; and Paul saying, "Be imitators of me, as I also am of Christ." She speaks the truth while lying, and even unwillingly. And she does well to say, "but listen to Christ." ^C For often unclean spirits are compelled to cast themselves down, since they are not of the truth, and they reveal their Lord, whether they wish to or not, by necessity—just as the young girl who had a spirit of Python said: "These men are the servants of the most high God"; and, "Why have you come before the time to torment us? We know who you are, the Holy One of God." Thus she too, being compelled, said not to listen to her, but to Christ. And to this point also pertains the saying: "Why have you come before the time to torment us? We know who you are: the Holy One of God." In this way, Maximilla, influenced by a certain force, does not wish to be heard, but wishes Christ to be heard.

How then do those who have heard this from her, and have believed her, wish to listen to her, after having learned from her not to listen to her, but to the Lord? For truly, if there were any understanding in them, when she utters earthly things, she should not be listened to at all. ^D And do not say that she was "following" [a spiritual impulse]. For it is not the nature of one who is following [a spirit] to teach and then to overthrow herself. For if she says at all, "Do not listen to me," what kind of spirit was it that was speaking in her? If it was she who was saying it, as a human being, then she was not in the Holy Spirit. For the one saying, "Do not listen to me," was evidently speaking with a human mind, and was not in the Holy Spirit. And she who was not in the Holy Spirit from above, but was of a human frame of mind, knew nothing. And so there was no Holy Spirit, but she spoke and uttered things with a human mind. But if she was speaking and prophesying by the Holy Spirit, what then was the Holy Spirit...

who would not desire to be heard? Truly, great is the blindness of falsehood and error. Moreover, great is the word of God, which instructs us in every way to discern those things which have been brought forth by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, which are spoken partly in the person of the Father, partly in the person of the Son, and partly in the person of the Holy Spirit. And if the Spirit that was in Maximilla were the Holy Spirit, it would never have contradicted its own words. For the Holy Spirit is one, who distributes to each as He wills. And He is called the Spirit of piety, and He is called the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit proceeding from the Father and receiving from the Son, being in no way alien from the Father and the Son. Therefore, He would not have said, "Listen not to me." For the Spirit would have spoken the things of Christ, and Christ sends the Spirit, and casts out demons by the Holy Spirit; ^A but the Lord speaks the things of the Father; and the Father has sanctified the Son and sent Him into the world, that they might know Him and glorify Him, just as they glorify the Father. Thus, the mind of those who alienate themselves from the following of Christ has collapsed in every way. And so, what is that which says, Do not listen to me? Blindness is the deception, and great is the word of God, which instructs us in every way to know what things have been spoken by the Holy Spirit, partly in the person of the Father, partly in the person of the Son, and partly in the person of the Holy Spirit. And if the Spirit in Maximilla were the Holy Spirit, it would not have spoken its own words. For the Holy Spirit is one, who distributes to each as He wills. ^B And He is called the Spirit of piety, and He is called the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit proceeding from the Father and receiving from the Son, being in no way alien from the Father and the Son. What then, did He not say, "Listen not to me"? For the Spirit of Christ was speaking, and Christ sends the Spirit, and by the Holy Spirit casts out demons; and the Lord says the things of the Father; and the Father sanctified the Son and sent Him into the world, that they might know Him and glorify Him, just as they glorify the Father. And in every way the mind of those who alienate themselves from the following of Christ has fallen away.

XIII. But Maximilla goes on—that sheer force of intelligence and doctrine, if I may speak jokingly—saying that "The Lord sent me, a proclaimer, herald, and interpreter of this labor, and of this promise and covenant, forced, whether I will or no, to learn the knowledge of God." Let us therefore consider, O beloved, the solid and stable foundation of our life and the way of light, and let us not be tripped up by the words of those who are on the opposite side, and by the pasture of a foreign spirit. For look at the one who spoke thus here: she proclaimed herself to be "forced," not by a voluntary will. But our Lord did not come into the world against His will, nor was He sent from the Father with necessity; but He had the will together with the Father, and with the Holy Spirit the capacity to give; and likewise, He has the will together with the Father, and this grace is given to all, not with necessity, but out of an excess of philanthropy. ^C And so, those whom He called, He called with purpose, not imposing necessity, nor placing a yoke upon them. For He says, "You who thirst, come to me"; and again, "If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself and follow me." And through Isaiah, speaking this same thing, He said: "If you are willing and listen to me." And later, so that the prophet might show who it is that is speaking, he said: "For the mouth of the Lord has spoken these things." And do you see in every way the discrepancy of these things with the divine Scripture, and the different notion and assumption, contrary to the faith and following of God? For Maximilla was indeed saying that she forced those who were willing and those who were unwilling; so that by this very utterance, such a claim is proved to be a lie. For she neither taught the knowledge of God, which she did not know, to those who were willing, nor did she force those who were unwilling. ^D

nor did she teach the knowledge of God, which she did not possess; nor did she offer violence to those who were unwilling. For not all who are in the whole world know the name of Maximilla, or have heard her false dogmas and discourses. Thus, their fabricated dreams and trifles collapse entirely, having nothing in common with divine truth.

^A XIV. Furthermore, those same people especially venerate a certain desert place in Phrygia, where once stood the town of Pepuza, which is today leveled to the ground. For they maintain that the heavenly Jerusalem descends there. Therefore, they travel thither and perform certain mysteries and celebrate sacred rites according to their own opinion. For that faction of men is dispersed throughout Cappadocia, Galatia, and the aforementioned Phrygia—whence the sect is called Cataphrygian—but it is also seen in great numbers in Cilicia and in Constantinople.

^B Finally, that we may omit nothing pertaining to the designation of each of the heresies we have gathered, we must also speak again about the name of the Tascodrugites. For this name belongs either to this very sect or to the one succeeding it, called the Quintillianists; for it is from these very people that this name also originates. They are called Tascodrugites for this reason. In their language, *tascòs* is called a peg, and *drouggos* is called a nose or snout. And from their placing of their index finger, as it is called, upon their nose while praying—ostensibly for the sake of sorrow and affected sanctity—they have been called by some Tascodrugites, that is to say, "peg-nosers." ^C But in this heresy of Montanus, or in its sibling sect of the Quintillianists, or certainly the Priscillianists and Pepuzians, a certain terrible and forbidden work is said to take place. For at a certain festival, they pierce a very young infant over its whole body with bronze needles, and they collect its blood to use in their own rites, ostensibly for a sacrifice.

XV. But enough of this heresy for now. For we undertook in every single instance not to pass over anything, but to communicate honestly what we had discovered either by hearsay, or from the writings of others, or learned by the testimony of some who had given us credible assurance. For if we wished to commit to writing more than what we have received, ^D we would deservedly fall into the suspicion that we had composed certain depraved and absurd things with the intent of attributing the enmity of heretics to them, and that we would be held to the same charge as those who bring forward nothing true, but instead bring into our midst things they have never heard or seen, nor learned from the true discipline of the Holy Spirit. Since, therefore, as we have said, we are accurately covering everything pertaining to each heresy, so that what is destructive and pestilential in them is [brought forward] for the amendment of the readers.

^A And for those who have not yet been beset by it, it serves as a preventative, so to speak—a remedy of the truth dispensed to the prudent, that we ourselves might be called disciples of the disciples of Christ, and of the Savior himself, who exists as the helper of bodies and souls.

Now, having sufficiently and more than enough engaged in the refutation of this heresy, let us, with the help of Christ, proceed to the others, and let us, with the wood of the cross of truth, shatter their virus—which is to say, their venomous, fang-like poisons. For the one we treat now is like a hemorrhaging viper, whose virus is endowed with such power that it drains all the blood from the bodies of those it bites, and thus destroys them. This is exactly what the heresy of the Quintillians accomplishes. For they pierce the body of an innocent child and draw out all its blood, which they then nefariously misuse for the celebration and participation of their mysteries in order to deceive people.

Finally, before we gird ourselves—relying on the power of Christ—to address the remaining ones, let us implore His truth, so that, having tracked down the vestiges of each error and having exposed and refuted its power, we may, as usual, give thanks to God for all things.

AGAINST THE QUINTILLIANS,

I. ^C The Quintillians again—who are also called Pepuzians, Artotyritae, and Priscillians—are the same, being among the Phrygians and originating from them; however, they are divided in a certain way. For these people among the Phrygians, or Priscillians, say that in Pepuza, Quintilla or Priscilla—I cannot say precisely which it was, but one of them, as I have said before—was sleeping in Pepuza, and that Christ approached her and slept with her in that manner which she, in her delusion, used to claim: "In the form," she says, "of a woman, dressed in a bright robe, Christ came to me and instilled wisdom in me, and revealed to me that this place is holy, and that here the holy Jerusalem descends from heaven." Therefore, she says, even until this day, certain women and men are accustomed to being initiated there in that place, in order that, by keeping watch there, they might behold Christ. For this reason, among them women are called prophetesses. ^D Yet, I do not know very clearly whether this is among them or among the Phrygians. For they are together and possess the same mindset.

II. They make use of both the Old and the New Testament, and they believe similarly in the resurrection of the dead. They declare Quintilla, along with Priscilla, to be their founders, whom the Phrygians also acknowledge. They bring forward many very empty authorities.

^A They attribute a unique grace to Eve, because she was the first to eat from the fruit of the tree of knowledge. They also boast of the sister of Moses as a prophetess, using her as a precedent to support their institution of admitting women into the clergy. Furthermore, they say, Philip had four daughters who were prophetesses. Often, seven virgins enter their church holding lamps, dressed in white, pretending to come so that they may prophesy to the people. By displaying a kind of feigned enthusiasm, they deceive the people present, causing them to weep as if they were leading them to a mourning of repentance, shedding tears and lamenting the life of men with a certain theatrical gesture. Among them, women are bishops and women are presbyters, and they are admitted to the other orders, so that no distinction of sex is observed. For in Christ Jesus, there is neither male nor female. These are the things we have discovered about them. They also call them Artotyrites because, to celebrate their mysteries, they use both bread and cheese to perform their rituals.

III. But truly, once one has wandered from the sincere religion, it is inevitable that everything men perform becomes ridiculous and confused, so that various kinds of madness arise from it, as well as the influence of demons upon their bodies. For those who do not hold the anchor of truth, but yield themselves to the gusts of the wind on every occasion, their minds are swept away by a headlong madness. For as to the fact that they admit women to the order of bishops or presbyters, they claim to do this on account of Eve, while they hear what was said by the Lord: ^B Toward your husband shall be your turning, and he shall rule over you. But the apostolic word also escapes them: I do not permit a woman to speak, nor to have authority over a man; and again: For man is not from woman, but woman from man; and: Adam was not deceived, but the woman, having been deceived, was in transgression. Oh, the manifold error of this world!

Therefore, as something toothless and full of folly, having bypassed this heresy like a gecko, I shall proceed to what follows, O beloved, calling upon God for the aid of our humility and for the fulfillment of our promise.

AGAINST THE QUARTODECIMANS, Heresy XXX, or L.

^D 1. From these two heresies, both being mixed with one another, the Phrygian,

and the Quintillian or Priscillian sects, a certain new one was formed and introduced into the world: the heresy of the Quartodecimans. While they agree with the Church in other matters, they deviate from everyone in this very point, that they have embraced certain things not consistent with its institutions and doctrine; for they also persist in Jewish fables, though they do not hold equal or identical views with them. For what they say, they do not understand, nor do they know what they are affirming. ^A Indeed, once a year they stubbornly celebrate one day of Pascha. Although they retain a sincere opinion with Catholics concerning the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and they accept the prophets, apostles, and evangelists; and they likewise confess the resurrection of the flesh, and the future judgment, and eternal life; yet among these things they are afflicted by no small calamity, because they misunderstand that which is written in the Law: "Cursed is he who does not make the Pascha on the fourteenth day of the month." ^B There are some among them who, regarding the same single day, differ from those before them, and thus they will the more justly obtain the name Quartodecimans, than the latter ones, which once exercised the whole Church, but especially the Western Church. Those who followed this [view] did indeed celebrate Pascha on a Sunday; but if the fourteenth moon fell on that day, they did not postpone it to the twenty-first day according to the prescription of the Nicene synod, but celebrated the feast on the term itself. That this was held by many in Gaul long ago, in Spain, and especially in Britain, is testified by the writings of Bede, Sigebert, and others. See in particular Bede, *Ecclesiastical History*, bk. 1, ch. 3, and bk. 5, ch. 16; ^C then [see] what we have noted regarding Nicephorus a few years ago. The last error of the Latins concerning the celebration of Pascha arose because, while they observed the Nicene canon and the Catholic rule in other points, they nevertheless, by the Jewish rite, anticipating the near term of the first month, established the new moon on the 8th of March, and they had two common years, which the others called embolismic: namely, in the cycle of 8 and 19. Against these, and their standard-bearer Victorinus, Bede argues in more than one place. And although the 14th moon occasionally celebrated Pascha on a Sunday, they never did so before the equinox: which the Jews were accustomed to do, as will be said elsewhere. There were also other errors of the Quartodecimans. For among other things, they rejected the lapsed with Novatian, as Theodoret reports; which Socrates asserts of the solitary Asiatics in bk. 5, ch. 21, where he discourses at length on the rite of celebrating Pascha, and on the disagreement between the Asiatics and the Romans. ^D Other of them [celebrate] the same single day, differing not at all from the institution of the former; and yet the latter brought this forward as something different and disparate. Wherefore it must be seen whether those predecessors, who claimed to have discovered a certain day from the Acts of Pilate, observed the 14th moon, so much so that this mention of the 8th before the Kalends signifies no change in the calculation of the 14th moon, but contains only superfluous precision. It is also possible that they chose that 14th moon for the celebration of Pascha which was closer to the 8th before the Kalends of April; but the Cappadocians [celebrated] that same day fixed in the Julian year on the 8th before the Kalends of April.

^A And there is a dissension (9) among them that is not trivial, with some saying [it should be] on the fourteenth of the moon of the 8th before the Kalends of April. We also found transcripts from the Acts of Pilate, in which it is indicated that the Passion occurred on the 15th before the Kalends of April. But we determined, as we learned with great accuracy, that the Savior suffered on the 13th before the Kalends of April. Some, however, say on the 10th before the Kalends of April. These, too, have fallen away from the set subject. But I fear to prolong the discourse on these matters to too great an extent. For we have many things to say.

II. ^B For having fulfilled the entire Law, the lawgiver Moses, having received the matter from God, in the final book of Deuteronomy, that is to say, he sets forth all the curses, not only concerning Pascha, but also concerning circumcision, and concerning tithing, and offerings. Therefore, if they have escaped one curse, they have plunged themselves into many. For they will be found to be accursed, not being circumcised; accursed, not tithing; and they become accursed, not offering in Jerusalem. And oh, the many people who cast themselves into many contentions! ^C For truly it is possible to say that wise word of the Ecclesiastes, which was imparted to us from the Holy Spirit: that "This the Ecclesiastes knew, that God made the wise man upright; but they have sought out many paths for themselves."

Whence does the judgment of these men not err? For first, because they keep the Pascha on the fourteenth, they have need to take the sheep from the tenth, and to keep it until the fourteenth; and there will no longer be one day of fasting, but five: the tenth, and the eleventh, and the twelfth, and the thirteenth, and the fourteenth. But if it is sacrificed toward evening (10)

^A it is carried out over the days being assigned to fasting; and no longer is there one single day of fasting; and the question concerning one day among them—which is not one at all—falls away. For it holds the previous types joined together; and they have suffered no minor loss in the divine economy. For it was necessary for Christ to be sacrificed on the fourteenth day according to the Law, so that the light illuminating them according to the Law might cease among them, with the sun rising and covering the moon's radiance. For from the fourteenth day downward, the brightness of the moon wanes. Thus also in the Old Law, from the coming and passion of Christ, the Jewish synagogue was darkened, and the Gospel shone forth; yet the Law was not abolished, but fulfilled; nor was the figure rendered void, but it set forth the truth. For so also, at the performance of the Passover at Jericho, ^B the divine Scripture immediately added, saying: "And they ate in Gilgal, and the manna ceased." In these words, the divine Scriptures testified by prophecy to the very thing, that because of their denial of the Lord, the angelic and heavenly food which they called manna would cease among them at the Lord’s Passion.

III. Furthermore, the holy Church of God, gathering from every side the things necessary for the celebration of this mystery and bringing them into one, retains the truth. For it uses not only the fourteenth day, but also the week that revolves in the recurring order of the seven days of the Sabbath; so that according to those things done by the Lord according to the archetype, there might be both a resurrection and a feast. And it uses not only the fourteenth of the moon, but also the course of the sun, so that by making two Passovers in one year, we might not end up celebrating ^C no Passover at all in another year. Therefore, we observe the fourteenth day, but we pass beyond the equinox, and we bring the conclusion of the completion to the holy Lord’s Day; and we take the lamb from the tenth day, recognizing the name of Jesus through the *iota*; so that nothing might escape our diligence that appears to pertain to the ecclesiastical and genuine and life-saving celebration of the Pasch.

I will, however, pass by this pestilential breath of this toad, or rather this puffed-up serpent, having sealed these things through the power of Christ, and ^D directing my mind to the things that follow, while customarily calling upon God for help.

AGAINST THE HERESY

I. Following these, after the sects of the Cataphrygians, the Quintillianists, and those called the Quartodecimans, a new heresy sprang up in the world, like a weak serpent.

^A that cannot endure the scent of dittany, or of storax, or of frankincense, or of southernwood, or the smell of bitumen, or of incense, or of the gagates stone, or finally of a stag’s horn. For those who have become familiar with these things through experience say that these kinds are repellent to serpents and venomous creatures. And some say that dittany (dictamnum) is so named because those in the medical profession use it as a remedy for women in labor. Thus, it is fitting that we should liken it to the Word who came down from on high, God from the heavens, born of the Father timelessly and without beginning. For Solomon says regarding the foolish and base woman, that "she hates the word of safety." Just so, these men also have hated the solid words of the proclamation, being earthly and abhorring heavenly things. Hence, as they dread the voice of the Holy Spirit, which says: ^B "The voice of the Lord preparing the hinds," He who said to His own servants and apostles: "Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy." For this was the voice preparing the hinds, which was scattered throughout the world through the holy apostles and evangelists so that the hostile force and boldness of the devil might be trodden underfoot. But from the number of the apostles, John especially stood forth, who, setting his mind against them, repressed the power of these blind men, who were like serpents.

II. Yet such men have no strength against the ark. For holy Noah is permitted by the word of the Lord to secure it, as He says to him: "You shall coat it with ^C bitumen within and without," to show the form of the holy Church of God, which possesses the power of bitumen, by which the pernicious and death-dealing doctrines of serpents are repelled. For wherever bitumen is burned, no serpent lingers there. Indeed, they are even put to sleep by the holy scent of storax, and they flee from its smell, as they do from the power of southernwood, or frankincense, if it has been planted and grows above the serpent’s lair. For in those very places where Ebion and Cerinthus and their followers dared to assert that Christ was a mere man and born from the union of both sexes—I mean in Asia—there the Holy Spirit raised up for the world this holy herb, or shrub, which has driven away the serpent ^D and shattered the tyrannical dominion of the devil. For there the blessed John, in his advanced age, was moved by the Holy Spirit to preach and to call back those who had wandered from the path, not that he might compel them by force and necessity, but that he might induce them freely and willingly, and afterwards reveal to those who were persuaded the divine light of heavenly doctrine.

But why do I debate this matter at length? For whoever dwells long in a place where southernwood grows, there no serpent will remain or make its lair. So where the true doctrine of God is, no hiding-place of venomous doctrine will have any power, but it will be utterly destroyed.

^C III. Such, then, is the opinion of the Alogi; for this is the name I bestow upon them. Henceforth they shall be called thus; and so, beloved, let us give them a name, that is to say, Alogi [alogoi]. For they had a heresy, as it is called, which discarded the books of John. Since, therefore, they do not accept the Word [Logos] preached by John, they shall be called Alogi. As total strangers, then, to the preaching of the truth, they deny the purity of the proclamation, and accept neither the Gospel of John nor his Apocalypse. ^B And if they accepted the Gospel, but rejected the Apocalypse, one might say that they were doing this perhaps with subtle and careful judgment, not accepting it as an apocryphal work, because of the things spoken deeply and obscurely in the Apocalypse; but since by their nature they do not accept the books preached by the holy John, it is clear to everyone that these are the very people, and ones like them, of whom the holy John spoke in the Catholic Epistles: *It is the last hour, and you have heard that Antichrist is coming; and now there are many antichrists*, and so on. For these people offer excuses, being ashamed to contradict the holy John because they know that he was numbered among the apostles and was beloved by the Lord; he who worthily revealed the mysteries and reclined upon the breast of the Lord. And so they attempt to refute them in another way. They say that these are not the works of John, but of Cerinthus, and they claim that they are not worthy to be in the Church.

^C IV. But they are refuted by the very beginning of their attempt, neither understanding what they say, nor of whom they affirm it. For how can those things be of Cerinthus, which are especially repugnant to Cerinthus? For Cerinthus asserts that Christ was a simple man, recently born. Whereas John proclaims that the Word was always [present], and came from above, and became flesh. Therefore, from this very introduction, their foolish calumny is exposed as mere stupidity, for they do not understand whence they are being refuted. For they themselves also seem to believe the same things as we do; yet, not holding fast to the secure teachings provided to us by God through the holy John, they will be found to be refuted in those things of which they are ignorant, and how they are puffed up with a knowledge according to the truth. And if they would desire to recover and consider [the matter], they would know. For we would not discard the teachings from the Holy Spirit that are worthily and securely established. For they argue against themselves—for I would not say against the truth—that his books do not agree with the other apostles. And they proceed to lay hold of the holy and

^A divine doctrine of his and argue against it. For, they say, what did he write? "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God," and likewise: "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us; and we saw his glory, glory as of the Only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." And immediately: "John bears witness, and cries out, saying, This is he of whom I spoke to you." And: "This is the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world." Then he writes thus: "And they who heard said to him: Rabbi, where do you stay?" Afterward: "The next day, he says, he wished to go forth into Galilee, and he finds Philip, and Jesus says to him: Follow me." And shortly after this he says: "And after three days there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and Jesus and his disciples were called to the marriage, and his mother was there."

But the other evangelists relate that he spent forty days in ^B the desert, being tempted by the devil, and only then returned and chose his disciples. And those men, in their ignorance, do not perceive that it has been the study of each evangelist to proclaim, in harmony with the others, the things already spoken by them, but also to reveal those things which had been passed over by them. For it was not a matter of their own will, but their teaching and the sequence of their writing proceeded from the Holy Spirit. If they wish to find fault with this, let them learn that the other three did not begin from that same sequence. For Matthew is the first to begin to proclaim the Gospel. For to him was the task committed to preach the Gospel from the beginning, as we have also spoken at length regarding this in another heresy; nor will it trouble us to discuss the same things again here, for the sake of the demonstration of the truth and the refutation of those who are misled.

^C V. This Matthew, therefore, is deemed worthy of the Gospel, as I have said; and most rightly so. For it was fitting that the man who had turned from many sins and had arisen from the toll-booth to Him who came for the salvation of the human race, and who said, "I came not to call the just, but sinners to repentance," should be appointed—as an example to us who are to be saved—to the task of preaching salvation, he who had specifically been drawn from the toll-booth and had turned back from injustice, so that through him men might learn of the philanthropy of His coming. For after the forgiveness of his sins, He granted him also the resurrection of the dead, ^D and the cleansing of leprosy, and the powers of healing, and the casting out of demons, so that he might persuade those who hear not only by word, but also by the work itself.

^A (18) To the lost, that they shall be found through repentance; and to the fallen, that they shall arise; and to the dead, that they shall be revived. 426 And so this Matthew writes and preaches the Gospel in the Hebrew language. And he does not begin from the beginning, but relates the genealogy from Abraham. Abraham, he says, begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob, and the rest [of the sequence], up to Joseph and Mary. And he sets [it] from the beginning, saying: The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David; then he says: the son of Abraham. Then, ^B coming to the matter itself that is sought, he says: Now the generation of Jesus Christ was in this wise: When his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph, being a just man, sought to put her away privily. And behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying: Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins. And this, he says, was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying: Behold, the Virgin shall be with child, and so forth. And Joseph, he says, being raised from sleep, did so. And he took unto him his wife; and knew her not ^C till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus. Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying: Where is he that is born King of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. Where, then, is the whole history of Zacharias? Where are those things which are narrated by Luke? Where is that vision of the angel? Where is the prophecy of John the Baptist? Where is the rebuke of Zacharias, that he could not speak until all things which had been spoken by the angel were fulfilled? Where are the words spoken by Gabriel to the Virgin? Where is that demonstration of the assurance—with which, ^D with prudence, Mary answered the angel herself—as she asked, saying: How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the pure and precise explanation, as he said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee?

VI. What then shall we say? Since Matthew did not proclaim the things spoken by Luke, are we to suppose that the holy Matthew is inconsistent with the truth? Or, on the contrary, that the holy Luke, in saying that Matthew did not write of these first events, did not tell the truth? Did not God distribute to each [evangelist], so that the four evangelists, being chosen to preach the Gospel, might find what each should accomplish? And [that] they might preach in agreement and equality, so that it might be shown that

^A they have sprung from the same fountain; but that which was received by each, another should recount, he who had received from the Spirit a portion of the analogy. What, then, shall we do, when Matthew preaches that Mary gave birth in Bethlehem, according to the genealogies set down by him, from Abraham and David, the incarnate presence of Christ, while holy Mark is not found saying these things, but takes his introduction to the Gospel from the ministry at the Jordan, and says: "The beginning of the Gospel, as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: The voice of one crying in the wilderness"? Thus also with those things dealt with by holy John, and secured in the Holy Spirit, he took care to speak not only of those things already preached many times, but of those necessary things omitted by the others in their own preaching. For the entire subject matter of the Gospels followed such a plan.

^B For since Matthew preached Christ as born, and conceived of the Holy Spirit, and, according to the flesh, as having been placed under the dispensation from the seed of David and Abraham, this has been an occasion of error for some who did not understand; not because the Gospel itself is the cause of their being led astray, but because their own mind, having been led astray, contrived those things from the Gospel with a wicked suspicion in order to set forth their own understanding of those same things. For from this, those around Cerinthus and Ebion held that he was a mere man, as did Merinthus, and Cleobius, or Cleobulus, and Claudius, and Demas, and Hermogenes, who loved the present age and abandoned the way of truth. For as they contradicted the disciples of the Lord at that time, they attempted to prove their own folly from the genealogy of Abraham and David; not thinking rightly, yet hunting for a pretext from this point. For they were often contradicted by the holy John and those around him, by Lucius, and many others. But shamelessness, having rubbed its own forehead, was ambitious to draw down evils upon itself.

Immediately after Matthew ^C, there followed

Mark, who was ^A a companion of Saint Peter in Rome, and was entrusted with the publication of the Gospel. And when he had done this, he was sent by Saint Peter to the region of Egypt. This man was one of the seventy-two disciples who were dispersed because of that saying which the Lord had uttered: *Unless anyone eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, he is not worthy of me* (John VI, 54), as those who have read the Gospels clearly understand. However, through Peter he returned, and was deemed worthy to preach the Gospel, being filled with the Holy Spirit. He begins to preach from where the Spirit enjoined him, setting the start from the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, thirty years after the account of Matthew. But since he was the second writer of a Gospel, and did not signify clearly concerning the descent of the Word of God from heaven—although he declared it expressly—yet because he had treated it less accurately, hence new darknesses arose in the minds of those whom I mentioned a little before, lest that evangelical splendor should illuminate them. For thus they boasted: "Behold, a new Gospel is produced for you concerning Christ, in which there is no mention of that heavenly generation; but it records only this: *In the Jordan the Spirit descended upon him, and a voice: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased* (Mark I, 10, 11)." ^B

VII. Since, therefore, such incredible madness was prevailing among them in these matters, the Holy Spirit compels and pricks on Saint Luke, so that he might lead the minds of these blind men out of that deepest abyss, and commit to writing things that had been omitted by others, lest anyone—straying too far from the truth—should believe that the generation of Christ had been proposed by him as a fictitious fable. But he subsequently raises his discourse higher, ^C and since he sets forth everything more subtly, he accurately pursues the series of events, and to create belief in the truth, he brings forward those as witnesses who had been ministers of the divine word. For thus he speaks: *Forasmuch as many have taken in hand* (that he might indicate some who had taken this in hand, namely Cerinthus, Merinthus, and others). He proceeds indeed: *It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus* (Luke I, 3 sqq.)—whether, writing this, he meant a certain Theophilus, or addresses any lover of God—*of those things,* he says, *wherein thou hast been instructed, the certainty.* Here he signifies that some instruction had preceded, by which he had already been imbued by others; but that he had received nothing certain from them. After these things, he exposes the truth of the matter: *There was in the days of Herod the king, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia* (Luke I, 5): and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, whose name was Elizabeth. And he begins from... ^D

a point higher than Matthew did. For Matthew declared the thirtieth year of his age at the beginning. Mark, truly, set forth those events which happened after the thirtieth year; and in those which occurred at the Jordan, he is in agreement with Matthew and Luke. But Matthew began his narrative from the thirtieth year itself, before that whole history of the baptism and the events at the Jordan. Luke, moreover, took his beginning from the sixth month before the conception of the Savior in the womb; to which he then adds nine months, along with the few days in which he was born, so that the span of thirty-one years and more is collected. ^A He recounts, furthermore, how the shepherds, admonished by the angel messengers, beheld God; and how he was born in Bethlehem, and wrapped in swaddling clothes in a manger, and circumcised on the eighth day; and how, after forty days, they performed for him the offerings which the law had prescribed; and how Simeon received him in his arms; and how Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, made open confession; and how he went from Nazareth to Jerusalem with his parents, who paid for him what the law had commanded. None of these things has Matthew, nor Mark, nor John worked out ^B in their accounts.

VIII. From which it has come to pass that certain Gentile philosophers—I mean Porphyry, and Celsus, and Philosabbathius, a man sprung from the Jews, a crafty and most wicked serpent—when they wrote against the evangelical history, accused the holy evangelists; being carnal and animal men, and warring according to the flesh, who could neither please God nor had they known the things of the Holy Spirit. For all of them, stumbling at the words of truth through the blindness of their ignorance, and falling into such error, were wont to boast repeatedly: ^C "Can it be that the same day saw him born in Bethlehem, and—as was the custom to be done after eight days—circumcised, and after forty days carried to Jerusalem; and that those acts of Simeon and Anna occurred on that same day, especially when on the very night that Jesus was brought into the light, an angel appeared to Joseph after the arrival of the Magi, who had come for the sake of worshipping him, and who had offered their gifts from opened purses? For then, he says, the angel appeared to him, saying: 'Arise, and take the child and thy wife, and go into Egypt; for Herod seeketh the life of the child.' ^D If, therefore, he was carried into Egypt on the same night that he was born, and was there until Herod died, how could he have remained in Judea and been circumcised on the eighth day? Or what, then, is this that Luke has lied about after the forty days?" (For thus, through their utmost blasphemy, they raise an objection which turns back upon their own heads.) "For on the fortieth day (says Luke) they brought him into Jerusalem, and thence to Nazareth." But these men, being ignorant, do not in any way understand what the power of the Holy Spirit is.

^A IX. For it was granted to each of the evangelists to describe most truthfully the things that were fulfilled at each of their respective times and opportunities. Therefore, Matthew, having set forth only that he was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born without the seed of man, said nothing about the circumcision, nor did he touch upon any of the things that happened before the two years; but he narrated the arrival of the Magi at long last, as the true word of God testifies 1, when Herod inquired of the Magi concerning the time. And the time of the star’s appearance was ascertained, and the answer of the Magi was that it was from two years and under; so that this time was not the same as that which was dealt with by Luke. But Luke narrates the things before the two years; and Matthew, having mentioned the birth, leaped to the two-year period, and made clear the things that happened after two years. ^B Wherefore Herod also, having pondered this after the Magi had departed by another way, thought that that child who had been born would be found in the multitude of children and be killed with them. For he ordered all the infants, as many as were in the territory of Bethlehem, to be killed, from two years old and under, up to that very day on which the Magi had been with him.

From which, who does not see that when the Magi came, the child was two years old? Since the narrative of these events demonstrates the truth itself most accurately. For Luke writes that the child, as soon as he was born, was wrapped in swaddling clothes and lay in a manger and a cave, because there was no place in the inn. For a census was being held then; ^C and those who had been dispersed during the times of the wars that existed under the Maccabees had traveled to every part of the world, so that very few indeed remained living in Bethlehem. Therefore, in one copy of the evangelists it is called the city of David; but in another it is called a village, because it had a very narrow territory. When, therefore, the edict of the emperor Augustus was brought, those who had been scattered here and there were compelled to come to that place with their families for the sake of being enrolled, and they easily filled it, so that because of the crowd of people, nothing was left in the inn. But after the census, each one returned to where he had placed his dwelling. Whence there was more space for living. And so, the first year now being finished, and a second one in addition, because of the memory of those things that had taken place there, ^D from hence to whom is it not evident (25) that when the Magi came, the child was two years old? For the account itself explains the whole matter with complete precision. For Luke says that the child was swaddled immediately upon being born and laid in a manger and in a cave, because there was no place in the inn; for a census was taking place then. And those who had been scattered from the time of the wars that occurred in the time of the Maccabees had been scattered to all parts of the world, and very few remained living in Bethlehem. Therefore, in one manuscript of the evangelists, it is called the city of David; but in another they call it a village, because it had come to have a small expanse of land. But when the command of King Augustus had occurred, and they had a necessity, both those who were dispersed (26) and their families, they came to the place in order to be enrolled, and the multitudes flowing in filled the place, and there was no room in the inn because of the congestion. But after the census, each departed to where he had his permanent place of residence. And so there was space in the land. And as they came, so to speak (27), for the sake of remembrance

the arrival of the Magi occurred at just such a juncture. Perhaps they were no longer in the same lodging where Luke testifies that Mary and Joseph stayed at the time of the census. For they did not find Mary in the cave where she had given birth, but as the Gospel relates, the star, it says, led them to the place where the child was. And entering the house, they found the child with Mary, no longer in a manger, no longer in a cave, but in a house; so that the precision of the truth might be known, and the interval of two years, that is, from the time he was born until the Magi arrived, might be expressed. And on that very night, after two years had passed from the birth, the angel appeared and told him to take the child and his mother to the land of Egypt. Therefore, Joseph does not return to Nazareth, but flees with the child and his mother to Egypt, and spends another two years there; and thus again, after the death of Herod, the angel returns him to Judea.

^B In the thirty-third year of Herod the Lord is born; in the thirty-fifth the Magi came; in the thirty-seventh year Herod dies; and his son Archelaus succeeds to the kingdom, having reigned for nine years, as I have stated in other places. He withdrew, therefore, having heard about Archelaus, and went and dwelt in Nazareth. And from there he used to go up again each year to Jerusalem. Do you see how much precision there is in the holy Gospels regarding every matter? But those who are carried along by ignorance, having darkened their own mind, do not know the import of each narrative; but they simply lift up their mouths against the holy things and loosen their tongues, saying nothing in truth, but estranging themselves from life.

Hence, therefore, Luke, after having narrated the first things, again says how in the twelfth year he went up to Jerusalem; so that he might not leave any room for those who supposed him to have appeared in the world simply as a perfect man of full age, and to have come to the Jordan to John; as was claimed by Cerinthus, and Ebion, and the others. ^C For the crafty serpent, moving in crooked ways, does not stand in one opinion; but to some it seems he was born from the intercourse and seed of a man, and to others that he simply appeared as a man. Therefore, the holy evangelists, describing everything in minute detail, are precise. And by nature Luke, as if tracing the reasoning from below to the things above, says: Now

^A Jesus was about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph. But this "being supposed" is not the truth; for Joseph was a father in rank, because it had so pleased God; yet he was not a father, since he had not had intercourse with Mary, but was only called her husband because he had become betrothed to her—an old man, of eighty years or so, having six children from his first wife, as I have discussed more fully elsewhere concerning this matter. How, then, could he who had no union be his father? This is entirely impossible.

^B XI. But you will say to me: How then was he called her husband, if he did not possess her? He who doubts these things is ignorant of what the Old Law ordained: for from the time a woman has been betrothed to a man, whether she be a virgin or still living in her father’s house, such a one is called a wife by name alone. For this reason the holy angel says: *Do not fear to take to you your wife* (Matt. I, 20). And that no one might think there is any delusion in the Gospels—for this mystery is astonishing, and the narrative is above human capacity; it is plain and enlightened only to the sons of the Holy Spirit—it says: *And Jesus himself was about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, of Heli, of Matthan* (Luke III, 23). And he traces the genealogy up to Abraham, from whence Matthew also began. But he goes beyond Noah and reaches Adam, in order to signify him who was formed first of all, and who was sought out through Him who came from his own substance—that is, from the holy Virgin Mary. For He came for the sake of him who was once formed, and those born from him who desire to inherit eternal life. And having passed beyond Adam, he says, *who was of God* (Luke III, 38).

^C From this, therefore, it was a manifestation that He was indeed the Son of God, yet through the seed of Adam, by continuous succession, He came appearing in the flesh. But those who were led astray did not obtain this light again. They spoke against the Word, deceiving themselves beyond the truth. They claimed, "Behold, a third Gospel, that according to Luke." For this was entrusted to Luke, who was himself one of the seventy-two of those who had been scattered by the word of the Savior, and who had been brought back again to the Lord by the holy Paul, and having been entrusted by him—[the text here reflects the Greek notation regarding Luke's commission to preach the Gospel; and he preaches first in Dalmatia and Gaul...].

to preach the Gospel; and he preaches first ^A in Dalmatia, and in Gaul, and in Italy, and in Macedonia. And the beginning was in Gaul; as the same Paul also says concerning some of his followers in his Epistles: "Crescens," he says, "in Gaul." For it must not be read "in Galatia," as some who have been led astray think, but "in Gaul."

XII. But I shall return to the subject proposed. For since Luke had brought the genealogies from the lower to the higher, and had succeeded in conveying the presence of the Word of God from above, and at the same time had become joined to His incarnate dispensation, so that he might turn those who had been led astray away from their error, they did not understand. Wherefore, the Holy Spirit later compels John, who was excusing himself from preaching the Gospel on account of reverence and humility due to his advanced age, being in the ninetieth year of his life, after his return from Patmos ^B—which happened while Claudius was Caesar—to set forth the Gospel after he had dwelt in Asia for many years. And there was no need for him to go into minute detail regarding the incarnate ministry; for that was already established. But he acted as one walking behind others, seeing them already ahead of him and having given themselves over to rougher paths, and errors, and thorny places, desiring to call them back to the straight way and to secure them by making a proclamation to them; and he said: "Why do you go astray? Where are you turning? Where are you wandering, Cerinthus, and Ebion, and the rest? It is not as you think. Indeed, Christ was born according to the flesh, that is clear. For behold, I myself confess that 'the Word became flesh.' But do not, from the time he became flesh, think that he only existed then. For He is not from the time of Mary only, just as each one of us exists from the time he is born; but before being born, [we] did not exist. But the holy Word of God, the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, is not from the time of Mary alone, nor from the time of Joseph alone, nor Eli, nor Levi, nor Zorobabel, nor Salathiel, nor Na- ^C than, nor David, nor from Jacob, nor from Isaac, nor from the time of Adam, nor...

[alt-version omitted]

^D Crescens, he says, in Gaul. For it is commonly "in Galatia." Which is the most ancient and certain reading, whatever Epiphanius may assert. Which both Eusebius in Book III of his *History*, ch. 4, and Chrysostom, Ambrose, Theodoret, and all the Greeks and Latins recognize. Although there are not wanting those who understand "Galliam" in Paul as "Galatia," like Theodoret. But that Crescens was apostle both to the Gauls and to Galatia, Ado testifies in his *Martyrology* on the 5th of the Kalends of July in his *Chronicle*, as does the new *Roman Martyrology*. For ancient texts only mention Galatia. And certainly it can be doubted whether not only Crescens, but even anyone else in those times brought the light of the Gospel to the Gauls.

...that he wrote the Gospel on Patmos; but at Ephesus. Nor indeed under Claudius, but under Nerva Cocceius he returned from exile, although he asserts he was recalled later under Claudius.

^A nor from David, nor from Jacob, nor from Isaac, nor from the times of Adam, nor Noah, nor Abraham, nor from the fifth day, nor from the fourth day, nor from the third, nor from the second, nor from the time when the heaven and earth were created, nor from the time when the world began; but: *In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made by him, and without him was made nothing that was made*, and the rest. *And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw it.* Then: *There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a testimony, to give testimony of the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but was to give testimony of the light. That was the true light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world.* He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, ^B he gave them power to be made the sons of God; who were born, not of blood and flesh, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, he says, and dwelt among us. John bears witness, and cries out, saying: *This was he of whom I spoke: and of his fulness we all have received.* And he says: *I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying in the wilderness.*

XIII. These things being set forth, he proceeds as follows: *These things were done in Bethabara.* In other copies it is: *Bethania, beyond the Jordan.* After these things, he shows that the disciples of John asked him: *Rabbi, where dwellest thou?* And he said to them: *Come, and see.* And they went, and stayed with him that day. And on the next day, it was about the tenth hour; and Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two who had followed him. He first finds his own brother Simon, and says to him: *We have found the Messias, which is interpreted Christ.* This man brought him to Jesus. And Jesus looking upon him, said: ^C *Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter.* On the following day he wished to go into Galilee, and he finds Philip, and Jesus says to him: *Follow me.* Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. Philip finds Nathanael, and says to him: *We have found Jesus the son of Joseph from Nazareth, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write.* And Nathanael said to him: *Can anything of good come from Nazareth?* Philip says to him: *Come, and see.* Jesus seeing Nathanael coming to him, says of him: *Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile.* Nathanael says to him: *Whence knowest thou me?* Jesus answered, and said to him: *Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.* Nathanael answered him, and said: *Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou art the king of Israel.* Jesus answered, and said to him: *Because I said unto thee: I saw thee under the fig tree, ^D thou believest? Greater things than these shalt thou see.* And he said to him: *Amen, amen I say to you, you shall see*

the heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.* And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee, and so forth. ^B

That he might show that, after the forty days of temptation, and after his return from that very temptation, and his movement toward Nazareth and Galilee, as the other three evangelists have said, he came again to the Jordan; as will be shown from the discourse of John, who says: *The next day he saw him coming, and said: Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world.* And again: *The other day, when he saw him walking, he said: This is he of whom I said to you: After me cometh a man who is preferred before me, because he was before me.* And John, he says, bore witness, saying: *That I saw the Spirit coming down as a dove, and remaining upon him.* And the fact that he bore witness, and that *This is he of whom I said to you*, uses this wording to signify different times, so as to demonstrate that it is not the same time as the baptism, but a different one. For he did not come to John immediately after the temptation; but first he went into Galilee, and then from Galilee to the Jordan, which is to say, to John. Wherefore he says: *This is he of whom I said to you.* And since the Gospel says: *And John bore witness: That I saw*; it declares that this happened some time before the event.

^C XIV. After this, the beginning of the calling of those around Peter from Andrew is indicated. For Andrew went up to him—one of the two who had followed him, who were disciples of John, and were still remaining in Galilee, studying under John for a time. And as soon as Andrew had remained that day (it was about the tenth hour), it happened that on that same day he met his own brother Simon, and told him—

^A that which we mentioned a little earlier: We have found the Messiah; and so he led him to the Lord, and the rest. And as the sequence of events has it, he said to him: You shall be called Cephas. And on the morrow he desired, he says, to go out into Galilee, and he finds Philip, and Jesus says to him: Follow me. Now Philip was from Bethsaida, of the city of Andrew and Peter. And you see that he allows us to consider that, of the two who had followed—being disciples of John, of one of whom he mentioned the name, that he was Andrew, but of the other he did not—we might understand this one, whose name he did not mention, to be Philip, on account of their being from the same region, sharing the same tent, practicing the same craft, and being fellow workers; or perhaps it was John, or James, one of the sons of Zebedee. For it was fitting that these should be called first, and then Philip, in the order in which they are enumerated in the Gospels: Peter first, then Andrew, then James, then John, and after these, Philip. But let these things be passed over for now; for the sequence of this treatise is great.

XV. We must return to the question at hand, which serves to show that, just as they were already being discipled under John and were attending to his instruction, and having in the same way spent the first day with Jesus, they then departed on the next day and returned again to fishing, as the accounts of the other Evangelists contain. ^B For after Jesus had departed on the following day, the account immediately adds: On the third day a marriage took place in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there. And Jesus also was invited, and his disciples, to the wedding. From the detailed words and sentiments on both sides, it is to be understood that Christ had taken other disciples with him as well, who had remained with him. Perhaps these were those around Nathanael, and Philip, and certain others. For those around Andrew had departed. But those who had remained with him were also invited ^C to the wedding. And after he had performed this first sign, he went down into the parts of Capharnaum and came to dwell there; and from then on he began to work other signs there: that he healed the man who had the withered hand. But he also saved the mother-in-law of Peter—who was from Bethsaida, but had married a woman from Capharnaum, though these towns were not far distant from each other—from a fever, and, having been healed, she served; so that this is the sequence of events. ^D And after these things he returned again to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. Then at last he read the book of Isaiah the prophet, having anticipated them further, and saying: You will surely tell me this proverb: Physician, heal—

^A yourself. Whatever we have heard as having occurred in Capharnaum, do here also in your own country. And do you see how there is a sequence of truth? And he performed nothing, he says, because of their unbelief. And passing on from there, he went into the city of Capharnaum. And having come to the regions of the sea, as Matthew says, he saw Simon Peter and Andrew his brother casting nets; and again James and John, the sons of Zebedee, and he called them completely. And having cast aside their nets then, they followed him. Now Luke ^B indicates the precision of the matter, wherefore they followed him thereafter without turning back, no longer delaying the calling, having said that when he had come to the lake of Gennesaret, he saw Simon and Andrew mending their nets, and he went up into the boat, which was, he says, Peter's and Andrew's. This signifies that he was already known to them. Therefore, because of that familiarity, they received him; and having gone up, he sat down. Then after the teaching, he says to Peter: Put out into the deep, and let down your nets. But they said: Master. For already, because of the testimony of John, those who had heard him before were calling him "Master," since they had heard from him first: Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world; and that they remained with him that day, and on the second day they went out.

Afterwards, when they were greatly amazed at the catch of fishes, and Peter was saying: Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord (perhaps he was also repenting because he had previously been called, and had returned to the fish and to the unemployment of fishing), the Lord said: Do not fear; encouraging him, not that he was rejected, but that he was able to hold to the calling. For, he says, from now on you will be catching men. At which time they signaled to their partners who ^C were in the other boat to come and assist them in hauling in the catch. For, as he says, they were partners with Simon, just as it has been explained above by me from this premise. Two did follow him, having heard from John, of whom one was Andrew. But we have considered in our own mind most appropriately that the other was perhaps one of the sons of Zebedee, because of the partnership in their craft and their communion. And then, after all these things, the four of them, having left behind their boats as well, followed him to the land, as the history of Luke holds. So that it is demonstrated completely that no crookedness or contradiction is found in the holy Gospels or among the holy evangelists, but all things are clear, provided one distinguishes the intervals of time. For from this point, the things concerning Peter and John ^D having then been joined and following him, it came to pass that he was teaching throughout all Galilee and in Judea. And as the [word] then was being spread abroad...

(39) From this point onwards, as Epiphanius says, it is brought about that the apostles, Peter, Andrew, and the others, who had been called shortly before and joined to him, set out to preach, even before John was cast into chains. Of which matter we shall treat later, as well as of the birth of Christ and the true year of his baptism and passion.

^A XVI. In the first place, if you take the computation of the Egyptian months, he was baptized on the twelfth of Athyr, which is the sixth day before the Ides of November, that is to say, sixty days before the day of the Epiphany, which is the day of his birth according to the flesh, as the testimony of the Gospel according to Luke has it, where it is written: *And Jesus himself was beginning to be about thirty years of age, being (as it was supposed) the son of Joseph.* For he was in actual fact twenty-nine years of age and ten months old when he came to baptism, so that he might be said to be of thirty years, though not yet complete. Hence it is written: *Beginning to be about thirty years of age.* Thereafter followed the forty days of temptation. Then there were more or less two weeks, which he spent at Nazareth after the temptation; then, with John, the first and second day; and after he departed from John, the same amount of time, when Andrew followed him together with his companion, and then Simon Peter. On the next day, as we have said, and as the order of the evangelical narrative requires, Philip was called, and Nathanael. On the third day thereafter, the marriage took place in Cana of Galilee, following those ^B two days mentioned before; and this was the first of all his signs, and the completion of thirty years from his birth and his appearance in the flesh. For on that very day on which he had been born according to the flesh, he is believed to have performed that first miracle of water turned into wine, when he had now finished thirty full years from his birth according to the flesh and his arrival: a point which we have often commemorated, and which the exact series of the Gospel narrative seems to demand that we should understand and receive in that manner. Now, after that first miracle, the other signs followed: and likewise the preaching of the heavenly doctrine, and other things of that kind which pertain to the singular humanity towards us, and to the showing forth and demonstrating of the miraculous power and doctrine of the Gospel. And since this has been stated by me not once but often, I am compelled to repeat it, on account of ^C blind men who, for the sake of asserting their infidelity, seize upon an occasion from every side to contradict both the Holy Spirit and the most consistent order of the Gospels.

XVII. For so clear and accurate a method overwhelms and removes all those who do not hesitate to fight against the Gospel, since it demonstrates the very thing; and it shows the beginnings of the other events following after baptism in this manner. Furthermore, the things that occurred after the baptism during those forty days of temptation in the desert were not passed over by John without the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, because they had been committed to memory by the three [other] evangelists before. Just as other evangelists thought other things should be passed over, because one relied upon another as if for support. Yet so, that from them all, the truth is collected ^D and brought together as one.

For immediately after the temptation, as I have said, He goes to Nazareth, and stays there, while no disciple is yet with Him. And from thence He departs to John; at which time Peter is called through the mediation of Andrew; then Philip, and through Philip, Nathanael. ^A And let no one, being doubtful of this, make a careful investigation, seeing that Andrew was the first to meet Jesus, and then Peter, and that he was called through him, and begin to be annoyed by this. For the meeting with Andrew was indeed the first, Peter being younger in his time of life. ^B For later again, when their complete renunciation of all things took place, it occurred through Peter; because he was the leader of his own brother; and furthermore, because God is He who knows the calls of the heart, and knowing who is worthy to be set in the first place, He chose Peter [(41)] to be the leader of His disciples, as it has been most clearly demonstrated. For afterward, when they had come to Him and remained for the first day, as I said, and on the second had traveled, and on the third day, the first miracle having been performed—some others being with Him, not Andrew, nor Peter, nor John, nor James—next, after He had gone into Capharnaum and gone up again into Nazareth, and from thence again to Capharnaum, and had performed a portion of the miracles, such as the healing of him who had the withered hand and of Peter’s mother-in-law, He went up again to Nazareth, and read the book of Isaiah, and went down again to Capharnaum; it was then that the perfect calling of those around Peter and John occurred. ^C And thus the whole sequence is consistent, with nothing contrary existing, but all the truth being most clearly evident, and proclaimed in truth. For the other [(42)] evangelists say that He went off as a fugitive from the face of Herod, and after the flight came and stayed in Nazareth. And after Nazareth, having received baptism, He went away into the desert. And after these things He returned. After having returned, He began to preach.

XVIII. But they say that the Gospel written in the name of John is false. For after saying, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us,” and a few other things, it says immediately, “A marriage took place in Cana of Galilee.” And they do not remember, those who summon this foolishness upon themselves, that John, after saying, “The Word became flesh,” says, “and dwelt among us,” which is to say that He became man; ^D and that He came to John the Baptist in the Jordan, and was baptized by him, John the evangelist testifying this after His return from the temptation; just as John the Baptist says that

^A He it is, of whom I spoke to you; and again, that "I saw the Holy Spirit descending in the form of a dove, and remaining upon Him"; and, "This is He who takes away the sin of the world." You see, therefore, that nothing has been passed over through forgetfulness, but only those things have been omitted which Matthew had already expounded. Since there was no longer need for those, he had to bring forward that divine utterance by which the error of those might be cut down, who believe that Christ was called [Christ] only from Mary and from that time forward, and who say that the Son of God was a mere man, and that He progressed by certain advances and increments until He obtained the name of the Son of God. For this reason, John thought that he must take upon himself that part which seemed necessary; for although all things are great and necessary, he was nevertheless most intent upon explaining divine matters and that heavenly administration. Therefore, those who, on the ground that it does not quite agree with the others, repudiate the Gospel according to John and do not admit it, are in the greatest error and are wandering in the blindness of their mind.

^B XIX. For this most holy evangelist, though fourth in order and succession, and though he was the first of all in the time of his writing, was unwilling to repeat those works of others which had already been clearly set forth before him; but he placed before them those things which had not yet been spoken. For Matthew, having made his beginning of writing from Abraham, having passed over the infancy of Christ and the second year from His birth, again makes his narrative. Mark, however, commences from the fifteenth year of Tiberius, having circumscribed the events of the intervening time. Luke, however, tracing these things from a higher source, began from the time which preceded the birth of Christ, and set forth both his and John's conception in the womb of Mary and Elizabeth. Finally, John, coming last, draws his narrative from the highest point of all, and sets out to establish and strengthen those things which are prior to that temporal generation of Christ. ^C For the things he committed to memory are for the most part spiritual, since those things which pertained to the body had been abundantly corroborated by the writings of others. Wherefore he undertakes a spiritual narrative concerning that divine gift, which, lacking any beginning, was infused into us from the heavenly Father, and, by the counsel and will of the Father, descended into the Blessed Virgin, and in her virginal womb was united with flesh. The others, moreover, spoke things consistent with these, looking chiefly to that which was necessary. But John had regard for the purpose he had set for himself. Thus it happens that from the four Gospels a precise and most certain truth concerning those things which pertain to the flesh and divinity of Christ is established for us.

XX. For when He had completed the whole business of the baptism and the temptation, He came, and having joined the disciples to Himself, He performed that first miracle in Cana of Galilee on the third day after He had begun to preach. ^D For Christ is not said to have attended the marriage before the temptation; nor did He perform any miracle at all before that time, unless perhaps those which it is said He performed in His childhood, which I see are affirmed by some. And yet, that He offered some proofs of His childhood age...

^A was necessary, so that no occasion might be given to other heresies, which claim that Christ descended to the Jordan and entered into Him in the form of a dove.

Wherefore, in His twelfth year, Luke clearly showed this, that while He was disputing with the priests and elders, He said to Mary: "Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?" in order to refute the argument of those who think that the Holy Spirit descended upon Him only from the time that He was baptized; and, on the contrary, that men might understand that the Word Himself, descending from heaven, took flesh from Mary, and that when He reached the Jordan, the Holy Spirit poured Himself into Him: so that this might also be made clear, who He was of whom the Father gave such distinguished testimony: "This is my beloved Son; listen to Him." Moreover, He willed this further to be an example and a proof for those who were to be illumined by the divine light through Him; specifically that they too would inevitably obtain the Holy Spirit, as well as the heavenly benefit, the forgiveness of sins, and the grace communicated by Him in baptism.

XXI. But when He began to perform the greater and more perfect miracles in the time of His preaching, this, he says, is the "first sign" that Jesus performed in Cana of Galilee.

Those things which were done then, when after the temptation and having crossed the Jordan, He turned His course toward His own country—to Nazareth, that is, where He had been raised by His mother. Where, having stayed for ^C two days, He began, inflamed by the zeal and care for human salvation, to undertake the office of preaching. Staying there, therefore, for two days, because He had returned after a long interval, and accompanied by some of the disciples whom He had already taken to Himself, having dismissed the two who had followed Him, He immediately set out for Galilee for the sake of preaching, and to perform that miracle which we read was accomplished at the wedding. For see with what circumspection Scripture declared this very thing, just as John the Baptist testifies as if the matter were already concluded, with these words: "And I did not know Him; but He who sent me to baptize said to me: Upon ^D

^A whom you see the Spirit descending in the form of a dove and remaining on Him, this is He." For the Father, sending John to baptize, had bestowed this sign upon him, so that when he saw it, he might recognize the One sent from above into this world, the Savior and benefactor of our souls. Those, therefore, who hold such views are refuted by the truth of such Scriptures and by their precision, especially by the harmony of the four Evangelists. For no person of sound mind would cast away that which has been most accurately and perfectly treated ^B by the Holy Spirit in the holy Gospels.

XXII. They also bring charges again [(44)] against the same holy Evangelist, or rather against the Gospel itself, claiming, as they say, that John spoke of two Passovers observed by the Savior, while the other Evangelists mentioned only one. And these ignorant people do not know that the Gospels acknowledge not only two Passovers, but speak of two as the first ones, and including the one in which the Savior suffered, [they account for] three Passovers during the time of His preaching. For immediately from the Jordan, as Luke says, Jesus was beginning to be about thirty years old, being the son, as was supposed, of Joseph, ^C of Eli, and so on. For the Savior was born in the forty-second year of Caesar Augustus, Emperor of the Romans; which was the twenty-ninth year of the Roman relation to the Jews. For Augustus reigned thirteen years before Judea was completely annexed to the Romans. And there was also, in the time of his reign, roughly speaking, a friendship between the Romans and the Jews, an embassy sent, a procurator appointed, and taxes collected for about five years, more or less, until Judea was completely surrendered and became fully subject to tribute; when the princes from the tribe of Judah had ceased ^D and Herod, a man from the nations—a proselyte, however—held the kingdom. Thereafter, Christ was born in Bethlehem of Judea, and came to begin the preaching when the Christ-leading princes, having lasted until Alexander, had ended.

[(44)] There is nothing in these books of more importance, and in the treatment of which Epiphanius has taken more effort and study, than in this question in which the year of the Lord’s birth and passion is investigated. Yet there is no place more obscure anywhere, nor one where a translator has less leave to equivocate or dissimulate. It is far from the case that he should fear being long-winded in explaining it, or feel the need to defend himself with the brevity of notes and annotations. And this question, since it exercises scholars just as much today as it did in those ancient times, has finally been brought to such a state that whoever has honestly confessed his own ignorance seeks a more honorable outcome than if he were to trust that he could hold something certain and tested. For to start from the ancients; before that common computation of Dionysius had spread, who allowed himself to be shut into a certain and established opinion? It is long and tedious to go through all the opinions of the ancient Fathers; and that has been done diligently by others, especially by our own Deker and by Joannes Kepler the mathematician, in that learned dissertation *De anno Natali*, and in the *Eclogae chronologicae*; to say nothing of the *Annals* of the most illustrious Baronius, and other chronographers. After such exquisite and exact work by all of them, it might seem superfluous for us to discuss more vehemently things which have been anxiously and accurately discussed by them, were it not that Epiphanius himself and the obligation of the task undertaken drove us to it, even against our will. It will be easy for the reader to follow this attempt and our labor, if he recognizes that my aim was this: to handle an almost infinite controversy, the most difficult of all by everyone's judgment, as briefly as such a great matter permits, and no longer than is necessary, but with the greatest ease; and to put forward what has been skillfully devised on this matter by ingenious and learned men, accumulated with some addition of our own. Wherefore the question to be discussed in this place will be two-fold: the one concerning the year itself in which Christ was born; the other, concerning the one in which He suffered. (Because what Petavius discussed here concerning the year of Christ's Nativity and the year in which He suffered is too long to have a place among the notes, we have sent them to the Appendix of the Dissertations which we have placed under the works of Epiphanius. Ed.)

which they indeed continued up to Alexander, and to Saalina, who is also called Alexandra. All these things took their beginning from the time when Christ was born in Bethlehem, in the forty-second year of the whole reign of Augustus, which was the ninth year from the procuratorship of Antipater, the father of Herod, ^A when there was friendship between the Romans and the Jews, and some tributes were paid, and it was already the fourth year since he had been appointed by Augustus. After the fourth year of Herod, and five years—more or less—of the procuratorship of Antipater his father, finally Judea was surrendered completely, until the thirty-third year of Herod, with the forty-second year of Augustus completed, when the whole of Judea was taken under control, as I have said, after it had been made tributary to the Romans for twenty-nine years, and after Antipater, the father of Herod, had served as procurator, and after him Herod had been appointed by Augustus as king over Judea.

^A These things were transacted in the consulship of Octavius Augustus for the thirteenth time, and Silanus; the consuls who followed them succeeded in this order:

I Lentulus and Piso for the second time, II Lucius Caesar and Paulus, III Vinducius and Varus, ^B IV Lamia and Servilius Nommius, V Magnus Pompeius and Valerius, VI Lepidus and Aruntius, VII Caesar and Capito, VIII Creticus and Nerva, IX Camillus and Quintillianus, X Camerinus and Sabinus, XI Dolabella and Silvanus, XII Lepidus and Taurus, XIII Flaccus and Silvanus, XIV The two Sexti, XV Pompeius Magnus and Apuleius, XVI Brutus and Flaccus, XVII Taurus and Libo, XVIII Crassus and Rufus, XIX Tiberius Caesar for the second time, and Drusus Germanicus for the second time, ^C XX Silanus and Balbus, XXI Messala and Gratus, XXII Tiberius Caesar for the third time, and Drusus Germanicus for the third time, XXIII Agrippa and Balbus, XXIV Pollio and Vetus, XXV Cethegus and Varus, XXVI Agrippa for the second time and Lentulus Galba, XXVII Getulicus and Sabinus, XXVIII Crassus and Piso, XXIX Silvanus and Nerva.

^D XXIII. You have here thirty full years. We have been diligent in enumerating these consulships one by one, so that readers may understand that there is nothing fabricated in the sacred doctrine of the truth, but that all things have been preached by the Church with the greatest accuracy. For who, turning his eyes to this series of consuls—which is most certain—will not condemn those who think there is any discrepancy in the number of years expressed by the Evangelists? It is for this reason, surely, that those earlier heresies collapsed, which had invented the fables of the thirty aeons, and had allegorically derived other things of that kind from the number of the thirty years of the Savior, in order that they might thereby be able [to explain the origin] of the aeons and princi-

thirty-third year of his incarnate presence—the Word of God, who is impassible from above, but who deigned to take on flesh for our sake, in order that he might blot out the handwriting of death against us. For after that consulate, in the thirtieth year signifying his life, another consulate occurred, known as that of the two Gemini; then another consulate of Rufus and Rubellio. And thus, as the consulate shifted—the one coming after the consulate of Rubellio, which later came to be called that of Vinicius and Longinus Cassius—the Savior suffered on the thirteenth day before the Kalends of April. And the error of all these men is refuted, clearly demonstrating the teaching that is in accordance with the truth: that not only a period of two Passovers is mentioned in the Gospels, but also [a period of] three.

XXIV. For he was born around the month of January—that is, on the eighth day before the Ides of January, which according to the Romans is the fifth of the month of January; according to the Egyptians, the eleventh of Tybi; ^B according to the Syrians, or Greeks, the sixth of Audynaeus; according to the Cyprians, or Salaminians, the fifth day of the fifth month; according to the Paphian, the fourteenth of Julius; according to the Arabs, the twenty-first of Aleom; according to the Cappadocians, the thirteenth of Arata; according to the Hebrews, the thirteenth of Tebeth; according to the Athenians, the fourth of Maimacterion—and he passed through the twenty-nine full consulates mentioned above. Then, in the thirtieth consulate, around the tenth month, he came to John and was baptized in the river Jordan in the thirtieth year of his incarnate birth—that is, according to the Egyptians, on the twelfth of Athyr, on the eighth day before the Ides of November; ^C according to the Greeks, the eighth of Dius; according to the Salaminians, who are also the Constantians, the sixth of the third Choeac; according to the Paphians, the sixteenth of Apogonicus; according to the Arabs, the twenty-second of Angallabaith; according to the Macedonians, the sixteenth of Apellaeus; according to the Cappadocians, the fifteenth of Aratata; according to the Athenians, the seventh of Metageitnion; according to the Hebrews, the seventh of Marchesvan; as the holy Gospel according to Luke testifies to my statement, saying in this way: *And Jesus was beginning to be about thirty years old, being the son, as was supposed, of Joseph.* And from then on, from the twelfth of Athyr, he preached the acceptable year of the Lord, according to those things previously stated by the prophet Isaiah: *The Spirit of the Lord is upon me; because he has anointed me; he has sent me to preach the gospel to the poor, to preach deliverance to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of return.*

XXV. For he truly preached an acceptable year—that is, ^D a year not gainsaid. For he spent the first year after the thirtieth year of his incarnate presence in preaching, and all received him; neither did the Jews resist, nor the Gentiles, nor the Samaritans, but all heard him gladly. In which year he went up to Jerusalem, after he had been baptized and had passed through the forty days of temptation, and had made a choice of his own disciples; and having returned from the temptation to the Jordan, and having crossed the Sea of Tiberias, he proceeded toward Nazareth and arrived at Jerusalem.

^A And in the midst of the feast he cried out, saying: If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. And thus he went away to Nazareth, and into Judea, and into Samaria, and into the regions of Tyre. And when the first year had been completed, he went up again to Jerusalem. And later they sought to take him at the feast, and they were afraid. At which feast he said that "I am not going up to this feast." For he did not lie, heaven forbid! For when the feast was halfway over, he came, he says, and went up to Jerusalem; and they were saying: Is this not he whom they were seeking to take? And lo, he speaks openly; have the priests truly learned that this is the Christ? But we know where this man is from. For because he spoke mystically and spiritually to his own brothers, they did not know what he was saying. ^B For he denied that he would go up into the temple or onto the cross on that feast day, so that he might perform the administration of his Passion and our salvation, and wake from the dead and fly up into heaven, all of which things he performed afterward by his own power and will. And after these things, as the two-year period after his baptism and his birth had been completed, from the month of November and from the month of January, and from the time beyond that, finally in the thirty-third year of his incarnate economy, after he had passed the two consulships which we mentioned, of both Geminus and of Rufus and Rubellio, finally in the third consulship, and in the third month thereof, after January and February, in the month of March, the Word—he who is without passion, having suffered in the flesh for our sake—consummates the mystery of the Passion. Yet he remains in impassibility, as Peter says: Put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit. ^C XXVI. He suffered on the thirteenth day before the Kalends of April, when they had anticipated by one evening, that is to say, on the fourteenth of the moon at the middle of the night. For they had anticipated and eaten the Passover, as the Gospel says, and as we have often related. They ate the Passover, therefore, two days before the eating, that is to say, on Tuesday evening, whereas it should have been on Thursday evening. For the fourteenth, in this way, fell on the Thursday. And he is seized on the same Tuesday evening, which was the eleventh of the moon at night, the sixteenth day before the Kalends of April; Wednesday, the twelfth at night, the fifteenth day before the Kalends of April; Thursday, the thirteenth by day, but the fourteenth at night, the fourteenth day before the Kalends of April; the Preparation (day), the fourteenth at night, the fourteenth day before the Kalends of April; ^D Saturday, the fifteenth at night, the twelfth day before the Kalends of April; finally Sunday dawned, which illumined the underworld, the earth, and the heaven with his light, because of the fifteenth day of the moon and the course of the sun. Then, because the resurrection and the equinox fall on the eleventh day before the Kalends of April. For which reasons, having been deceived, they passed by the legitimate time by one day, as we said before. For there remain from their reasonings some additional hours, which in every third year make the difference of one day among them.

^A For they add to the lunar cycle, after three hundred and fifty-four days, another four hours each year, so that in three years they amount to one day. For this reason, five intercalary months are completed among them in fourteen years, because one hour is taken away from the solar course of three hundred and sixty-five days and three hours. For when the hours are added, there remain three hundred and sixty-five days, less one hour. Whence they, having multiplied the fourteen years six times, so that eighty-four years arise, intercalate one month in the eighty-fifth year: by which it comes about that eighty-five years exhaust thirty-one months; whereas the accurate calculation requires, besides the thirty months, an additional twenty-four days and three hours.

XXVII. Since this had been the cause of error for them, not only did they disturb everything, ^B by anticipating the legitimate time of the Pasch by two days, but also, having exceeded it by one day, they entangled themselves in great errors. But through a wise moderation of the truth, it came about that all things were related most accurately for our salvation. Wherefore, after the Pasch was performed, the Savior withdrew to the mountain, having eaten this very Pasch, which he says he has desired to desire. Therefore, he ate the Jewish Pasch there with his disciples; nor did he perform it any otherwise, but in the exact same manner in which they performed it, so that he might not destroy the law, but fulfill it. And so, when he had already passed his thirtieth year and had approached the baptism, and after this same thirtieth year had completed that solid acceptable year, with no one contradicting, he soon added another, in which he also experienced the resisting Jews and was greatly harassed by their vexations and envy; and furthermore, he had already entered into the third year from the day on which he was born, that is, the Epiphany, which occurs on the sixth of the month of January—or the eleventh of Tybi among the Egyptians—and continued for a full seventy-four days, which, as has been said, end on the thirteenth before the Kalends of April, which is the twenty-fourth of Phamenoth among the Egyptians. In this way, I repeat, he completed thirty-two full years and seventy-four days besides from the Epiphany. Furthermore, he rose again, according to the counting of the Egyptians, on the twenty-sixth of Phamenoth, on the very day of the Equinox, or the eleventh before the Kalends of April. From which it is clear that they are not the children of the truth. ^C

XXVIII. Of these, Valentinus first meets us: who, from the number of thirty years, to which he supposes the age and virile strength of the Savior to have been brought, contrived his fable of thirty aeons. In this, reason flees him. For he did not live only thirty years, but was baptized in his thirtieth year, when he had already reached the tenth month past twenty-nine years. This day we defined before as the twelfth of the month of Athyr, the eighth before the Ides of November. After these points, when he had preached the acceptable year of the Lord, and another equally full of contradiction, and an additional seventy-four days filled with the same trouble, from the day on which he had once been baptized before his birthday; ^D all manifest lies are the works of those who are not the children of the truth.

^A and 132 days; and from the beginning of the consulship of Silvanus and Nerua, two years and 134 days. ^B And here the aforementioned Valentinus is refuted, as well as the many who share his folly. Those also are refuted who reject the Gospel according to John, whom I shall justly call irrational, since they reject the Word of God, who was preached through John, the ancestral God-Word, who has come down from heaven and has wrought salvation for us by the whole of His incarnate presence. For by the consulships, and the years, and the structural evidence of the prophet Isaiah, and from the Gospel according to Luke, and from that according to John, and from that according to Matthew, and from that according to Mark, and in a word, from every side, the misguided are refuted; for He not only fulfilled one Passover after the beginning of the preaching at the annual period of a year, but He even completed the periods of nearly three consulships after the baptism of John. And the argument of those who do not understand has utterly collapsed into error, and madness, and ignorance, which not only does not know its own life, but is also falsely and vainly arrayed against the truth.

XXIX. Of the birth of the Word of God in the forty-second year of Augustus

^C For we find it written somewhere in these accounts that the unbegotten Word of God from God was born around the fortieth year of Augustus; which escaped the notice of the writer, or, because the letter beta was erased and only the letter mu remained, they made it only forty years. For He was born in the forty-second year of Augustus. ^D He states, however, that it was twelve days before the Kalends of July or Ju-

[alt-version omitted]

July, I cannot say, in the consulship of Sulpicius Camerinus and Pompeius Vettius. ^A I pondered this, that those who state the day of the conception, and how Gabriel brought the good news to the Virgin, voiced the suspicion of some who argue in tradition that He was born after seven months. For we have found from this Proposon [(47)] [or, Propontis] until the eleventh of Tybi, and before the eight days of the Ides of January, when the Theophany truly happened, that He was born, a period of seven lunar months minus four days. ^B So therefore, if you should find it written anywhere in notes, do not be misled concerning this information. For the certain birth of Christ is indeed the eleventh of Tybi; but some say that He was carried in the womb for ten months minus fourteen days and eight hours, so that it is nine months and fifteen days and four hours, hinting at what is said by Solomon: *Coagulated in blood after the space of ten months.* Nevertheless, the aforementioned birth of the Lord in the flesh took place everywhere on the eleventh of Tybi according to the Egyptians. And around that same eleventh [(49)], after thirty years, the first miracle took place in Cana of Galilee, when the water was made wine.

[(47)] *We have found from this Proposon.* This is a most foul error, concerning which I would not wager a hair, nor will I begin to prognosticate. Although from the consequences it is possible to elicit what should have been written. For from the day which those men prefixed for this Nativity to the 6th day before the Ides of January, he says there are seven lunar months, less four days. ^C But six lunar months collect 177 days: to which 26 added make 203 days; which, subtracted from 371, leave 166 days. And so, on the 169th day from the Kalends of January, that is, the 14th day before the Kalends of July, they asserted that Christ was conceived, and 200 days later, or on the 6th of January, that He was born, those of whom Epiphanius speaks. And so this passage should have been understood: *from the days before the twelve Kalends of July.* Or because the day is the 24th of Epiphi, *from the 24th of Epiphi.* Cornarius seems to have read *before Piso*. Which is not to be disapproved of, so that it might perhaps be interpreted thus: *From the year of the consulship of Augustus and Plautius, and from the 14th of the Kalends of July of that year to the 11th of Tybi, when Lentulus and Piso were consuls, seven lunar months had intervened.*

[(48)] *But some say that He was carried for ten months.* If those who defend that opinion constitute the Nativity of the Lord on the 11th of Tybi, or the 6th of January, they must have placed His conception on the very Kalends of April. From which day to the 6th of January, nine months and fifteen days are counted, which are in total 281 days. ^D But if, according to the common opinion, they bring it to the 25th of December, the conception of Christ falls on the 20th of March. Epiphanius, however, held it as certain that Christ was born on the 6th of January, which was the opinion of the Egyptians. Although they seem to have doubted whether He was born on that day, as Cassian signifies in *Collation* x, cap. 2. Clement of Alexandria in *Stromata* i reports various opinions on that matter: such as those who said He was born on the 25th of Pachon, that is, the 20th of May; those of the Basilidians, who said the 15th of Tybi, or the 10th of January; or finally others who, like Epiphanius, the 11th of Tybi. But Clement himself counts from the Nativity of the Lord to the death of Commodus 194 years, 1 month, 11 days. And if that were true, the Nativity of Christ would correspond to the 22nd of Athyr, which is the 18th of November. For Commodus died in the 193rd year of the Dionysian era, on the day before the Kalends of January. Therefore Christ will have been born in the 42nd year of the Julian [era], on the 15th of November. But there is an ancient tradition, received by the whole Church, that Christ was born on the 25th of December; which no prudent man would rashly challenge. Wherefore Scaliger’s divination is ridiculous and to be rejected; he, in the *Appendix* of the work *De emendatione temporum*, and in *Isagoge* can. 3, asserts from the circle of ephemerides and priestly functions that the Nativity of Christ should be placed at the end of September. Which is a pure dream; nor does it rest on any demonstration, or any certain firmament: first because it is not yet sufficiently explored what the arrangement of the year and months was among the Jews; then neither is that certain, whether Judas Maccabeus, when he was restoring the sacrifices and the functions of the priests, restored the cycle of the ephemerides *anew and from the beginning*; or whether, after the interrupted *ephemeris*, he substituted that which was to succeed the prior one, under which the temple was violated by Antiochus. To this, Maccabees 1, cap. iv, verse 42, states that a selection of priests was made, namely of those who might be whole and immaculate, such as perhaps the priests of the first course were not. Finally, that Christ was baptized on the 24th of the Julian [era], or at the completion of 30 years, assumed by Scaliger, has not been demonstrated, as we have proven in its proper place. And if any defect appears in that, or if the circuit of the ephemerides seems to the admonishing [scholar] to be for the sake of eliciting the year of Christ, anyone can, by rights used and posited by some of the same things as Scaliger, lead that circle and circuit wherever he pleases; for Kepler also, from that same series, kept the Nativity of the Lord on the 25th day of December.

But to return to that which Epiphanius introduced, the reasoning of some who thought that Christ remained in the womb of His mother for fewer days from the tenth month, because it is written at Sap. vii, 2: *Coagulated in blood after ten months*, the Catholic Armenian used the same argument in the letter which Scaliger cites in *Isagoge* can. p. 301.

[(49)] *And around that same eleventh.* Since he thought that Christ was born on the 6th of January, and baptized on the 8th of November, it was easy for Epiphanius to assert that the first miracle of the changed water happened on the same day on which He was born. But since according to the agreement of the ancient Church, the Nativity of Christ is attributed not to the 6th of January but to the 25th of December, and the baptism to the 6th of January...

A. ^A For this reason, and in many places up to the present day, this miracle which once occurred is renewed, and the very fountains and rivers attest to this by being changed into wine in many places. There is a fountain in the city of Cibyra in Caria where, at the very hour when the ministers drew the water and the Savior said, "Give it to the master of the feast," it is turned into wine. The same thing happens in the fountain of Gerasa in Arabia. We have drunk from that fountain of Cibyra, and our brothers have drunk from the spring in Gerasa, which is in the Martyrium. Many also in Egypt attest to this regarding the Nile. This is why on the eleventh of Tybi, everyone in Egypt draws water and stores it in Egypt itself and in many regions. ^B For thus it is found, after the twelfth of Hathyr, that Christ departed, underwent temptation for forty days, came back, chose some of his disciples, and, after the forty days of temptation, began to preach. And when he had descended to the Jordan and had met those around Nathanael and had taken them with him—when they stayed with him for two days—and when they had departed and he himself had gone out to Galilee, the Gospel immediately mentions, because of the two days previously mentioned: "On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee." This was a symbol of the Church; for on the third day of his work in the heart of the earth, which he performed on earth, rising after the passion, he joined a wedding to Cana. For Cana is interpreted as "possessing." And who is she who possesses, if not the heir, of whom David spoke in the fifth psalm: "For her who inherits," and so forth?

For this wedding is truly blessed, having taken its occasion from that prototype. ^C For there, indeed, was a physical wedding in Cana of Galilee, and water was truly changed into wine; and it was called so in two ways, so that he might restrain the watery and wild lust of those in the world into the temperance and decency of marriage, and that the rest might be remedied into the joy of the pain-relieving wine and of grace; that in every way he might stop the mouths of those rising up against the Lord, and that he might show that he is God with the Father and his Holy Spirit, providing water to the vine, coloring it in it into wine, and the joy of men. In another place we shall narrate these things at greater length; here, however, I have run through this matter as if in a digression. But although two Passovers ^D cannot occur, so that he turned water into wine on the same day he was born or even the day he was baptized. Otherwise, it is most absurd to claim that the first miracle was performed by him a year after his baptism, when, as I have taught before, he had already begun his preaching. For this is manifestly repugnant to the gospel history; but much more so if we assign only three Passovers with the ancients. For this reason, this miracle happened on a different day than the sixth of January; even though the Church celebrates the day on which the baptism occurred. Concerning which see Perrerius, lib. xi, Comm. in Dan., and Baronius in the Annals.

elsewhere we have discussed. Here, however, we have touched upon this discourse as if digressing by the way. But in truth, after the beginning of the preaching, two Passovers were celebrated by Christ; then He suffered at the third, so that all those intervals of days, months, and consulships which I have commemorated are brought to completion. And thus the entire false reasoning of those people vanishes, since the Gospels so agree among themselves that no one may seem to differ from another.

XXXI. But to return now to where I had digressed, Luke writes that which serves to confirm the things which have been variously and manifoldly proposed by me: “It came to pass on the second-first Sabbath.” Wherefore the word indicates that the first Sabbath is that which had been established at the beginning, of which the ^B Lord spoke in the creation of the world, and which from that time forward had arrived at that day by the circuit and revolution of seven days. But the second is that other one established by the law. For so we read that it was decreed: “You shall take for yourself a yearling lamb, unblemished, male (which was a figure of the Savior), from the tenth of the month. And it shall be kept until the fourteenth; and you shall sacrifice it at evening on the fourteenth day. And the Sabbath day shall be a holy day to you. And you shall eat unleavened bread for seven days; and on the seventh day you shall make a holy Sabbath, a holy day.” In this it is permitted to observe how, just as the Sabbath second from the former is called that holy Parasceve, which is consecrated unto the Sabbath, whether it be the Lord’s day, or the second, or the third feria. Yet this very second one, when the orb of seven days has revolved, is called the first. So that this may even serve as an argument, that not only John, but also Luke and the others, make mention of a two-year period, as well as three celebrations of the Passover. For thus indeed the Law prescribes: “You shall count for yourself seven hebdomads, from the day in which you offered the sheaf, from the day that you put the sickle to the grain; and you shall celebrate the seventh hebdomad as a feast day to the Lord your God.”

^A at the beginning of the preaching the Savior acts, and at the third Passover; so that those things already spoken of in detail concerning days, and months, and consulships, are fulfilled. And from every side the discourse concerning these things, which was led astray, has fallen, since the Gospels are in agreement with one another, and neither of the Gospels has anything contrary against the other.

AA’. I shall come again to what is proposed. Luke says again, testifying to me regarding the things spoken of in many ^B parts and in many ways, that: “It came to pass on a second-first Sabbath.” In order to show that the first Sabbath is that which was appointed and spoken of by the Lord from the beginning in the creation of the world, according to a period from that time until here, revolving by seven days, this is the first. But the second Sabbath is that ^C which is appointed by the Law. For he says: “Take for yourself a yearling lamb, unblemished, male (which was a figure of the Savior), from the tenth of the month. And it shall be kept until the fourteenth; and you shall sacrifice it at evening on the fourteenth day. And the Sabbath day shall be a holy day to you, and you shall eat unleavened bread for seven days; and on the seventh day you shall make a holy Sabbath, a holy day.” And see, that after the Sabbath, such a holy day of the Pro-Sabbath is called second, having been sanctified into a Sabbath, whether it be the Lord’s day, or the second, or the third day. But again revolving into seven days, the second is called first; in order to show from this, that not only did John signify concerning a period of two years of days and three feasts of the Passover, but also Luke and the others. For ^D thus the Law says: “You shall count for yourself seven hebdomads from the beginning of the sheaf, of the putting of the sickle to the harvest, and you shall perform the seventh hebdomad as a holy day to the Lord.”

^A By these words he indicates the Pentecost. For after the Passover was sacrificed, within the third day, that is, after three days from the lamb, he commanded the sheaf to be brought in, so that he might signify the blessed sheaf rising from the dead after the third day, the earth offering it up, and it being taken back again from it in the resurrection of the tomb, and remaining with the disciples for forty days, and at the end of the Pentecost bringing it into the heavens to the Father—the first-born of the first-born, the holy first-fruits, the sheaf which was grasped from Mary, which was embraced in God, the fruit of the womb, the first-fruits of the threshing floor. For no longer after Pentecost does the sickle offer the first-fruits to God. For Christ no longer dies; death shall no longer have dominion over him, according to what is written. And do you see how many mysteries of God the law typified, and the Gospel fulfilled? From where then do we not have the clarification of these things to show? Because of not bringing the word into a wide exposition, ^B therefore we must turn back again to the sequence. It appears from the ears of grain and from the harvest and from the disciples that John and Luke and all of them narrate all these things after the forty days of temptation.

^B 32. But those people are not ashamed again to arm themselves against the things spoken by Saint John, thinking that they are perhaps able to overthrow the truth, not knowing that they are arming themselves against themselves rather than against the sound doctrine. But they say, mocking these things concerning the Apocalypse: “What,” he says, “does the Apocalypse of John profit me, telling me about seven angels and seven trumpets?” not knowing how necessary and profitable such things were in the correctness of the preaching. For as many things as were dark and enigmatic in the law and in the prophets, these the Lord ordained through the Holy Spirit for our salvation to be revealed to his servant John; for those things which were dark there, he preached here as spiritual and manifest. And he ordained the same things for us spiritually. And while he makes the tabernacle at that time out of skins, of reddened skins and hyacinthine ones and the rest, it was to show that the tabernacle there was a tabernacle, but one receiving the most perfect tabernacle of Christ. For a skin comes from a body that is dead, being as a shadow of a living body, so as to show that the tabernacle of God ^D is bodies. For since God dwells in holy bodies, the statement being fulfilled that, “I will dwell in them, and walk among them.”

If, therefore, some error was about to happen among the faithful, if the book had not been revealed to us spiritually, so that we might learn that there is no need of trumpets, but to know that the whole dispensation of God is spiritual; that

we should not take them for Jewish bronze trumpets, but understand them spiritually, as being the proclamation of the Church from heaven. As it is also said elsewhere: "On that day they shall blow the great trumpet." ^A For the prophets were trumpets. And the great trumpet is the holy voice of the Lord in the Gospel. For this reason it was granted even to angels to reveal it to us. "For he shall blow," he says, "and the dead shall rise." Now if those trumpets of the angels, which are read of in the Apocalypse, seem ridiculous to you, O you [heretics], because it is written in the Apocalypse, then the trumpet spoken of by the holy Apostle is also ridiculous: "He shall descend," he says, "from heaven at the last trumpet, and the dead shall rise on the last day, in the voice of the archangel." Since, therefore, the Apostle is in such marvelous agreement with the holy apostle John in the Apocalypse, what contradiction remains? And how shall each error not be immediately refuted, since God has given a testimony ^B in each of the saints?

XXXIII. Yet some of them again seize upon this passage in the same Apocalypse. And they argue, saying that he said again: "Write to the angel of the Church in Thyatira," and yet there was no Church of Christians in Thyatira at that time. How then did he write to one that did not exist? And such people find themselves compelled by their own preaching to confess against the truth. For if they say, "There is no Church in Thyatira now," they show that John prophesied it. For those of the Phrygian heresy having settled there, like wolves snatching the minds of the simple faithful, carried off the whole city into their own heresy; those who deny the Apocalypse of the Word were at that time campaigning to overturn it. But now, through the Lord, in this ^C present time, after one hundred and twelve years, the Church exists, and grows, and others are also appearing there. But at that time the whole Church had been emptied out into the Phrygian faction. Therefore the Holy Spirit was eager to reveal to us how the Church was to be deceived after the time of the apostles, of John, and of those... ^D

^A who follow after. For the Lord immediately rebukes them thus: "Write to the angel of the Church in Thyatira: These things says the one who has eyes like a flame of fire, and his feet are like burnished bronze: I know your faith, and love, and ministry, and that your last works are greater than the first. But I have this against you, that you permit the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to lead my servants astray, teaching them to eat things offered to idols and to commit fornication. And I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent from her fornication." ^B Do you not see, O you men, that he speaks concerning those women who, being deceived by the delusion of prophecy, also deceived many others? I refer to Priscilla, Maximilla, and Quintilla, whose fraud, though it could not escape the Holy Spirit, was nevertheless prophetically foretold by the mouth of the holy John, which happened after the falling asleep of the holy John. For since he prophesied in the times of Claudius Caesar, when he was on the island of Patmos (for they themselves also agree that these things were fulfilled in Thyatira), he was consequently writing by prophecy to those in Christ who were living there at that time, that a woman would eventually call herself a prophetess. And thus the argument contrived from every direction to attack the truth fell to the ground, as the word according to the Apocalypse is shown to be truly prophetic and from the Holy Spirit.

XXXIV. The same people again lift themselves up in their mind, ^C hunting after words endlessly, so that they might appear to discard the books of the holy Apostle, I mean John’s Gospel and the Apocalypse, and perhaps the Epistles as well; for even these accord with the Gospel and the Apocalypse. For they say: "I saw," and he said to the angel, "Loose the four angels who are upon the Euphrates. And I heard the number of the army, ten thousand times ten thousand, and a thousand thousands; and they were wearing breastplates of fire, and of sulfur, and of hyacinth." For such people thought—lest perhaps the truth be a laughingstock—that if he speaks of the four angels sitting at the Euphrates, it is to show the four different nations sitting there upon the Euphrates, which ^D are indeed Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes, and Persians; for these are the four kingdoms for which, according to Daniel, the end is prepared.

^A For these four kingdoms appear in succession in Daniel, as "first the Assyrians were reigning, and the Babylonians in his time. The Medes succeeded them. After them were the Persians, of whom Cyrus was the first king. For the nations are appointed under angels, as Moses, the saint and servant of God, bears witness to me, explaining the word in order and saying: "Ask your father, and he will declare to you; your elders, and they will tell you: When the Most High divided the nations, as he dispersed the sons of Adam. He set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of the angels of God. And the portion of the Lord became his people Jacob, the measuring cord of his inheritance, Israel." If, therefore, the nations are appointed under angels, he rightly said: "Loose the four angels who are bound at the river Euphrates, and who are being held back from allowing the nations ^B to go to war until the time of the Lord's long-suffering, until he shall command."

For the angels who had been appointed by the Spirit were being restrained, not having an opportunity for an incursion, because the time had not yet come to release to them the penalty, so that the rest of the nations might be unleashed on account of the outrage against the saints. ^A Such ones are released and come upon the land, as John prophesies, and the other prophets. For indeed, as the angels are stirred up, they stir up the nations toward an impulse of vengeance.

That by "fiery," "sulphurous," and "hyacinthine" breastplates he signifies certain things, no one doubts. For those nations have their clothing from such a color. For "sulphurous" garments are of a yellow, as it is called, wool; "fiery" garments, so that he may mean crimson clothes; and "hyacinthine," so that he may show the Callaicus (porcelain-colored) wool.

XXXV. But these men, not having received the Holy Spirit, are judged as spiritual insofar as they do not understand the things of the Spirit; and while wishing to speak according to the Word, they do not know the gifts in the holy Church, which the Holy Spirit truly and firmly narrated in a powerful way through those who followed him, namely, the holy prophets and the holy apostles—among whom the blessed John also imparted the same heavenly gift through his Gospel, his Epistles, and the Apocalypse. ^B Yet the saying reaches even to them: "To him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven, neither in this age, nor in the age to come." For indeed, they have waged war against the very words spoken by the Spirit.

Having considered these things and such things said against such a heresy to be sufficient—and as having trampled underfoot, by God's power and truth, this "scolopendra," or what is called the "iulus" (a type of serpent, many-legged, feeble, whose venom does not cause great pain but which, as is said, has many feet and is oblong)—let us move on to the rest, beloved, with the same power of God.

AGAINST THE ADAMIANS,

Heresy XXXII, also LII.

I. ^C They call a "talpam" (mole) a certain animal dwelling in the earth below, a quadruped, which burrows into the earth and has its dwelling in its innermost recesses. Everything about the animal is like a small puppy, having the contour of a little dog, to which there is no sight at all. ^D Yet the animal is destructive, uprooting from below all the crops of men, and especially the acrid plants, such as onions and garlic, bulbs and things of that sort, lilies and many others. But if, while burrowing, it happens to reach the outside of the earth and the open air, or if it is caught by men, it offers a ridiculous spectacle to all who have caught this animal. Just so, I also attempt to speak regarding the heresy now at hand, how it blinds the heart and acts senseless; but...

it brings destruction upon itself, and cuts away the foundation of its own existence from beneath. It brings ruin upon the many men who have fallen into it. And yet, whenever it happens that prudent men catch sight of it, it provokes not an ordinary laugh; just as the aforementioned animal, being mocked for its own blindness and for its incontinence, and finding nowhere to make its entry—just so with this heresy. For they have applied to themselves the name of Adam. We state this ^A having heard it from the account of many men; for we have not found it in writings, nor have we encountered anything of the sort.

Since many have spoken of it, it seemed worthy of mention. Wherefore we have justly compared it to the aforementioned blind animal; and because it does not appear quickly to men, by reason of its being hidden in the earth and working destruction from beneath. It is a laughingstock; and I considered whether to include it in the number at all. But because a report of it exists in the world, it will not be grievous for a wise auditor to know of all things in the world that have been sown like tares by the devil. Whether such a thing exists, or does not exist, having heard it from many who speak of it, it seemed reasonable to me for the sake of certainty to speak of it as well, and not to omit it, even ^B if it were destroyed and no longer exists. For I do not know for certain whether it still exists or not. But why do I extend the preface to the account for a long time? I shall begin to relate the ridiculous, or rather, the mourning. Mourning, because of how the devil has taken up residence in the mind of men, to mock the form fashioned by God; and ridiculous, because they neither see nor understand things with prudence.

II.

they perform in a state of nudity. If anyone, however, is thought to have fallen into fault, as they are accustomed to say, they no longer admit this person into their assembly. For they say that he is the Adam who ate from the tree, and they judge him to be cast out as if from paradise, that is, from their Church. For they consider their own Church to be paradise, and themselves to be the ones concerning Adam and Eve. By what logic, then, do they light a fire beneath their dwelling, so that the cold might not touch them? For Adam and Eve did not have ^A their residence in a house heated from beneath, nor were they oppressed by any scorch, nor did cold impose itself upon them; but they had the purest air, and one measured out by God in perfect temperance, neither strained by the harshness of cold nor beset by the disagreeable burning of heat; and there was ambrosia, prepared indeed by God; the place was well-ordered, made for contentment and a good life. And they were subject neither to cold nor to heat, as I said. Since these people are in need of such things, mockery is greatly theirs.

III. HOW EVERY ERROR OF THEIRS MAY BE REFUTED

Furthermore, let us consider the other point: how all this error is refuted, that they were not naked for one hour, but continuously, and they were not ashamed. And for these people, it is not because they lack shame that "nudity" occurs, even if they themselves think so, but rather on account of insatiable pleasure, which causes desire through the pupils of the eyes. For modesty, which is praised in all the holy Scriptures, has been taken away from them; and truly the word that was said by the prophet (Jerem. III, 3) is fulfilled: "You have acquired the eyes of a harlot; you have become shameless toward all." But after that hour, they ^B cloak themselves in garments outside, and they are no longer Adam. For not immediately did he have a wealth of garments; but first, indeed, fig leaves, then skin tunics, and it was only after a long period of their life that the multi-variegated wisdom of God put into them the knowledge of apparel. And in every way they will be mocked, saying that they are the ones concerning Adam, lying about themselves, and at the same time speaking the truth. For that these people are not Adam, this is clear from many proofs, as we have also pointed out; but that they are mocked by the intelligible serpent, this is clear from their affected habit, and nudity, and shame, and mockery.

It is not worthy for us to make much of their refutation. For the animal ^C to which they are similar does not require military engines or major weapons for its destruction; for by a small rod it is made to vanish. Often, moreover, after it has been brought up from its hole, it is left alone and perishes by itself, being laughed at and mocked, and not found, because of the all-laughable mockery, and indecent behavior, and the subject matter of the nonsense. Having examined the next points, let us again pray to God to work together with us

for the discovery and refutation of the others, and for our own salvation and that of those who encounter them.

461 AGAINST THE SAMPSAEANS, Hæresis XXXIII or LIII.

^A I. There is, in that region called Peraea, a certain heresy of those who are also called Elcesaeans, of whom we have made mention in the previous heresies. This heresy exists in the region of Peraea so called, across the Salt Sea — or Dead Sea, as it is called — in the land of Moab, about the torrent of Arnon, and beyond, in the territory of Ituraea and Nabathaea, as I have often stated already. For these people boast that Elxai is their master. And until now, they worshiped two women from his lineage as if they were goddesses, because they were supposedly from a blessed seed. Both the Ossaeans and Ebionites and Nazarenes use this book of theirs, as I have said more than once; but the Sampsaeans rely upon it most of all. Since they are neither Christians, nor Jews, nor Greeks, they are simply of a middle sort and are nothing at all. They even claim to have another book, which they attribute to a brother of Elxai. They say there is one God, ^B and they worship Him, so they claim, by means of certain baptisms. They adhere to the Jews in all respects. Some among them abstain from all living things. They do not hesitate to face death for the sake of the lineage of Elxai. Moreover, for a time I had heard that one of the two women, named Martho, had died, while Marthana was still alive; unless she too has by now passed away. Whenever either of these women went out from their home and traveled anywhere, a huge multitude of people would accompany them, collecting the dust from their feet and the saliva from their spitting, supposedly for healing, and with great mockery, they would store them up in amulets and charms. For every error begins with blindness, then proceeds to empty babbling. Such people accept neither prophets nor apostles. Everything among them is deceived. Water is honored by them, and they consider this to be God, almost asserting that life comes from it. They confess Christ by name, ^C though they consider Him to be a creature and one who appears repeatedly. They hold that He first fashioned the body of Adam, and then in-dresses Himself in it when He wills. They say that He is called Christ, and that the Holy Spirit is His sister, existing in a female form. They claim that each of them—both Christ and the Holy Spirit—is ninety-six miles in height, and twenty-four in breadth. And they add many other nonsensical things.

II. But since I have already spoken of this kind of doctrine in other heresies, and have demonstrated how it should be refuted, I did not think it necessary to attach great importance to the inquiry into their refutation, as we have already ^D labored upon this Elxai, or rather El-

Elxai, and those from him, in the other heresies previously set forth. For such a man, and the heresy from him, is caught—that he is astray. Since, then, we have struck at the solar lizard with the rod of hope in Christ and ^A of the Cross, let us pass on to what follows. For it is fitting that we use the same enigma—the name by which they themselves also named themselves—for expressing their bastardized appellation. For the Sampsaei are interpreted as "Solars" (Heliakoi). Hence we also mentioned that creature. For men call this lizard a "solar" one in that way. But this heresy is worse than the lizard, having not even an iota of its own benefit. ^B For that one, when its eyes have grown dim, by the turning of the sun, looks up after a time, having squeezed itself into a hole looking toward the east, and having fasted, gazing toward the east. This heresy, however, I say, possesses the foolishness of the animal in all things; indeed, not even the small portion of praise. Since, then, this heresy, having been declared to us as a solar lizard, and trampled upon by the truth, let it remain, being able to do nothing regarding the truth of God. ^C But let us, as we said, hasten to the others.

AGAINST THE THEODOTIANS (67)

I. There arose again a certain Theodotus, being a fragment from the aforementioned irrational heresy, the one denying the Gospel according to John, and the God-Word who was in the beginning in it, and His revelation, but also both consorting with and existing simultaneously with the other previously mentioned ^D heresies, and succeeding them in time, from whom the ones called Theodotians derive their name. And if this heresy still exists, it is unknown; but we shall tell what has come down to us from books.

This Theodotus was from Byzantium, the now-called Constantinople, a tanner by trade, but well-versed in speech. Along with many others, in a time of persecution—I do not know if I should say in such a persecution—he was arrested by the governor of the city with many others, and interrogated with the others for Christ’s sake. And while all the other servants of God, having carried off victory, obtained heavenly rewards, having testified for Christ, this man, having denied Christ and fallen from the goal of truth, became a backslider; and being reproached by many out of great shame, he fled from his own fatherland. And having gone up to Rome, he lived there. And by someone...

who knew him because of his great learning, he was criticized for how a man of such great learning could have fallen from the truth. In, as it were, a poor defense of his own, he invented this empty doctrine, saying: "I did not deny God, but I denied the man." Then, being asked what man, he answers saying: "I denied Christ, who is man." From this, he and those who were established by him, the Theodotians, formulated the doctrine that Christ is a mere man, born of the seed of a man. Then, in defense of his own error, he gathered whatever he found useful, not with a pure and sincere judgment of mind, but so that he might seek some semblance and coloring for his own impiety, ^B seeking sources from everywhere. For instance, what the Lord said: "But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth." You see, he says, that he is a man.

II. But the miserable wretch does not know that in the same context Christ speaks the truth "which I have heard from my Father." By "my Father" he means God, and certainly not a man. For if he had heard that from a man, he would not have boasted of the testimony of the truth by saying that he had heard the truth from men; but rather, he intended to show that he is God, born from the Father from above, but having become a man for our sake, and having been killed in the flesh, while living forever in his divinity.

He added that he had committed no sin in denying Christ, since Christ himself spoke thus: "Every blasphemy will be forgiven men, and whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." But, of course, the most miserable man does not understand that Christ the Lord, when he desired to confirm the salvation of those who had once been insulting to him and had turned themselves to repentance, so that he might not establish any punishment against them, uttered that oracle out of his incredible humanity and clemency. Furthermore, because he knew that there would be some who would rise up against the Holy Spirit and attack him with blasphemies, and who would reduce him to a servile condition and say he was a creature and alien to the nature of God, in order to exclude this error, he added: "But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, neither here nor in the world to come." In this, he did not intend to praise those who blasphemed him, but showed his foreknowledge and his humanity, which provided for the stability of the salvation of those who might repent after their blasphemy. For the same Lord said in another place: "Whoever denies me before men, will be denied before my Father"; and likewise: "I will deny him." Conversely: "Whoever confesses me, I will confess him before my Father."

^B But the miserable wretch did not know that in the same context Christ speaks the truth which I heard from my Father. He says "Father" is God; for he does not mean a man. For if he had heard [it] from a man, he would not have boasted of the testimony of the truth, saying that he had heard the truth from men; but [he said it] so that he might signal that he is God, born from the Father from [above], but [also] that he became a man for our sake, and was killed in the flesh, while still alive in his divinity.

Then he says that he did not even commit a sin by denying Christ, saying that Christ himself said: "Every blasphemy shall be forgiven to men, and the one who speaks a word against the Son of man shall be forgiven. But to the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven." And the miserable [(69)] man is ignorant that the Lord, wishing to secure the salvation of those who had blasphemed him and had turned back to repentance, so that he might not decree condemnation for them, foretold this word out of an excess of gentleness and philanthropy, and because he knew that some were going to rise up and blaspheme the Holy Spirit, and in the manner of a slave define him as being a created thing and alien to the substance of God. Therefore, in order to secure them, he says: "But the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven, neither here nor in the coming age." He is not praising those who blaspheme him, but shows his foreknowledge and his own philanthropy, securing beforehand the salvation of [those] who [might] repent from blasphemy. For he himself says again: "The one who denies me before men, shall be denied before my Father"; and again: "I will deny him"; and again: "The one who confesses in me, I will confess him before my Father." ^{C D}

^A The same Theodotus says again: "And the Law spoke concerning Him: The Lord will raise up for you a Prophet from among your brethren, like me; Him you shall hear. But Moses was a man. And this one who was raised up from God," he says, "was not God, but a man; since He was of them, just as Moses also was a man." And that turncoat Theodotus, having fallen into error, does not perceive in himself how each word has its own safeguard. For that the Lord raised Him up "from among their brethren" is to be referred to the fact that He was born from Mary, as it says: "Behold, the virgin shall have in the womb, and shall bear a son; and, remaining a virgin, she shall have in the womb," not from the seed of a man, "and shall bear a son." It is clear that the offspring is born of a virgin in the flesh. "But they shall call His name Emmanuel, which is interpreted, God with us." For He is God and man: born of the Father without beginning and without time, but man from Mary because of the incarnate presence.

Then, he says, the Gospel itself (70) said to Mary: "The Spirit of the Lord shall come upon you," and did not say, "The Spirit of the Lord shall be within you." Wherefore, through contentiousness in every respect, the foolish man falls away from the truth. For Holy Scripture, securing our life on all sides, in order to show that the Trinity joins in and works in everything and in every manner, and so that some might not say (as many also falsely pretend to themselves, alienating the Holy Spirit from Christ and the Father), for this reason the angel says to Mary: "The Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you. Therefore also the Holy One who is born from you shall be called the Son of God." And he did not say only, "The one being born," but, "Therefore also the one being born," so as to show the Word, God from above, being born in the womb according to His own incarnation and according to His own good pleasure. And because of that which He managed for His own incarnation for our salvation, he adds: "Therefore also the Holy One who is born shall be called the Son of God." For if he had said, "The Holy Spirit will enter into you," it would no longer be thought that the Son of God had arrived in the flesh, but that the Holy Spirit had arrived in the flesh. That the Word has come down from above, John, clarifying the angel’s evangelical voice, says: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made." Then after this: "And the Word became flesh"; and he did not say, "The Spirit became flesh"; nor did he say, "Christ was born a man." For in every way the divine Scripture, safeguarding Him as both God and man...

recognizes Him: as God, who proceeded from God from above; as man, born of Mary without the seed of a man. Whoever deviates from these two most true facts is an alien to the truth.

^B IV. Furthermore, Theodotus raises another objection, citing what Jeremiah said concerning Him: "He is man, and who shall know Him?" He does not understand, because he is estranged from the truth, that every word contains within itself the interpretation of its own power and meaning. For a man is certainly known by many who know him; I mean by father and mother, brothers and kin, companions and neighbors, fellow citizens and servants. But here the Scripture, explaining the miracle of His entire mission, calls Him man because of the flesh He assumed, while by the words, "And who shall know Him?" it intended to declare His Divinity, which cannot be comprehended. For since "no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him," it follows that He Himself cannot be known by anyone unless He reveals Himself. ^C But He reveals to His servants, through the Holy Spirit, both His own Divinity and that of His Father, and His glory, and His own future eternal life, and His mysteries, and His teaching, and His true incarnation for our sake, that He is God from above, and man from Mary.

V. Then this same Theodotus goes on to claim that Isaiah also says He is a man, with these words: "A man knowing how to bear infirmity. And we saw Him in plague and in affliction. And He was dishonored, and was not accounted of." But this brute does not see how he is refuted again. For in the same place Isaiah speaks thus: "As a sheep He was led to the slaughter, and as a lamb before the shearer is silent, so He opens not His mouth. In His humiliation His judgment was taken away." He then adds: "Who shall recount His generation? because His life is taken away from the land of men." He did not say "His life is taken away," but added "from men." ^D For since the Word is perpetually living and has life in Himself, and imparts it to those who love Him, His life is taken away from men—

though He is life by His own nature. For the Word is life, and bestows life upon all who hope in Him in truth. And as for what is written: *"Who shall declare His generation?"* (Isa. LIII, 8), if He were a mere man born of Mary, His generation would be easy to describe. But since He is before David and before Abraham—for He says: "Abraham your father desired to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad"—and when they marveled and said, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?" He, refuting Theodotus and the faithless and God-denying Jews, said: "Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am" (John VIII, 56 sqq.). He truly existed before Abraham, and before Noah, and before Adam, and before the world, and before the heavens, and before the time of the world, ^B before all things, and before any created things. Therefore, being timeless and ineffable, He is announced by the Holy Spirit through Isaiah: *"Who shall declare His generation?"* For *"His life is taken from the earth."*

But, he says, the apostles said: *"A man approved among you by signs and wonders"* (Acts II, 22); and they did not say "a God approved." But this very thing, Theodotus, kills you again, because in the same Acts the apostles spoke, and blessed Stephen in particular asserts: *"Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God"* (Acts VII, 55).

^C VI. The heretic persists again and objects: "The Apostle," he says, "speaks thus of Christ: *'Mediator of God and men, Christ Jesus'* (I Tim. II, 5)." But he does not know how he is again arming an argument against himself. For he who said, "Mediator of God and men, Christ Jesus," he himself clarified this by saying: *"Who was predestinated the Son of God in power, according to the spirit of sanctification, by the resurrection of the dead of Jesus Christ our Lord"* (Rom. I, 4); and again: *"Made under the law"* (Gal. IV, 4). And making these words secure, he says: *"For if there are many so-called gods, and many lords, yet to us there is but one God, of whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things"* (I Cor. VIII, 5). If then all things are by Him, and we are toward Him, then the Only-Begotten born of Mary is not a mere man, nor [born] from the seed of a man. For how could all things have been made by Him—things that existed before Him, according to your argument—if He were a mere man? Or how could all things be recognized and made through Him before Him? And so his babbling falls away from every side. ^D In the same dialogue, having stated the knowledge concerning Him and the refutation of each [point],

468 now then, when those things which lead to the acknowledgment of Theodotus' heresy and to its piecemeal overthrow have been covered, we shall pass over the rest according to the custom of the sequence, just as one might set aside some part of a creeping thing yet [skipping...]

alive, having struck and extinguished it with the rod of the hope and faith of the truth. Therefore, we shall ^A hasten to contemplate and treat of the subsequent heresies, which are as ferocious as wild beasts.

AGAINST THE MELCHISEDECIANS, Heresy XXXV or LV.

I. Others again call themselves Melchisedecians, having perhaps broken away from those called Theodotians. They celebrate that Melchisedec, of whom mention is made in the Scriptures, first of all, and they believe him to be some great power. They place him in the highest and most inexplicable regions; and they assert that he is not only some power, but even greater than Christ himself. They argue that Christ simply came, and was considered worthy of that [Melchisedec's] order, allegedly based on that saying: *You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedec*; from which they claim [Christ] is even inferior to Melchisedec. For if he were not placed in a second order, he would not have been in need of that person's order. Concerning Melchisedec himself, they say that he is ^B *without mother, without father, without genealogy*, wishing to demonstrate this from Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews. They also forge for themselves spurious books, deceiving themselves.

Yet, their refutation comes from these very sayings. For as David speaks about the Lord, prophesying that he would be established as a priest according to the order of Melchisedec, the divine Scripture at the same time explains that Christ would be a priest. And it is found immediately saying: *Being made like to the Son of God, he remains a priest forever*. But if he is made like to the Son of God, he is not equal to the Son of God. For how can the servant be equal to the Master? For Melchisedec was indeed a man. And he is called *without father, without mother*, not because he lacked them both, but because there is no mention of them expressed in the divine Scriptures. Indeed, the deep and illustrious things of the Scriptures, which surpass the entire mind and ^C thought of human nature, have led many into error. For the inhabitants of Arabia Petraea, in the region called Rochom and Edom, revere Moses as God because of the marvels performed by him, and they worship his image; being misled—not because the righteous man was the cause for them, but because their own ignorance of the truth regarding the righteous man created a fantasy of the matter for them. ^D

[GREEK COLUMN] gathering; but in Sebaste, which was formerly called Samaria, having ^A deified the daughter of Jephthah, they still perform this rite annually (75). Just so, these people too, hearing the wise and glorious words of the Scripture, turned them into nonsense; and, being lifted up to an arrogant state of mind, they left the way of truth and, having fashioned myths for themselves, they shall be convicted in all things.

II. For indeed, with some, the father and mother of Melchizedek (76) are mentioned; but there is no such thing according to the explicit and canonical Scriptures. Some have said that his father was called Heraclas, and his mother Astaroth, also called Asteria. Now this person was a son of the local people, who at that time dwelled in the plain of Sabe (77). And the city was called Salem (78); concerning which one person has set forth one thing, and another, another. For some say it is the one now called Jerusalem, but once called Jebus; others have said that there is another Salem in the plain of the Shechemites, opposite what is now called Neapolis. Whether, then, it is from here or from there, the places are not far apart from each other, yet the matter explains the deed. For it says, "He brought out bread and wine to Abraham." And he was a priest of the Most High at that time. "He who blessed Abraham, and received a tithe from him." For it was necessary for the priest of the Most High to be honored by the servant of God; and first of all for Abraham to offer to the one acting as priest in uncircumcision. And since the priesthood was about to come from him by way of circumcision, [it was done] so that every height being raised against the knowledge of God might be brought low through knowledge, to the end that the circumcision, boasting of the priesthood, might not be able to argue against the priesthood of the holy Church. For if Abraham offered a tithe to Melchizedek, and those from Abraham offer to Levi and to Aaron—and after a time, for the priesthood to be again from circumcision through Aaron and his sons successively, [as] the Scripture says through David, after twelve generations (79) from the birth of Levi, and the seventh from Aaron—

[LATIN COLUMN] that is abandoned, they have fallen into error. Their just man [Jepthah] does not support this reason; rather it is the madness of those who, because of him, excited an opinion of a true divinity through ignorance. But in Sebaste, which was formerly called Samaria, they consecrated the daughter of Jephthah with divine honors; in whose memory they celebrate an annual festival. Thus those heretics, having heard the words of Scripture full of wisdom and dignity, were led into mindlessness; and being puffed up with arrogance, they abandoned the way of truth, and so we shall most clearly convict them of having invented nothing for themselves but fables.

II. Indeed, some have commemorated the names of both of Melchizedek's parents; but those are nowhere declared in the explicit words of Scripture, nor in either Testament. There are those who say his father was named Heraclas, and his mother Astaroth, or Asteria. Furthermore, that son was from one of the natives of that time, who were living then in the plain of Sabe. They named the city itself Salem, concerning which it has been handed down differently by others. And some think it is the place now called Jerusalem, formerly called Jebus. Others think there is another Salem in the Shechemite field, which looks to Neapolis opposite. But whether it be said to have come from this place or that, both these locations are not far distant from each other. And nevertheless, the narrative of the event itself explains what was done by him. For he says, "He brought out to Abraham bread and wine. And he was a priest of the Most High at that time." He who blessed Abraham, and took a tithe from him. For it was fitting that the priest of the Most High should be honored by the servant of God; and that Abraham, as the first, should offer a gift to the priest celebrating the sacred rites in uncircumcision, since it was to happen at some point that the priesthood proper to circumcision would derive its origin from him himself, so that all loftiness raised against the knowledge of God might be abased by knowledge; and so that circumcision, boasting more gloriously, might not be able to contend with the priesthood of the holy Church. For when Abraham offered a tithe to Melchizedek, and his descendants offered it to Levi and Aaron in succession, and nevertheless [the tithe] was afterwards attributed to circumcision,

^A a nature—it seemed—not established in the old priesthood; yet it was transferred to the order of Levi, and before Aaron, according to the order of Melchizedek, to the priesthood: which is now administered in the Church from Christ until today, not with the seed being any longer chosen by succession, but with the one sought according to virtue as a type.

III. For the first priesthood in uncircumcision was perfected through Abel, then through Noah, and thirdly through Melchizedek. And that Melchizedek ^B was a man, the holy Apostle himself says in the Epistle with these words: "But he whose genealogy is not traced from them received tithes from the patriarch." It is clear, therefore, that he is not genealogized from them. But how many others are not genealogized, as is most manifest? Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, Elijah the Tishbite; and in all the inspired scriptures their fathers and mothers are nowhere mentioned. But lest any error arise from this, I shall not be reluctant to relate in this place what we have learned from the tradition of some. We have received that Daniel's father was a certain Sabaan. And as for Elijah, we have similarly found his nature and his patriarchate, which I will explain in order as follows: Elijah the Tishbite ^C was from the tribe of the priests; and many think he was of the tribe of Benjamin. But he states nothing for certain. Among the Christians, besides Epiphanius, the Alexandrian Chronicle, pg. 376, attributes a priestly origin to Elijah, and adds that he was called "Tishbite" from the priestly city of Tishbe in Arabia. This seems to have been borrowed from the book *On the Life of the Prophets*, which is inscribed with the name of Epiphanius. "Elijah," he says, "the prophet was from Thesbōn, from the land of the Arabs, from the tribe of Aaron, a Levite, living in Gilead, because the Tishbite territory was given to the priests." Some superintendent among the Lutherans, who most recently interpolated that book about the prophets, ^D wonders marvelously how to expunge those words which he indeed enclosed in parentheses to signify that they are extraneous. For if, he says, we place Tishbe in Arabia, he will no longer belong to the citizens of Gilead or to the Israelite kingdom. Here he attaches his own conjecture; and clearly the opportunity had to be sought to declaim against the monks, whose ignorance he suspects of having intruded those little words. For when it was read, and there was another reading annotated in the margin, as it grew, he says, by the barbarism of the monks, it was received into the very context of the author. But in that conjecture, that pastor exposed his own supreme ignorance and levity. For he did not know that Arabia once stretched very widely; so that it comprised not only the best part of Transjordania or Peraea, but also Coelesyria and Damascus. Since the region itself of Bashan and Gilead was contained in Arabia, according to the authority of Jerome in *$Isaiah$* and in *$Obadiah$*, where he observes that what was previously called Gilead was later named Arabia, and finally in his own time, Gerasa. Concerning Damascus, Tertullian, in book 3 *Against Marcion*, ch. 13: "Damascus," he says, "was formerly counted as part of Arabia, before it was transferred to Syrophenicia." Therefore, that book *On the Life of the Prophets* understood the Gileadite territory by the name of Arabia. But Kimchi thinks it was so named from the city in which he first dwelt; whence he later migrated to Gilead. Which words of David, the most learned Hebrew [scholar] Elias Levita did not at all understand. For

^A we find a lineage, which I recount in order in this manner. Elias the Thesbite was brother to Joda the priest; and therefore, he was of priestly stock, the son of Achimaam; Achimaam was the son of Sadoc; Sadoc of Achitob; of Amoria; Amorias of Moria; Morias of Zara; this one of Azias; Azias of Phinees; Phinees was the son of Eleazar; Eleazar was the son of Aaron, obviously the priest; Aaron the son of Amram; Amram of Caath; Caath of Levi; Levi the third son of Jacob; Jacob being the brother of Esau, the child of Isaac; Isaac the son of Abraham. But in the stated Books, the origins of these are not indicated with complete clarity, unless perhaps some things which pertain to Elias are comprised in the books of Paralipomenon. Moreover, regarding the three ^B youths, Sidrach, Misach, and Abdenago, we find nothing of them either in the apocrypha or in the traditions. What then shall we say? Will those three youths cast us into that error, that we should think regarding them what is not lawful, and admire each particular thing more than is right, and over-excessively? Far be it that we should ever admit such a thing into our mind! For both bounds have been prescribed to us, and foundations laid, and the structure of the faith, and the traditions of the apostles, and the holy Scriptures, and the successions of teaching; and divinity is secured from all sides by the truth of God. And let no one be deceived by novel fables.

The opinion of that man is expounded thus: ^C as originating from the city in which he first dwelt, which is called Toschab, but later he dwelt in Gilead; although he does not explain why he was called *of the inhabitants of Gilead*. But otherwise, unless I am mistaken, Kimchi is to be understood. For he does not judge the name of the city to have been *Toschab*, which is absurd, but that he sat there, in that city, namely Thisbi, in the beginning. Wherefore it should be read *Thisbi*. Nor is it true, as Elias adds, that there is no cause offered by David why Scripture should say Elias was of the inhabitants of Gilead, when by express words it signifies this very thing, since having set out from Thisbi he migrated to Gilead. But Elias the Levite teaches that the city in Gilead was Thisbi; which, when it had been razed to the ground by the Israelites after that slaughter of the Gibeonites (in which the Gileadites were likewise involved, Jud. xxi), most of those who had escaped that slaughter returned and later restored the town; and from that event they were named *inhabitants of Gilead*. One of whom was Elias; for it is an argument that he lived in those times, because Phinees was then ^D surviving; whom the masters consider to be the same person as Elias. These are the [views] of the Levite. Which are most foolish. For let us suppose Elias to be Phinees; how can it be believed that he was sought for death by the Israelites and escaped by flight, when he stood on their side and was their leader? Yet, St. Jerome has this same fable about Phinees, that he is the same as Elias, in his book *Quaestiones Hebraicae in Paralipomenon*, relying on the authority of which Petrus Damianus in his 4th Epistle *Ad Nicolaum Pontificem* expounds the same in more detail. This does not even deserve a refutation. The Abulensis denies that he was a priest at all, but [his argument] is a very light conjecture; because he is called an inhabitant of Gilead. Indeed, there is at least room for the opposite suspicion from this, since he was from the *inhabitants* (that is, an incomer, not a native), and not from that tribe, but a stranger and dwelling on foreign soil. But in a doubtful matter, there is on both sides a large store for guessing and dreaming. We are not idle. As for the town of Thisbi, no one has handed down anything certain regarding its location, except that it is asserted to have been Tobias, [which is] placed in Galilee, above Aser: which things are not found at all in the Latin. But also Masius thinks that in Josue xix, *Orn* should be written for *Biosn*. Josephus, book viii, cap. 7, says that Thesbon is a city of Gilead, the fatherland of Elias.

(82) *Brother of Joda*. This is Joiadas the high priest, who performed the priesthood under Athalia and Joas; but died under the latter, when he had lived 130 years. Torniellus assigns his death to the year of the world 3191, and roughly the thirty-fifth year of Joas. But Joas began, according to our chronology, in the year of the Julian period 5836; therefore it corresponds to the year 3870, from which subtracting 130, there remain 3740. Thus, Joiadas was born approximately in the year of the Julian period 3740, about XXXI years after the temple was built under Roboam. But if Elias was the brother of Joiadas, and the son of Achimaaz, it follows that Azarias is the same as Joiadas. For in the book of I Paralipomenon, cap. vi, from Sadoc to the destruction of the temple, this series of priests is proposed: 1 Sadoc 8 Sadoc 2 Achimaas 9 Sellum 3 Azarias 10 Helcias 4 Johanan 11 Azarias 5 Azarias 12 Saraias 6 Amarias 13 Josedec 7 Achitob

Azarias was therefore the same as Joiadas; which Abul. testifies that the learned have thought about this passage of Paralipomenon. Indeed, the succession of the Jewish high priests is a knotty matter; whose names in Josephus are very different from those which are handed down in the book of Paralipomenon. The easiest way of reconciling them is to affirm that most of them were endowed with multiple names. Moreover, in the priestly stock of Elias and Joiadas, Epiphanius has omitted two; for he hands down that Azias, who is Ozi in Scripture, was the son of Phinees, whereas he was his great-grandson. For he omitted Abisue and Bocci.

(85) *In the books of Paralipomenon*. There is not, as far as I know, a single word regarding the stock of Elias in the books of Paralipomenon. Otherwise, all that question regarding the stock of Elias would have been removed, if it had indicated even most lightly from what tribe he was born.

^A IV. I shall now return to the matters I proposed, namely what they most ineptly contrive concerning Melchizedek. For that he was indeed a just man, and a priest of God, and king of Salem, is true; but he was not existing in heaven, nor did he descend from heaven. "For no one has ascended into heaven, but he who has descended from heaven, the Son of man," says the most holy and truthful God the Word. And the divine Scripture, confirming the order of Melchizedek, and the Holy Spirit teaching expressly, showed the translation of the priesthood from the old Synagogue and custom to a most excellent and supreme custom, and one not joined to a carnal succession. For this holy Melchizedek neither had a successor after him, nor was the priesthood taken away from him; for he remained a priest for the whole time of his life. And even now in the Scriptures he is celebrated as a priest, with no one having succeeded him, or having overturned the service of the priesthood during his time. In exactly the same way our Lord, not being a mere man, but from God, very God the Word, and Son of God, begotten of the same without beginning or time, who is perpetually with the Father, yet became man for our sake from Mary, and not from the seed of a man. ^B And He offers the priestly gift to the Father, having taken the lump from human nature, so that for our sake He might be established as a priest according to the order of Melchizedek, which has no succession. For He remains offering gifts for us into eternity; having first offered Himself, so that He might abolish the sacrifice of the old covenant, having offered Himself as a more perfect and living sacrifice for the salvation of the whole world; He Himself is the victim, He Himself the sacrifice, He Himself the priest, He Himself the altar, He Himself God, He Himself man, He Himself king, He Himself high priest, He Himself the sheep, He Himself the lamb, having become all things in all for our sake, so that life might in every way be ours, and that He might work the immoveable foundation of His priesthood for all ages, no longer distributing successions according to seed, but gifting that it be guarded in the Holy Spirit according to righteousness.

^C V. Others dream something else regarding this Melchizedek. For such men have been examined carnally, not having understood spiritually what was said by the holy Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews. And Hierax thinks this Melchizedek is the Holy Spirit, because it is written of him: "made like to the Son of God; he remains a priest forever." This is also illustrated by other words of the Apostle, when he says: "But the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings inexpressible." But he who understands the mind of the Spirit knows that He intercedes with God for the elect. But even this man has wandered completely from the intended meaning. For the Holy Spirit never put on flesh. And not having put on flesh, He could not be king of Salem, or a priest of any place. But at a more opportune time, when [I treat] concerning this Hierax and his heresy, ^D I shall create a subversion of it, then I shall discourse at length concerning these matters.

I shall now seize upon the sequence, and [consider] how many other fables others dream up concerning this Melchisedech.

VI. The Samaritans indeed deem him to be Shem, ^A but they will also be found laughable. For the divine Scripture, establishing all things gracefully and confirming all things in truth, did not arrange the times and the years in vain. For when Abraham was eighty-eight years old, or ninety, more or less, Melchisedech met him then, and brought forth to him bread and wine, prefiguring the enigmas of the mysteries, the antitypes of our Lord, who says, "I am the living bread," and the antitypes of the blood which flowed from his side for the cleansing of those who had been defiled, and for the sprinkling and salvation of our souls. ^B And the father of Abraham, Thare, at his seventieth year... [Melchisedech, king of Salem, the priest of the most high God, who offered wine and bread as the sanctified food in the type of the Eucharist.]

Concerning the opinion of the Jews or Samaritans, and other errors of the ancients about Melchisedech

The aforementioned is spoken of by almost all; the testimonies of whom have long since been studiously collected by Catholic writers. But a distinguished and most eloquent man is he who happens to occur to me now, the passage of Clement of Alexandria in book V of the *Stromata*: "Melchisedech, king of Salem, the priest of the most high God, who offered wine and bread as the sanctified food in the type of the Eucharist." See Augustine, *Epist.* 95.

That Thare begat Abraham at his seventieth year

Scripture explicitly teaches that Thare begat Abraham in the seventieth year of his age, and excludes all tergiversation. Nor have any of the most ancient Fathers interpreted that passage otherwise, as even those who favor the contrary opinion are forced to confess, who, against the authority of Moses, seem to assert that the patriarch was born not in the seventieth, but in the one hundred and thirtieth year of Thare. Let those men see how rightly they repudiate the consensus of so many centuries, and indeed of all the Fathers. We do not believe that what is opposed by them is of such weight that for its sake it must be denied that the sun shines at noon.

Furthermore, in this description of the generations, Epiphanius deviates not only from the Hebrew sources, but also from the numbers of the LXX Elders, such as they exist today. I shall provide here the series of the Hebrews and Greeks, so that each one may more easily perceive what should be observed.

Hebræorum et Latinorum series. Ex editione Vulgata LXX Seniorum. Vixerunt post generationem. Vita integra. Ex Hebræis et Latinis. Sem post diluvium genuit anno 2. Sem anno 500. 600. Arphaxad 35. Arphaxad 135. 303. 558. Sala 30. Cainan 130. Eber 34. Sala 130. 403. 433. Phaleg 30. Eber 134. 430. 464. Reu 52. Phaleg 150. 209. 259. Seruch 50. Reu 152. 207. 259. Nachor 29. Seruch 130. 200. 259. Thare 70. Nachor 179. 119. 148. Abraham 70. Thare 155. 205.

Colliguntur ad Abrahami ortum anni 292. Colliguntur ad Abrahami ortum anni 1172.

Yet by the reckoning of Epiphanius, only 292 years are gathered from the flood to the birth of Abraham. The difference is 230 years, which in the edition of the LXX Elders arise from Cainan and the hundreds of Nachor. For commonly 179 are attributed to Nachor, but by Epiphanius 79. But in the Preface to this work, and in...

^A the Ancoratus number [116], connecting those same generations, he inserted Cainan. So that it might appear that the edition of the LXX Elders was in this part varied and interpolated; for some codices included Cainan, others expunged him. Since in Eusebius' edition (Greek page 9), from Africanus and the LXX Interpreters, and also from the Hebrew exemplars of the Samaritans, Cainan is omitted in the context of this genealogy; nor does the sum of the years from the flood to the birth of Abraham exceed the number of years that Epiphanius counts in this place. Wherefore he indeed followed Eusebius here.

Regarding Cainan, there is an old question, which is usually debated in various ways by more recent writers. To me, he seems entirely to be omitted, since he exists nowhere in the Hebrew truth, nor in the Latin edition. For the idea that some hold that this defect crept into the Hebrew codices is asserted far too idly. The authority of Luke makes the controversy more serious. But this has long since been satisfied by pious and learned men. For since the codices of the Greeks commonly exhibited [the name] Cainan, Luke, who wrote in Greek, copied this genealogy from no other source than from their books: and therefore he also inserted Cainan, whom if he had otherwise omitted, he would have offended the Greeks themselves. Wherefore, affirming nothing on either side, he simply rendered the generations which he had found in the Greek edition. Just as if someone wishing to lead the Ethiopians to the Catholic faith were to excerpt the succession of their kings from their common Annals; even if someone had been intruded into the number, this should be believed to be the fault not of a Catholic writer, but of the histories and the Annals. ^D This I judge, with our Pererius, Jansenius, Genebrardus, and other learned and pious writers, to be probable.

(88) "Eber begets Phalec." The error is not Epiphanius', but the copyist's, in the notation of the numbers. Read therefore 134, as is clearly evident from the following collection.

(89) "According to the calculation of other copies." What these exemplars are, which from the birth of Sem to 80, or Abraham, think there are 628 years—that is, from the flood to the birth of Abraham 348—I could not discover. For neither the Hebrew nor Samaritan, nor finally the editions of the LXX Elders, number them so. Wherefore I fear that the numeral notations of Epiphanius are not entire. According to the Samaritans, and some copies of the LXX Interpreters, which number 942 years from the flood to the birth of Abraham, with 180 added, the years from the birth of Sem to Abraham become 1122.

^A And in that way the vanity of the Samaritans is refuted on all sides.

VII. But the Jews, for their part, admit that he was a just and upright man, and a priest of the Most High, as is recorded in the Holy Scriptures. But they say his mother is not written down, nor is his father known, because he was the son of a harlot. Yet even this nonsensical interpretation fails. For Rahab was a harlot, and yet Scripture makes mention of her. And again, Zambri is recorded as having committed fornication, and Chasbitha with him, even though she was of foreign stock and did not trace her origin from the race of Israel. ^B And everyone who does not enter by the door, as the holy Gospel says, is a thief and not a shepherd.

As pertains to the Catholics, there is not only one way in which Melchisedec is defined. For some believe that the Son of God himself appeared to Abraham at that time in human form. But they appear to have strayed completely. For no one can be called "like" himself, whereas the Scripture speaks of Melchisedec in this manner: "But made like unto the Son of God, abideth a priest continually." Yet this much is true: that he, whose origin is not at all derived from them, received tithes from Abraham, since his lineage is woven from other men than Israelites. All these things have been mentioned by us on account of this heresy, and our narrative has been instituted, as it were, by a digression.

VIII. ^C Now, this same sect also celebrates its offerings in the name of this Melchisedec, whom they proclaim to be an intermediary before God. On account of this, they say, it is right to make offerings to God through his intervention, for he is a prince of righteousness, and was appointed by God to this very end in heaven, being a spiritual being and ordained as a Son of God. And, they say, we must offer to him so that by him we may be represented before God ^D and obtain life through him. And they say that Christ was chosen so that he might recall us to this one knowledge from the manifold divergence of ways, and for that reason he was anointed and chosen by God, because he turned you away from the worship of idols and showed the way. Whence also the Apostle, sent by God, revealed this very thing to us, that Melchisedec is great, and abideth a priest for ever; and, "Consider how great this man is," and that the less is blessed of the better. For this reason, they say, he also blessed Abraham the patriarch, as being greater; of whom we are initiates, so that we may obtain a blessing from him.

IX. But how empty is the understanding of all heresies! For lo, they also denied their own Lord, who ransomed them with his own blood, who did not receive his beginning from Mary, as they think, but who always existed with the Father, God the Word, begotten of the Father without any beginning or time, as the whole Scripture declares. For it says: "Let us make man in our image and after our likeness," and it did not say "to Melchisedec." For he is indeed a priest of God ^D

^A in his own generation, and he did not have a successor after him; but he is not one who has descended from above from heaven. For Scripture did not say that he brought down bread and wine to Abraham; rather, he brought it out to him and to those with him, as one who received the patriarch returning from the defeat of the kings. And he blessed him because of the justice that was present in him, and the faithfulness and piety of the man, because the patriarch had been tested in all things and did not fall away from justice in any particular. Moreover, in that expedition he even had God as an ally against those who had truly invaded the territory of the Sodomites and had carried off his nephew, the holy Lot; and he returned him safe with all the booty and plunder. And how, indeed, can we demonstrate that the Son was always with the Father? For, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." It did not say: "In the beginning was Melchisedec." Also: "The Lord therefore came to Abraham; and the Lord rained fire and sulphur upon Sodom and Gomorrah from the Lord." Furthermore, the ^B holy Apostle says: "One God, from whom are all things; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things."

So that no one might object: "Where then is the Holy Spirit, since he makes mention of only one and one?" But it was not fitting that the Holy Spirit should be the commendator and herald of himself. For Holy Scripture constantly preserves this practice, that it proposes itself to us on the model of an exemplar. Therefore, regarding the Holy Spirit, the Apostle spoke these things: "One God, from whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things." But he who spoke these things with the Holy Spirit did not intend for the Triad to be incomplete. To this, the Lord himself speaks clearly: "Go therefore and baptize all nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." And again, the Apostle says: "But it is one and the same Spirit who distributes to each as he wills for the benefit." Behold, ^C therefore, the Father; behold, the Son; behold, the Holy Spirit. And nowhere is Melchisedec; neither when it is said that he distributes gifts, nor when he discusses the loftier things. And in vain are the false and contrived things of the obstacles sung by these men—not from the truth, but from the very hissing of the dragon, just as he was able to deceive and lead each one astray.

Now that we have disputed sufficiently about them, let us finally dismiss those whom we have struck down, as if a shrew-mouse, with the stone of strong faith and steadfastness, and have escaped the deadly poison. For ^D they say that the shrew-mouse is such by nature that it causes no immediate harm to one bitten by it, but gradually destroys the body and brings all the limbs to corruption until it has brought the victim to…

^A a state which they call *kelephia*, it in fact inflicts infection. Thus, the dogma of this sect appears to those who first hear of it to be of the most trivial importance; but when, little by little, their discourses have crept in, they bring, first, questions and doubts, and then destruction to those who are not instructed with this defense and, as it were, this antidote. But that animal does not show itself rashly; rather, it moves by night, and it is in this way that it causes the harm—especially in the region of the Egyptians. As it must be known to those who are versed in the knowledge of the animal, we have not made mention of the premise of this animal perfunctorily or because of calumny, for this is its *dikaioma* ^B (right/custom) (92). Henceforth I shall proceed to the others, so that, having been deemed worthy to fulfill the undertaking in God, we may give thanks to God.

AGAINST THE BARDESIANISTS (95),

A'. Following these, there follows a certain Bardesanes, so called. This Bardesanes, from whom the heresy of the Bardesianists has originated, was in his race from Mesopotamia, of those dwelling in the city of the Edessenes. He happened at first to be an excellent man; he wrote not a few discourses when he still had a sound and whole mind. For he originated from the holy Church of God, being a man of learning in the two languages, namely, in the Greek dialect and in the tongue of the Syrians. ^C Being at first closely associated with Abgar, the dynast of the Edessenes, a most holy man, and at once cooperating with him and having shared in his education, he persevered after the latter's death until the times of Antonius Caesar—not the one called the Pious, but Verus—the one who discussed much against the astronomer Abidas concerning fate. And other writings of his are also brought forward that are in accordance with the pious faith. But being pressed by Apollonius, the companion of Antoninus (94), to deny that he was a Christian, he would not acquiesce, ^D and he was almost related among the confessors of the faith. For indeed, by the patronage of piety... [original-script column: see facsimile] ...and, if someone pricks it, he will see the underlying flesh becoming foul and separated through the cracks. Swelling also follows those who have been bitten.

(92) "This is its *dikaioma*." It is Hebrew, *mishpat*, custom, a certain proper thing. Right in Scripture is for the most part rendered as *dikaioma*, which, however, it is not always permitted to refer to justice and equity. As in 1 Kings, ch. viii, 11, Samuel explains the right of the kingdom to the Israelites who are asking for a king: "This will be the right of the king who is to rule over you." Where the word for right itself does not seem to be interpreted in such a way as if those things which are in great part unjust and nefarious are permitted to kings to do and usurp; but "right" is taken for corrupt custom, and as Rabbi Levi and Rabbi David explain: for "the matters which he mentioned, but Samuel wished to frighten them and alarm them, and he advised [them] what the king would do when he is strengthened in his kingdom, when it is burdensome for them from what is impossible to do from the point of view of the judgments of the Law."

(94) "Apollonius the companion of Antoninus." He is Apollonius of Chalcis, concerning whom Eusebius in the *Chronicon*.

^A Having been asked if he calls himself a Christian, he replied almost with the order of a confession, and answered with sensible words, making a brave defense for piety, saying that he did not fear death, which would occur by necessity even if he did not contradict the emperor. And thus the man was greatly adorned in all things, until he fell into the error of his own heresy, becoming like an excellent ship that is laden with countless goods, but having been dashed against the harbor, not only suffers the loss of all its items, but also brings death to its passengers.

^B II. For this man attached himself most miserably to the Valentinians, and from their depravity he drew that poisonous and tares-like venom. He introduced many other principles and productions of his own. And having denied the resurrection of the dead, he dogmatized this heresy. He makes use of the Law and the Prophets, and the Old and New Testaments, and also of certain apocryphal books. But he, along with all those who have preceded him or come after him, will be easily refuted as one who has alienated himself from the truth, and like a bright and fiery torch has been changed into soot.

For concerning the resurrection of the dead, although it has already been discussed in other heresies, I shall not be burdened to discuss the same subject again in a few words for his refutation. For if you accept the Old Testament, O fellow, and the New Testament likewise, how will you not be convicted of corrupting the way of truth and alienating yourself from the true life of the Lord? Since the Lord Himself was the first, that He might be for us an earnest of the resurrection and the first-born from the dead, and He died for our sake and rose again. And He did not suffer merely in appearance. For He was buried, and some have carried His body. Joseph of Arimathea is a witness, and the women who brought spices to the tomb are witnesses, and the weight of the hundred pounds of aloes is a witness, that it was not a semblance or a phantom. The angels also are witnesses, who appeared to the women, saying: "He is risen; He is not here. Why do you seek the living among the dead?" And He did not say, "He has not died," but "He has risen," He who suffered in the flesh, but lives forever in the Spirit, and who, according to His divinity, is exempt from all suffering. He who exists, having risen from the heights and being perpetually begotten of the Father. Yet the same One, in the last times, willed to be made man from the Virgin Mary, as the most holy Paul testifies, saying: "Made of a woman, made under the law." Have you never heard the word of Scripture which says: "This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality"? Or has not the prophet Isaiah convinced you, when he speaks thus: "And the dead shall rise, and those who are in the graves shall be awakened"? And the Lord Himself saying that "These shall rise to eternal life, and these to..."

^A their punishment"? Do you not recall that conversation of Abel after his death with God, how it is not said that his soul pleads and cries out to God, but his blood? Now blood is by no means the soul, but the soul is present within the blood. For blood is a visible body, whereas the soul, being something invisible, has its place in the blood. And thus, O Bardesanes, your wickedness is refuted on all sides, overturned by the very power of the truth.

III. Against many principles

^C Since the sound faith is preserved on every side, being the foundation and salvation of the faithful, the invented emptiness of all heresies is easily overturned; just as this one also has been overturned, having rendered itself most miserable and alienated itself from life. For the prophet says to the holy Church of God: "I will set your stone as a carbuncle, and your foundations as sapphire, and your walls as choice stones, and your battlements as jasper." Then afterwards he says: "Every voice that shall rise against you, you shall overcome them all; but against you it shall not prosper." For there is nothing that can overcome the faith of the truth, because it is built upon the rock, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it; as the holy God the Word, her King, and Bridegroom, and Lord, and Master promised her; ^D to whom is the glory, honor, and dominion, to the Father in the Son, with the Holy Spirit, unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Now that this heresy has also been trampled underfoot, being like the head of a serpent severed from its trunk and still quivering, crushed as it were by the staff of life, it remains that we, having duly given thanks to God, should pass on to observe the other heresies, O beloved.

AGAINST THE NOETIANS,

I. Another, after this one, arose by the name of Noetus, not many years ago, but as I said before...

^A of these one hundred and thirty, more or less, an Asian, being from the city of Ephesus. He, being borne along by a strange spirit, wished of his own accord to say and teach things that neither the prophets, nor the apostles, nor the Church from the beginning held, nor even conceived. This man, being lifted up ^B by his own spirit as it were on a chariot of madness, dared to say that the Father had suffered. And further, being carried away by a certain greater pride and delusion, he called himself Moses and his own brother Aaron. But meanwhile, receiving word of the rumor surrounding him, the blessed presbyters of the Church called him before them and examined him regarding all these things, and whether he had brought forward this blasphemy regarding the Father. He at first denied it when brought before the presbytery, because no one ^C before him had vomited forth this terrible and destructive poison. Later, however, having cast his madness upon some others, so to speak, and having gathered to himself about ten men, he was lifted up into greater pride and insolence; and having become bold, he openly disseminated his heresy. Therefore, the same presbyters again summoned both him and the men who had been disastrously led astray by him, and questioned them again about the same matters. But he, ^D together with those who had been led astray by him, brazenly standing his ground, began to contradict them, saying: "For what evil have I done? I worship one God, I know one, and no other besides him, who was born, suffered, and died." As he remained constant in these opinions, they cast him and those who had been taught his doctrine out of the Church. The same man died shortly after with his own brother; yet he was not buried with the honor of Moses of old, nor his brother with the honor of Aaron; for they were cast out as deserters, and none of the Catholics afforded them burial. After this, those who had imbibed the doctrine corrupted by him confirmed this same dogma, led on by the very same words by which their master had been led at the beginning; for when, upon being asked by the council of presbyters, he had said he worshipped one God, he heard from them the truthful response: "We also worship one God, but we know how to worship him legitimately. And we also have one Christ, but we know one Christ, the Son of God, who suffered as he suffered, died as he died, rose again, ascended into heaven, is at the right hand of the Father, and is coming to judge the living and the dead. We confess these things, having learned them from the holy Scriptures, which we also know."

II. From this, the Noetians, being an offshoot of him, and all his followers profess the same dogma, and endeavor to confirm that frantic doctrine of theirs by those words by which God spoke to Moses: "I am the God of the fathers..."

first, and I am after these things; and there shall be no other gods for thee;” and what follows. They used to argue thus: "We know Him alone. ^A If, therefore, Christ was born when He came, He Himself is the Father, He Himself is the Son; hence He Himself is the God who always existed, and who has now come, as the Scripture says: ‘This is your God; no other shall be reckoned alongside Him. He found the whole way of knowledge, and gave it to Jacob His servant, and to Israel His beloved.’ After this, He was seen upon the earth and conversed with men."

"Do you see," they say, "once again how the divine Scripture instructs us, so that we should not imagine one God after another, asserting that He Himself is the only God who came, and that He Himself was the One who was seen later?" Furthermore, they employ another passage, as it says: "Egypt hath labored, and the merchandise of the Ethiopians, and the Sabeans, men of high stature, shall pass over unto thee, and they shall be thy servants; and they shall walk after thee, bound in fetters, and they shall worship thee, and in thee they shall make supplication, because God is in thee, and there is no God ^B besides thee. For Thou art God, and we knew it not, the God of Israel the Saviour." "Do you see," they say, "how the divine Scriptures signify one God, and proclaim Him manifest? And by confession He is one, the same who always exists. And for this reason, we do not speak of many gods, but of one God, the same being impassible, the same being the Father of the Son, the same being the Son, and the one who suffered, so that He might save us by His own passion; and we cannot speak of another"—having indeed learned this confession, and this wicked assumption, and destructive madness, from their master.

Then they bring forward other passages for the validation of themselves, as their teacher also said, that the Apostle likewise bears witness to these words: "Whose are the fathers, and of whom Christ came according to the flesh, who is over all God blessed for ever. Amen." But they wish to interpret this in a single-clause manner in this way, just as Theodotus did. The latter, to be sure, by ^C describing Him as a bare man in the most extreme, natural sense, whereas the former, once again, falling into another extreme, uniform-wise sets down the same Person as Father and Son and Holy Spirit, having supposed Him to have suffered and been born in the flesh. Neither, therefore, did those who follow Theodotus speak anything in truth, nor did this Noetus and his followers—or rather "No-sense" [Anöetos], by the force of the name, as the divine Scriptures refute both them and all who have been led astray.

III. But to one who has his mind fixed on God, and is illuminated by the divine Scripture and the Holy Spirit, their argument is easily refuted, and appears full of every folly. For it is a deed of audacity ^D and a thought of blindness to say that the same is the Father, and the same is the Son, and the same is the one who suffered; as those who assert such things shall be judged even by sound reasoning. For how could the same be Father and exist as Son? For if He exists as Son, it is by all means of someone

^A from whom He has been begotten. But if He is Father, it is impossible for Him to beget Himself. Again, for that which is called Son not to have begotten Himself, but to have been begotten from the Father—O, the great mental blindness and incorrigible reasoning of men! For that which is reasonable is not as these men imagine, but as the Truth indicates to us through the divine Scripture. For immediately the Lord says, speaking: "Behold, my beloved Son shall understand (98), whom I have chosen, in whom my soul has delighted. I will put my Spirit upon Him." And you see how the voice of the Father indicates by nature a Son, upon whom He also places His Spirit! Then the Only-begotten Himself says: "Glorify me, O Father, with the glory which I had with You before the world was." And He who says, "Father, glorify me," does not call Himself Father, but acknowledges his own Father. Again, in another place: "A voice came from heaven, that this is my Son; hear Him." And He did not say: "I am my Son; hear me," nor again, "I have become Son," but, "This is my Son; hear Him." And concerning the saying, "I and my Father are one," He did not say, "I and my Father am one," but "I and my Father are one." But the, "I and the Father," with the article "the" and the and interposed, signifies a Father by nature a Father, and a Son by nature a Son.

^B IV. Concerning the Holy Spirit, He speaks thus: "If I go away, He will come, the Spirit of truth." But this is much clearer: "I go, and He comes." And He did not say: "I go, and I come." But by these words, "I" and "He," He demonstrates that both the Son consists in His own hypostasis, and the Holy Spirit likewise in His own. Item: "The Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, will take of Mine." By which words He shows that a hypostasis proper to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit is to be assigned. In addition to this, at the Jordan, the Father spoke from heaven; the Son truly descended to the Jordan; and the Holy Spirit appeared between both in the likeness of a dove, and descended upon Him. Although the Holy Spirit did not in the least take on flesh, nor did He put on a body. But lest the Son be believed to coalesce and be confused with the Holy Spirit, He presented Himself to be seen under the image of a dove, so that, of course, the Spirit might be discerned with a singular and proper person. Finally, with how many arguments can we demonstrate this against those who have conceived this insane madness of opinions in their mind! For if their meaning is true, and their speech is absurd, and not at all coherent, and has no weight, nor power, nor reasoning of understanding ^D or manifestation; therefore, they ought to be cast out from the Scriptures.

And yet you say, O man: might those who truly offer worship ^A to the Trinity—who are sons of the truth and of the one Catholic Church—be thought to hold to polytheism? But this is not so. For who does not rejoice that there is one God of truth, the Father Almighty, from whom the only-begotten Son is in truth God the Word, the Word subsisting in his own person, having been begotten of Him without beginning and without time? Therefore, the Church safely preaches one God, the Father and the Son. For, "I am in the Father, and the Father in me," and "We both are one"—that is, there is one divinity, one will, and one lordship. And from the Father, the Spirit also proceeds, subsisting in his own person, and in truth the perfect Spirit of truth, who illuminates all things, who receives from the Son, the Spirit of truth, the Spirit of the Father, the Spirit of Christ. For this reason, the Church acknowledges one divinity: one God the Father of truth, a perfect Father subsisting in his own person, a perfect Son subsisting in his own person, and a perfect Holy Spirit subsisting in his own person; one divinity, one dominion, one lordship. Wherefore, the divine Scriptures ^B have preached in every way clearly one God, that is, the consubstantial Trinity, always possessing the same identity and the same lordship. And thus your reasoning of folly has collapsed from every side, O senseless one. These things having been said, it is necessary to examine the utterances of the aforementioned Noetus from the beginning, and in this way to refute his individual arguments.

V. First of all, since he produced the point that, "There is one God, from whom are all things, and we for him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, and we through him—through whom are all things, and we through him"—do you not see that "there is one God, from whom are all things, and we for him," signifies the one principle, so that he might not turn the mind to many principles and again lead the wandering mind of men into polytheism, toward the vain babbling of multiple gods? For you see how he has used one name and one designation, not denying the only-begotten ^C God. For he knows him to be the Lord, and he also knows him to be God. Therefore, guarding himself, he says: "And one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things." And in declaring this regarding the "Lord," he did not signify that the Father and the Son are the same; but he showed the Father to be truly Father, and the Son to be truly Son. For when he said, "One God," he referred to the Father, not as denying that the Son is God. For if he is not God, neither is he Lord; whereas, since he is Lord, he is also God. But he was compelled by the Holy Spirit to bring them into one ^D designation.

^A Nor yet let anyone suppose, because he said one, and one only, that anything has been taken away from the number of the Trinity; as if he had made no mention of the Holy Spirit. For in naming the Father and the Son, God and Lord, he named them in the Holy Spirit. For he did not cease, when he said, "One God," concerning the Father, of whom are all things, to acknowledge Him as Lord; nor again, when he said, "And one Lord Jesus Christ," did he deny Him to be God. But just as, regarding the Father, he was satisfied with the single appellation, saying, "One God"—with which word is also contained the other, "Lord"—so too regarding the Son, he expressed only the phrase, "One Lord"; with which word is also joined the appellation of God. Wherefore, when the Apostle was discoursing about the Father and the Son, he was not void of the Holy Spirit, but spoke in the same, as I have said. But the Holy Spirit is accustomed in no way to seek His own commendation, lest He might seem to have provided us with an example of commending ourselves. There is therefore one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, or for whom are all things; and one Holy Spirit, by no means an alien to God, but being subsistent, because He is the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of truth, and the Spirit of the Father, and the Spirit of Christ.

^C VI. As for the objection he puts to us: "Egypt has labored and the trade of the Ethiopians, and the Sabean men of stature shall pass over to thee." Also that: "Thou art God, and we knew it not; and they shall serve thee, and they shall go behind thee bound in handcuffs, and in thee they shall pray: because in thee God is, and there is no God besides thee. For thou art God, and we knew it not, the God of Israel, the Savior"; ^D "You see," he says, "how there is only one God?" For he relies most on those places of Scripture, as we said before, not understanding their meaning, but fraudulently cutting off the sacred Scriptures, and establishing distorted narratives, and bringing forward sacred authorities in a perverse order and with some parts omitted. He speaks nothing consecutively or in order, and finally Noetus understands nothing, nor do those who are called Noetians from him. And just as sometimes the name of a lion is given to a very bad dog, and they call those who do not even see existing things "those who see many things," and say that bile is sweet, and some have named vinegar honey, and some have named the Furies Eumenides; so we see it has happened in their case, that Noetus, bearing a name of sense, exists as senseless, and those from him are senseless, neither seeing at all the consequence.

of those he claims, and of those things that are put forward. As ^A a fool, that is, a senseless and stupid man, he would be called; and this very name would be equally consequent to that inept disciple. For they do not understand the reason and the consequence of what they say and openly propose, so that in them that saying of the holy Apostle is fulfilled: "Neither understanding what they say, nor whereof they affirm."

VII. For observe, dearest brothers, what the Scripture has said beforehand, or rather the Lord Himself, as it is written at the beginning of the chapter. Whence, from that most true narrative which is in the whole chapter and the argument, the Christian faith is to be demonstrated. For thus it says: "Ask me concerning my sons and daughters, and command me concerning the works of my hands. I made," it says, "the earth, and man upon it; I with my hand founded the heaven; I commanded all the stars; I have raised up a king with justice, and all his ways are ^B straight. This one shall build my city, and shall turn again the captivity, not with price, nor with rewards, says the Lord of Sabaoth." Then it adds: "Egypt has labored, and the trades of the Ethiopians, and the rest, because God is in thee." In whom else, indeed, should we say that God resides than in the paternal Word? For truly the Word of God is the Son, and in Him the Father is known, as He Himself testifies: "He that has seen me, has seen the Father"; and, "I have glorified thy name upon the earth"; then again, "that I have raised up a king." Do you not see that the voice is the Father's, which is distinctive, which raises up from Himself the true Word ^C as King over all, Him who was truly begotten of Him without beginning and without time? Which same King He raised up again, as the holy Apostle expressed in these words: "But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you; he that raised up Jesus Christ from the dead shall quicken also your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you," so that the oracles of the prophets may harmonize with the apostolic, and the apostolic with the evangelical, and the evangelical with the apostolic, and the apostolic finally with the prophetic.

Then: "I raised up a king." And here is declared He who raised Christ from the dead. But when it says, "In thee God is," with what mystery and how ^D admirably does Holy Scripture propose all things! For indeed in the flesh, as it were in a temple, the divinity was foreseen and shown to the hope of men through conversion to God. For the Son of God, the Word of God, as in a holy city and a holy temple—that is to say, in the holy incarnation and in the fleshly presence—being God, dwelling in a holy temple, thus speaks: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." For the Word of God, sent by the Spirit in the flesh, administers all things mysteriously, and showing the bond of love, He draws us, and having humbled Himself, though He is the great God, He Himself, the Word, born of a Virgin through the Holy Spirit as the Son of God, being one, Himself in flesh and spirit

brought all the business of His dispensation to perfection. To what, then, does this refer: "He who descended is the same who ascended, the Son of man, who is in heaven"?

^A VIII. What can Noetus, with his stupidity and madness, object to these things? Was flesh present in heaven before? Certainly not. How, then, is "He who descended from heaven the same who ascended"? Unless he wished to signify that the Word Himself, who had descended, did not come from a lower place but had descended from heaven. But after He assumed human flesh—not, indeed, conceived from the seed of a man, but through the Spirit and from the flesh—He brought the whole business of His economy to completion; and for this reason, signifying one unity of the union of the Word and the incarnation, He says that He who came from above ascends above in the perfection of divinity. For even now, He who was not formerly is flesh, having come from the Spirit and the Virgin, the perfect Word offered to God the Father, who before this was not flesh in heaven. What, then, was in heaven other than the Word who was sent down from heaven? To whom the union into one divinity belonged, joined and fused according to the power of the Father, that He might show that the same God the Word existed on earth and in heaven, changeless and immutable. For the Word was, God was always, He was Spirit, He was power; and as He took into Himself the common name, which men could grasp, so He was called the Son of man, being the Son of God, and was named by the prophets as the one pre-existing, which He was not yet in the flesh, on account of what was to be fulfilled in Him. As Daniel also said: "I saw one like the Son of man coming on the clouds." Therefore, the prophet rightly saw this Word in heaven by the Holy Spirit by this name, calling Him the Son of the Highest. Therefore, the Only-Begotten, declaring the things that are first in the later order, says: "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven, the Son of man." Not that the flesh was in heaven, but that He who descended from heaven was to be called by such a name.

^B IX. But what at last, O man, will you bring forward? "It is written," he says: "This is our God, and no other shall be accounted." Very well, as also the Apostle affirms, saying: "Whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all." These things are indeed written by him in an admirable way. For this one, who is, is God over all. Since He Himself teaches us, saying: "All things have been handed over to Me by My Father"; therefore He is God over all. And so John also testifies, saying: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, and have seen with our eyes, and our hands have touched." And again he says in the Apocalypse: "He who is from the beginning, and He who is coming, the Almighty." ^C These things were clearly and excellently articulated by him. Rightly, I say, he spoke: "All things have been handed over to Me by My Father"; and he spoke exactly.

He was therefore God over all, while nevertheless having His own Father. Which He expressed ^A in these words: "I am going to the Father." But if He Himself were the Father, to what Father, then, O foolish man, would He be going? For again He speaks: "That they may be one, just as I and You are one."

X. For Scripture, being especially cautious regarding this, lest men lean toward either extreme, directs their understanding and intellect everywhere toward the middle path of truth. Wherefore, to confront those who proclaim that the Son is foreign to the Father—which is the opinion of Arius and other sects—it speaks thus: "I and the Father are one." Conversely, to refute those who assert that the Father and the Son are the same, in place of what He said, ^B "I and the Father are one," it speaks in another place in prayer: "Make them one, just as I and You are one"; in order to strike shame into Noetus and his school, by bringing forward the union of the disciples. For by what reasoning could Peter and John, and the others, be one, as if coalescing and merging into one? But those things were surely said because they stand together in the union of one divinity and in one will and power, so that every error and falsehood that might rise up against the truth from either side might be excluded. ^C The holy apostle Philip says: "Show us Your Father." To whom He replied: "He who sees Me, sees also My Father." He did not say: "I am the Father"; but He added "Me," which is the same as Himself. Likewise, He says, "sees the Father," not referring to Himself. For that article is one thing, the pronoun another, and "me" another. For if He were the Father Himself, He would have said precisely: "I am." Since, however, He is not the Father Himself, but the Son, He truly says: "He who sees Me, sees the Father," to refute the blasphemy of Arius, which alienates the Son from the Father.

Since these things are so, and since all the holy Scriptures most certainly demonstrate to us the way of truth, ^D after we have repelled this Noetus and the sect of the Noetians propagated by him, together with the rest of the heresies—just like that dragon which is called the "ostracites" (or "testaceous"), who when he pursues a man, can in no way bend himself toward the right or toward the left—having turned away from him and his school and wickedness, let us, relying on divine aid, direct our mind to the remaining ones, so that we may be able to unravel and refute the strange modes of speech devised against the truth in them.

AGAINST THE VALESIANS,

I. We have heard of the Valesians many times, yet we have not been able to discover where their author Valens was from, or from whence he arose, nor what his dicta, precepts, or discourses were. Although from his

^A lights, which is Arabic, we have some suspicion that he held the same opinion, and that the sect which we said exists among certain people who dwell in the Bacathi of the province of Philadelphia beyond the Jordan, remains to this day, as I said, in suspicion. These people are called Gnostics by the inhabitants of that place, although they are by no means Gnostics, and they dissent from them in the variety of their opinions. But what we have been able to learn about them is generally of this kind:

In the beginning, many of them frequented the Church, and this continued until their madness increased and spread, and they were segregated from the communion of the Church. Moreover, they are all castrated. They hold opinions about principalities and powers and other matters in this same manner. Whomever they receive into their discipline, as long as his virile parts have not yet been cut away, he abstains from living things. But after they have either persuaded him or violently performed the excision, then at last, as if free from every struggle and placed outside of all danger, so that he might not be inflamed toward the pleasures of lust by the use of food, he is permitted [to eat] any kind of food. Nor do they treat their own people in this way only, but often also strangers who are passing by and turn aside to them, as is spread about them by frequent rumor. For they seize such persons inside, and having bound them with manacles and chains, they violently mutilate them of their members. These are the things we have received about these heretics; and when we learned in what place they have their domicile, and how common that name is in those regions, and since we have received no other name for the heresy, we have rightly persuaded ourselves that this is the same one.

^B II. But there is a certain remarkable foolishness in these people. For if they wish to fulfill what is written in the Gospel: "If one of your members scandalizes you, cut it off from you. For it is profitable for you to enter into the kingdom of heaven lame, or maimed, or crooked," etc. How can any mutilated person enter the kingdom of heaven? For if the kingdom of heaven possesses all things perfect, it has nothing imperfect in itself. And when the bodies of men rise again, all the members will rise together, so that none of them is utterly left behind. And if we deny that any member at all rises again, not even the whole body will rise. But if that one member which scandalizes must be left behind, it is a consequence that none at all should be left behind. For all our members have scandalized us. But who is there who can tear out and amputate his heart for scandalizing in all things? For, he says, "from within proceed fornications, adulteries, lusts," and other things of that kind. Who, therefore, will tear out his own heart? But if, as the impiety and madness of some maintain, the body does not rise again at all, what then of our

^A being one member, while the others do not satisfy this [condition]? But if the body is raised (for it is raised), how can there possibly be any wounding or maiming in the kingdom of heaven? Or how will the kingdom of heaven not be unseemly, having bodies that are defective in the pursuit of glory? But if the member that causes scandal were to be cut off, it has surely been cut off and has not sinned. But when it has been cut off and has not sinned, it must itself first of all rise before anything else, having not sinned.

^B Γ΄. Those who are bold enough for this rash act have set themselves apart and alienated themselves from all people. For they are neither men, because of what has been removed, nor can they be women, because of the unnatural state. ^B And they have anticipated the name of the crown of this struggle and prize. Nor, indeed, will these people appear to be any of the three classes of eunuchs mentioned by the Lord. For He says, ^C "There are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb." For they are blameless in their eunuchism; they have committed no sin in being born thus; nor, again, are they able to commit sin—I mean, the sin of sexual intercourse—since the organs of generation, which were created by God, are not naturally present in them. But neither do they have the reward of eunuchism for the kingdom of heaven, because they do not recall the struggle. And if such people are conscious of desires ^D while being unable to act upon them, and do not act, they do not have a reward. For it is not because they do not wish to, that the deed is not performed by them, but because they are unable. And this is the way of life of the first eunuchism mentioned by the Lord, that which is born from the mothers, from which these people cannot be.

Δ΄. "And there are eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men," says the Savior; and those mentioned before are not among these. For the former are born [as eunuchs], but the latter are made eunuchs by men for the sake of royal or administrative service. For some of the barbarian kings, or even tyrants, moved by jealousy and suspicion toward their own wives, take children while they are still very young and make them eunuchs, in order that, when they reach manhood, they may be trusted with their own wives, as I have said. And thus the cause of this state has come to be in the world. Whence perhaps I think even the term "eunuch" is derived, from the ability to be well-disposed (*eunoiein*), with the members being removed, and not being rubbed by the union of bodies, as though they were deprived of the organs. This, then, is another class, taken from childhood and made eunuchs by men, not for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.

^A

It follows then: *And there are eunuchs who have castrated themselves for the sake of the kingdom.* Who can these be, if not those noble men, first the apostles, then the monastics, and subsequent followers of virginity? Such were John and James, the sons of Zebedee, who persevered in virginity, neither by their own hands amputating their members, nor being bound by marriage, but struggling with their spirit and heart, and with the utmost admiration they brought back the crown and glory of that contest. Following them, countless thousands of men who have embraced the monastic life in this world, in monasteries and in the cloisters of virgins, have attained the honor of the same contest. These, clearly, have not had any association with women, but have struggled in the most perfect contest, as Elijah is found in the Old Testament, and Paul saying: *But I say to the unmarried, that it is good for them if they remain as I am. But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry.* How then did he remain? For if he had been castrated, and they remained like him, imitating him, that they might fulfill the "as I am," how could a castrated man have been able to marry, if he no longer had self-control? And the expression, *let them marry, and let them not be inflamed*, do you not perceive that he is speaking about continence, and not about the removal of members? ^B

But if they say that they have castrated themselves for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, how can they separate themselves from the aforementioned saying, which says that *there are some who have been made eunuchs by men*? For if someone castrates himself with his own hands, he is a man, and by his hands that wicked deed was committed. But if he cannot bring such ruin upon himself with his own hand, but has been castrated by others, he will no longer suffer it for the sake of the heavenly kingdom, because whether through himself or through the agency of others he has brought it upon himself, he has been made a eunuch by men. Wherefore, he will utterly fall from the hope of the crown and from the reward, since he merits no grace for abstaining from the use of such pleasure, but is unable to do so because he is destitute of the members necessary for that function. Wherefore, the judgment concerning him is the same as for one who violates any member of the body or cuts down another’s vine. ^C For he did not establish a way of life according to the divine will, but such a man has wickedly set himself against his Creator, the Lord God. Moreover, he shall burn with a more vehement desire. For even the eunuch, not by abstaining from his desire, but by being unable to fulfill the desire, is described by the Wise Man: *The desire of a eunuch shall deflower a young woman.* Consequently, O the incredible folly, devised in various ways in this world!

Conclusion of the Refutation of the Heretics

And these are the things which we have been able to investigate concerning this kind of heretic. Concerning whom, having spoken briefly, and suspecting them to be the same ones whom we mentioned before, having left behind and rejected with mockery these who, like the scorpion ^D with its bifid sting...

have opposed the paths of life established by the Fathers, and have erected their baneful stings against the form and precept of God’s holy Church; these, I say, having firmly trodden them underfoot with the sandal—that is, the voice of the sacrosanct Gospel, as is our custom—and having crushed and broken them, let us change our discourse to the remaining heresies, and here make an end of debating their foolishness.

AGAINST THE CATHARI, Heresy XXXIX, or LIX.

^A I. Next in order after these, certain people called Cathari arose from a certain Novatus, as the common report goes. This Novatus was at Rome during the time of that persecution which preceded the one Maximinus stirred up; it was, I suspect, that of Decius, or perhaps Aurelian. Because he was puffed up with arrogance on account of pretexts involving those who had lapsed in that persecution, and was unwilling to admit into communion along with his own followers those who had performed penance after the persecution, he turned to this heresy, asserting that there is no hope of salvation, and that there is but one penance. He maintained that no mercy could be shown to anyone who had fallen into sin after baptism.

But we also say that there is one penance, and that salvation is attained through the washing of regeneration. Yet we do not take away God’s love for mankind; we know the proclamation of the truth, and the Lord’s mercy, and the pardonable nature of our constitution, ^B the fickleness of the soul, the weakness of the flesh, and the many-fold nature of the perceptions of most men. For no one is without sin, and clean from impurity, not even if his life upon the earth be but a single day. And while perfect penance is found in the washing [of baptism], if anyone has lapsed, the holy Church of God does not destroy him,

but rather welcomes and grants the opportunity of changing his resolve after penance. ^A For God said to Cain: "You have sinned, be quiet." And to the paralytic: "Behold, you are well, sin no more." And the Lord recalls Peter after the denial, and to compensate for that triple denial, He led him three times to a confession: "Peter," He says, "do you love me?" Then, "Feed my sheep."

II.

The holy word, therefore, and the holy Church of God, always accepts penance, not weakening it, ^D nor making negligent those who run the race, but not turning away the grace and kindness of God, while knowing the manner of each particular case. For just as virginity

has lost its form, so to speak, in regard to the body, and cannot present it, since nature does not permit it; so also, one who has fallen into some greater sins after baptism, in the same way as one who has fallen from virginity has a second degree of commendation in continence, so he who has occurred in a greater transgression after baptism has a second path to restoration—not such a virtuous one as the first, yet the second way of life he possesses is not one to be rejected. The divine Word, therefore, does not reject the reward of those who labor in repentance.

III. Furthermore, again proceeding from this, they have invented other things. For they say that they have the same faith as we do, but they do not wish to hold communion with those who have married twice. For if anyone after baptism is joined to a second wife, by them he is no longer received, and the whole thing is foolish. For just as if someone were to see a person swimming in the water, and, being ignorant of the trial of the ordeal, were to throw himself into the waters, and be submerged—not being experienced, nor clearly knowing the skill of those who acquire salvation for themselves through the use of hands and feet—and thinks simply that the water supports a person without the movement of the hands; or as if someone were to hear a ruler punishing those who do something, even in the smallest matters, and thinks that the penalty is dealt out equally against all, as in the case of murder, and so also in the case of someone slandering his neighbor or fighting; or as if someone who is altogether a layman were to see a ruler who has received authority drawing a sword against wicked men, or against sorcerers, or blasphemers, or the impious, and thinks that everyone has the authority to exact punishment for such a cause; and, having seen men paying the penalty, he himself, imitating the same, would wish to kill some, as if he were judging those who have done wrong—such a person, having been caught, will himself pay the penalty, having received no authority from the king for such things, and because he thought that an equal sentence was issued by the law’s judgment against all, while he himself, through his own ignorance and incongruity, has rendered himself liable to destruction—so also they, having mixed all things together, have fallen from everything; and not understanding the precision of God's teaching, they have wandered off onto another path. They do not know that this is the tradition and sequence of the divine Scripture.

IV. For as regards those things handed down for the priesthood, because of the most excellent nature of the sacred ministry, they have thought that they apply equally to everyone; having heard that a bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife, and continent; and likewise both the

^A deacon and the presbyter. For indeed, the holy Church of God, after the coming of Christ, does not accept those who, from a first marriage, have entered into a second marriage upon the death of their wife, because of the exceeding excellence of the priesthood. And this, the holy Church of God guards with strict accuracy. But it does not even accept one who is still living with his wife and begetting children, even if he be the husband of one wife; rather, it receives as deacon, presbyter, bishop, or subdeacon only one who has practiced continence from his wife or who is widowed—especially where the ecclesiastical canons are strictly observed.

But you will surely say to me, "In some places they still beget children, even among presbyters, deacons, and subdeacons." This happens not by the authority of the canon, but because of the negligence of men in certain times, and because of the multitude of the people, where ministers cannot easily be found. For the Church, always seeing what is ^B most fitting, being well ordered by the Holy Spirit, has known that it should endeavor to have worship performed in a way that allows us to be undistracted toward God, and for spiritual needs to be fulfilled with every most-willing conscience. I say, therefore, that it is fitting for the presbyter, the deacon, and the bishop to be free for God, for the sake of sudden liturgies and needs. For if the holy Apostle enjoins this even upon those of the people, saying, "That they may be free for prayer for a time," how much more does he enjoin the same upon the priest? By "being undistracted," I mean being free to serve the spiritual needs in the ^C ministry. It is permissible for the laity, because of weakness, to be borne with, if they cannot endure in their first union, to be joined to a second after the death of the first. And he who has had but one exists in greater praise and honor among all the gathered faithful; but he who could not be satisfied with the one—having, after her death, for some cause of fornication, or adultery, or some other evil cause of separation, refrained from one, and should it happen, been legally joined to a second—is not blamed by the... ^D

divine Word, nor is he cast out from the Church and from life; rather, [the Church] bears with him on account of his weakness. It is not that he should have two wives at the same time, while the first is still living, but that, having separated from one, he should, if it so happens, be legally joined to a second. The holy Word and the holy Church of God show compassion to such a person, especially if he happens to be devout in other respects and conducts his life according to the law of God. For the Apostle would not have said to widows: "Let them marry, let them bear children, let them manage their households," nor again would he have spoken of the man who had his father’s wife, and who had been delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that "the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord"; nor would he have said again: "Confirm your love toward him, that such a one may not be swallowed up by excessive sorrow." For he said again: "Whom you forgive, I also forgive; for, if I have forgiven anything, I have forgiven it for your sakes in the person of Christ, that we might not be outwitted by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his designs." And you see how he grants repentance even after offenses? ^B

V. Furthermore, the Lord says: "Forgive one another your offenses, that your Father who is in heaven may forgive us." And in another place He says thus: "I will mourn for many of those who have fallen among us and have not repented," showing that if they have fallen and have repented, these are acceptable and will not be cast out, for the Lord knows what He will do with each one. ^C

And that the rule of the truth has such a character is clear to everyone. For after the first repentance, which is through the laver of regeneration, in which repentance every man has been renewed, no second repentance of that same kind exists. For there are not two baptisms, but one; nor was Christ crucified twice, but once; nor did He die for us and rise again twice. And for this reason one must take care, lest, if we have fallen, we lose the crown of renewal. But if anyone should fall, and be caught in some transgression, as the Apostle says, "You who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; looking to yourself, lest you also be tempted." If, therefore, anyone is caught in a transgression, of whatever kind it may be, let him repent. For God receives repentance even after baptism, if anyone should fall. But how one should act after this, He alone knows. For "His judgments are unsearchable, and His ^D ways past finding out"; and one should not judge before the presence [of the Lord], "until the Lord comes, who will also bring to light the hidden things of the heart." And then the praise of each one shall be made manifest. For the

day shall declare it, since it shall be revealed in fire. ^A

VI. Since these things are so, we neither show absolute freedom to those who have fallen into sin after baptism, nor do we snatch away from them the hope of salvation. For God is merciful and compassionate, and He has granted a way of return to those who repent. And while the first point is clear, regarding the second we know that God is merciful if we repent of our transgressions with our whole soul. For He holds life in His hand, and possesses a humanity inclined toward salvation. What He Himself does, however, is known to Him alone. Yet this much is certain: that there is no loss incurred by repentance, nor is the one who repents of all his faults forbidden [from hope]. How much more, then, should the same [mercy] be granted to one who, according to the law, has bound himself in marriage to a second wife? For as the first wife was ordained by God, so the later one was permitted on account of human weakness. And if one should take a second besides the first, his infirmity in this respect is tolerated. For it is written: "A woman is bound by the law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is free to marry whom she wishes." By this, it is declared that after the death of her husband, she is free from all sin, to the point that no one can gainsay it. ^B By adding "in the Lord," He signified that she is by no means an alien to the Lord if, after her husband's death, she joins herself to another man, just as neither is he who, upon his wife's death, joins himself to a second wife—provided it be "in the Lord," as the Apostle says. And he says: "She is more blessed if she remains as she is." The phrase "in the Lord" means not in fornication, not in adultery, not in illicit marriage, but to persevere in openness, in honorable marriage, in the faith, in the commandments, in charitable deeds, in reverence, in fasts, in law-abidingness, in almsgiving, in diligence, in well-doing. For these things, when they are present and remain in us, do not render us idle or unfruitful at the coming of the Lord.

For the priesthood, the first rank and an accurate rule of life in all things are assigned. But for the people, something moderate—and adapted to their capacity—is provided, joined with a certain indulgence, so that all may be taught and may obtain mercy. For the Lord is merciful, and He is able to save all by His own law and the true faith of the purity of the proclamation. For He alone is pure. But these men, while they proclaim themselves "Pure," by that very dogma make themselves impure. For whoever pronounces himself pure, by his own judgment condemns himself to extreme impurity. ^{C D}

VII. But there is a certain incredible folly in these men, who think that there is some scriptural statement of this kind (even if we admit their dogma to be true) which decides in this manner regarding the whole people. For they ought to have known that it is not only in this type of human conduct that souls incur guilt or are endowed with virtue, but that [the matter] entails...

not to deal craftily, not to slander, not to steal, not to profiteer. For from all these things, the filth of sins is gathered for us. For as it is said, "As a stake is driven into the midst between two stones, so also is sin [driven] into the midst of the buyer and the seller." And because from the multitude [of people] there are necessarily drunkards, and fornicators, and the covetous, and usurers—and because it is certain that they possess such things, and things similar to these—and also because falsehood follows upon each of them, how then can they call themselves "Pure" by means of this one vow, while the whole procedure of the Christian life concerning all faults is made secure? These people have not known the exact sense of the preaching, nor to whom He assigned this precise definition of the second marriage.

^B But as for those who have fallen away during the persecution, even they, if they show perfect repentance by sitting in sackcloth and ashes and weeping before the Lord, are such whom the Benefactor is able to pity. For nothing evil comes from repentance. The Lord, therefore, and His Church receive those who repent, just as Manasseh the son of Hezekiah returned and was received by the Lord, and just as holy Peter, the most eminent of the apostles, who for a time denied Him, [was received]. He who became for us truly a solid rock, establishing the faith of the Lord, upon which the Church was built in every way. First, because he confessed Christ to be the Son of the living God, and heard, "Upon this rock of the secure faith I will build my Church." Since he clearly confessed Him to be the true Son. For the saying, "Son of the living God," showed Him to be the genuine Son, with the addition of the word "living," as has been said concerning this in almost every heresy for me.

^{C D} VIII. But also concerning the Holy Spirit, the same Peter makes us secure, saying to those around Ananias, "Why has Satan tempted you, to lie to the Holy Spirit? You have not lied to men, but to God." For the Spirit is from God, and is not alien to God. But even here, a solid rock of the building and a foundation of the house of God was made in the one who had denied Him and returned again, and who was found by the Lord and counted worthy to hear again: "Feed my sheep; and, Feed my lambs; and, Feed my sheep." For Christ, by saying this, led us to the conversion of repentance, so that in him the most-securely-founded faith might be built up again, which does not deny life to men, as many as breathe in this life and repent in truth, and

correct their own failings in this age. ^A

IX. In the Song of Songs, the bride herself speaks to the bridegroom in this manner: *My brother answers, and says to me: Arise, come, my neighbor, my beautiful one, my dove; for the winter has passed*: that is to say, that sad and dark and terrible gloom of the clouds has passed. *The rain has departed and gone away, the flowers have appeared in our land; the time of pruning has arrived; the voice of the turtledove has been heard in our land; the fig tree has brought forth its green figs, our vines have blossomed, they have given forth their fragrance.* By this, she shows that all past things have gone by, and that the season is now spring-like, the sea calm and tranquil, the fear of rain has passed, the old branches of the vine have been pruned, and the grass is not only greening but has begun to put forth flowers. Just as the voice of preaching in the desert—that is, in our land—cries out, and that fig tree which was once cursed now produces its green figs, which are the fruits of repentance, visible upon the branches and trees; and the vines have begun to sprout, which is the fragrant preaching of the faith of the Gospel. ^B After he has suddenly called her, he says: "Arise, come." Arise from the death of sins, and come in justice; arise from transgressions, and come with confidence; arise from sins, and come to repentance; arise from sickness, and come into health; arise from infidelity, and come into faith; arise from perdition, and come into salvation.

Since Holy Scripture is in no way ignorant of the fact that, after the first repentance, and the first calling, and the healing, so to speak, the human race falls into many sins, it speaks again: *Arise, come, my dove*; calling her not once, but a second time, in such a way that the latter calling is not equal to the former. For in the first calling he addresses her thus: *Arise, my neighbor, my beautiful one, my dove.* First, therefore, he said: "Arise, come," and did not say: "And you, come." But in the second, he adds the article, so that he might signify a calling different from the other; a calling which, nevertheless, after that first one, shows forth a ^C helping hand and heavenly clemency. *And come*, he says, *my dove, into the shelter of the rock, beside the outer wall.* By "shelter of the rock," he means the kindness of Christ and the mercy of the Lord. For this is the shelter of the rock: the shelter, I say, of hope, of faith, and of truth. *Beside the outer wall*, means: before the gate is closed, before the King, having entered in, no longer receives the soul after its departure from this life and death. When we are no longer beside the outer wall, but the gates are closed, there is no longer any place for self-correction.

^A For in the world to come, after man’s departure, there is no gain from fasting, no call to repentance, no manifestation of almsgiving; nor is there any place for crimes, nor war, nor adultery, nor lusts, nor, on the contrary, for justice and repentance. For just as after a crop of wheat has been harvested, the grain can no longer swell, nor be corrupted by the wind, nor wither away, nor is there any other improvement, so also is it here. Yet do not object to me about the corruption in the storehouse—that is to say, the worms and the moths; for these things happen because of what is in this world. But what is depicted, what is spoken of to us at the gates, and what is secured in the storehouse, refers to the pattern and outline of faith. Where neither thieves break through, nor moths consume, as the divine Word said. Nor is there any gain of piety or repentance, as I have said, after death. For Lazarus does not go to the rich man there, nor the rich man to Lazarus; nor does Abraham send the poor man to become rich later; nor does the rich man obtain what he asks for, even though he beseeches the merciful Abraham with great prayers. ^B For the storehouses are sealed, the time has been filled, the contest has been brought to an end, the stadium has been emptied, and the crowns have been given; those who struggled have rested, and those who did not arrive have failed; and those who did not struggle no longer have the means; and those who were defeated in the stadium have been cast out; and all things are clearly perfected after the departure from here. Yet while all are still in the struggle, even after a fall there is the possibility of rising, and there is still hope, and healing, and confession; and even if it is not the most perfect state, yet for others, salvation is not despaired of.

XI. On Heresies

^C XI. But every heresy, once it has slipped away from the truth, is blinded in darkness and hallucinates, conceiving one thing in place of another. For these men are like certain unskillful people who do not know the condition, use, and order of each member. And, so to speak, what I am about to say is a nonsensical thing, similar to their own lack of understanding. Just as if they were to put shoes on the head and a crown on the feet, and a golden collar around the belly; and as for the other things—the garments, so to speak, made from clothes, which by some are called *odonia* or breeches—they put them on their hands, and rings on their feet. For such is the dangerous and disordered arrangement of those who possess ignorance. For the things ^D secured regarding the priesthood, regarding second marriage, and regarding...

^A other things, which were proclaimed by God out of an excess of austerity, so that some, through negligence, might not fall away, these men have linked to God an inhumanity. And just as if someone, holding the sleeve of a garment, should cover himself only from the wrist to the elbow, and yet at every hour brings the sleeve before his eyes and mocks others, forgetting that his whole body is naked; so also do these men: priding themselves on not accepting those who have married twice, they reject the one commandment while abandoning all the other commandments which are similar to this one, and even, by excess, better and more vital. And forgetting that they are naked in their whole body, having remained idle regarding all the commandments, and not having held even that one ^B commandment purely, they are naked in their whole bodies, while they abandon all the commandments of God and do not guard even that one in purity and sincerity.

XII. Oh, for the astonishing madness of men! Truly any occasion, however slight, has drawn each heresy away from the truth and led it into infinite evils. For just as if someone should find a broken hedge by a public road, and believing the path to be there, should depart a little from the road, thinking that there is a near exit by which he might return to the road again, not knowing that there is a very high wall there, intercepted by a very long space; and so he runs about, and can find no way to get out anywhere—and when he has proceeded a mile or two, there is still a longer journey ahead, and he does not find the road, but wanders hither and thither. He, therefore, laboring in this way, and finding no path that leads to the straight road, will perhaps find no other way than to return by the same way he entered. Thus, every heresy, when it had the shortcut for the journey at hand, through long detours has fallen into a solid wall; such is the obstructed and tortuous flexibility of ignorance and lack of knowledge. And it will never be able to find where to turn itself back to the right path, unless it directs its journey back to the primary path, that is, the royal one. This is what the law of the most holy Moses openly proclaimed when it commanded the king of Edom thus: Thus says your brother Israel: I will pass through your borders into the land which the Lord swore to give to our fathers; a land ^D flowing with milk and honey: the land of the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Jebusites and the Hivites and the Canaanites and the Hittites, a land flowing with milk and honey. We will not turn to the right hand or to the left; we will drink water in silver and eat food of silver. We will not turn this way or that; we will walk by the royal road. For there is a certain royal road, which is the Church of God and the path of truth. But each of these heresies, having abandoned the royal road and having inclined to the right or to the left, and having thereafter yielded itself long to error, is dragged away; so that there is no longer a limit for each heresy in its insolence of error.

^A XIII. Come then, servants of God and sons of the holy Church of God, you who know the sure rule of faith and walk the path of truth: do not be led away by contrary voices, or deceived by the discourses of any counterfeit sect. For the ways of such people are slippery, and their understandings are depraved; their path is steep and arduous. Indeed, they boast magnificently, yet meanwhile they know nothing of the lesser things. They promise freedom, while they themselves are slaves to sin. They glory in greater things, yet have not attained even the least.

But regarding this kind of heretics—those who are called Cathari, or "Pure," though "Impure" would be a more accurate name for them—I judge that enough has been said by me thus far. Therefore, passing over this heresy as we would the face of a basilisk, which, so far as the appearance of its name is concerned, is esteemed by a certain excellent title, we strike it down by the power of the wood, and let us hasten again to the others, taking with us the prayer to God, that He may accompany us, remain with us, be present, give aid, preserve, instruct, and grant that we may speak the truth; so that we ourselves, by saying falsehoods, may not fall into the same straits as those heresies which did not teach the truth to the world.

Furthermore, those who dwell in Africa and Byzacena, and who are called Donatists from a certain Donatus, being of the same mind as those former ones and for the same reason—namely, that they refused to hold anything in common with those who had lapsed during the persecution—rebellious, they shall be overthrown in the same manner as were the Novatians, or Cathari, who draw the same yoke with them. For this reason, we have not found it necessary to treat of them more fully in private, but have deemed it best to join them with their like. But these have erred even more vehemently and worse, insofar as they agree in faith with Arius; wherefore, they shall be overthrown in the same way regarding the faith, of which they think evil, as Arius was refuted by the word of truth—since he thought the same things as they, and they as he. And passing over this matter as well, we shall walk on to those that follow, having, with the Lord’s help, trampled down these things as if they were dreadful, serpentine monsters. ^B

AGAINST THE ANGELICI, Heresy XL or LX.

I. We have heard of the heresy of the Angelici, and have received the name only, but we have not clearly known what kind of heresy this is, perhaps because it appeared at some time, but later ceased and was eventually utterly extinguished. As for why it held this name, we are ignorant. For either it was because some heretics claimed that the world was created by angels (and whether this sect was called by this name because it asserted this, I cannot say), or else because they glorified themselves as being in the rank of angels, and in their life...

^A nor can I affirm this with certainty. Or rather, that they arrogantly claimed to belong to an angelic order and established a certain excellent mode of life? Not even this do I assert as a matter of certain knowledge. Or perhaps, finally, they drew that name from a certain place? Since there is a certain region, Angelina, situated beyond Mesopotamia. ^B

II. But now, whoever you are, listener, if you recall what I have said before, there will be no cause for you to bring me under suspicion of wrong. For this principle we adopted concerning the heresies: that we would recount the roots and causes, or something of what is wont to be done among them, for some, but would mention others only by name. And as the divine power has enabled and assisted us, we have gone through all of them up to this heresy, and have left none uninterpreted, except this one. Perhaps because, having been puffed up with pride for a short time and having later ceased, we did not perceive its grasp particularly clearly. Having mentioned this one only by name in passing, using the name as if it were an abortive fetus, we shall pass over this place and turn our mind to consider the others. And asking the Lord of all to appear to us, and to show to our humble mind the precise truth of what occurs among them, so that we may accurately signify everything; in order that we may effect the correction both for ourselves and for our neighbors—to flee what is base, and in what is good and most true, to procure for ourselves steadfastness in God, and to obtain firmness and constancy.

AGAINST THE APOSTOLICS, Heresy XLI or LXI

^C I. After these, others have named themselves Apostolics. They wish to call themselves Apotactics as well. They carefully observe the rule of possessing nothing. They are, moreover, an offshoot of the dogmas of Tatian—of the Encratites, the Tatianists, and the Cathars—all of whom chiefly repudiate the law. They have sacraments and mysteries different from ours. They boast of their poverty in all things, and they rashly divide and subvert the most holy Church of God with self-chosen superstitions, falling away from the loving-kindness of God. For they do not receive anyone who has once lapsed, and they hold the same opinions about marriage and other matters as those mentioned above. ^D And while the Cathars adhere only to the received Scriptures, these rely primarily on the so-called Acts of Andrew and Thomas (for so they call them), being altogether alien to the rule of the Church.

For if marriage is abominable, then those who have drawn their origin from marriage are clearly themselves impure. And if the holy Church of God consists only of those who have renounced marriage, then neither is marriage from God, nor is the whole business of the propagation of offspring. Therefore, since they themselves were born of that same process, they will be strangers to God. What place, then, will this have: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder"? For to separate by necessity is the work of man; but...

^A it is; to contain oneself voluntarily is not of man, but reveals the work of God. Moreover, this natural necessity is often subject to blame, because that which is performed by necessity is not done with right counsel and reason, but is kept outside the rule [of virtue]. For piety is not to be extracted by force; rather, righteousness is accepted by counsel and will. Furthermore, those things which are properly necessary for piety are manifest, which men measure, as it were, by nature. Such as: not to commit fornication, nor to commit adultery, nor to act licentiously, nor at the same time to contract a second marriage, nor to plunder, nor to do injury, nor to be intoxicated, nor to gorge oneself with food, nor to prepare poisons, nor to worship idols, nor to kill, nor to curse, nor to revile, nor to swear, to be indignant and quickly appeased, to be angry and not sin, not to let the sun set upon one’s anger. That it is permitted to be joined in lawful marriage, nature itself, created by God, will show. Finally, other things that are of the same principle can be recalled [to this standard], each according to its own manner and measure.

^B II. Yet, to pursue what we began to treat concerning them, these people dwell in a certain small region of Phrygia, Cilicia, and Pamphylia. What then? Is the Church, which extends to the ends of the earth, altogether cut off, and their sound gone forth no longer into all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world? Nor does that which was said by the Savior hold: "You shall be my witnesses unto the uttermost part of the earth"? For if marriage does not exist in holiness, and marriage has no life, let them be born without marriage; but if they are born from marriage, then they are profane because of the marriage. And if they themselves alone are not profane, although they are from marriage, then marriage is not profane; because without it no one could ever be born into the world. Great indeed is the error of those men, which has brought destruction to the human race in various and manifold ways, and has led each one astray from the straight path of truth under a certain empty pretext.

^C III. The Church does indeed possess renunciation, but it does not on that account deem marriage to be detestable. It possesses a lack of all possessions, but it does not insolently exalt itself against those who justly possess goods received from their parents, by means of which they may provide for themselves and for those in need. And many abstain from foods; but they do not behave proudly against those who eat them. ^D For let not him who eats despise him who does not eat; and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats. For he eats and drinks to Christ. Do you not now see the same concord in the Church, and the same hope and faith, which seeks to grant to each one according to his own strength and his own struggle of labor? For the holy Church of God is like a ship. Moreover, a ship is not joined together from a single plank, but from diverse ones. Indeed, it possesses a keel from one piece of wood, but not in a single fashion; while the anchors are from others. And the crossbeams and the rigging...

^A For it has the keel made from one log, but not in a single or simple fashion; the anchors are of a different kind. Then the peritonia (braces), the planks, the frames, and the parts of the poop, the sides and the thwarts, the sails, the tillers, the yard-arms, the hand-spikes, the nails, and all other things, are joined together from various kinds of timber. But each one of these heresies, consisting of a single log, does not display the mark and character of the Church.

But the holy Church of God possesses a modest marriage, and honors such a thing; for marriage is honorable, and the bed is undefiled. It has a most admirable continence, and commends it, since it undertakes a certain struggle, and looks down upon life itself as one more powerful. It has virginity, and highly exalts such a state, as being joined to virtue and adorned with the lightest wing. It has those who have renounced the world, and who are not puffed up against those who still exist in the world, but take delight in them; just as the apostles were, who were themselves void of the possession of all things. Yes, and the Savior himself, the Lord of all, when he lived in this flesh, wished to possess nothing of these earthly things. Yet he did not for that reason wish to reject those women who used to minister to him and his apostles. For it is written: Who had followed him from Galilee, ministering to him and to those who were with him from their own substance.

^B IV. But if matters were not so, who then could fulfill that saying: Come, you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was naked, and you covered me? For how could they have done all these things, unless they had fulfilled them from just labors, and from their own means acquired in righteousness? And if they themselves, having renounced [the world] and living an apostolic manner of life, were mingled with the others, that character would not be alien, nor estranged from the ordinance of God; and if they renounced wives for the sake of continence, the aforementioned [practice] would be praiseworthy, if they did not abominate marriage. But they would have used it with those who were still partners in marriage, knowing the measure and order of each. For the ship of God receives every passenger, except the pirate. ^C For knowing the pirate and the robber, it does not receive him, nor the fugitive, nor the one who shakes off the servitude of his masters. In the same way, the Church of God does not admit fornication, nor does it admit adultery, nor does it admit the denial of the faith, nor those who reject the mastery of the ordinance of God and of his apostles. But it receives the one engaged in great business, and the one skilled in the ways of sailors, and [it receives] the pilot and the expert, and the one at the bow, and the one at the stern—who possesses the greatest experience in keeping watch—and the one at the ^D...

^A For one of those ship-passengers, the master employs for some great business, another for nautical duties, a third he appoints as steersman, and sets others over the prow or the stern, according to each one’s special experience in looking out; another he keeps in the place of dregs or baggage, and yet another he receives merely for the sake of transporting him, that he might not sink in the sea. Nor does he use any exception at all, to close the way of salvation to him who possesses only this much; rather, he knows how to reconcile salvation for all, so that by providing for each one's function and manner of salvation, he preserves them. Otherwise, why do those of Caesar’s household send greetings through the Apostle? Or whence comes that apostolic saying: "If any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, and it so happen, let him marry; he sinneth not"? But this very thing—"he sinneth not"—cannot be obtained apart from baptism. For "all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God, being justified freely by his grace," ^B that is, by the second washing of regeneration. For this washing has adorned the soul and the body, having washed away every sin through repentance. Therefore, the grace of baptism extends both to the virgin and to her who is not a virgin, and she desires to be sealed by this sacrament for the sake of her own relief.

V. Explanation of the Apostle’s command regarding virgins.

But let not certain tepid and insipid men think, when we say that the Apostle prescribed marriage for a virgin, that by the same decree he also wished to cast down from her course her who has once determined to consecrate her virginity to God. For that apostolic discourse is not to be referred to such as these, but to those aging virgins ^C who remained in the prime of life not out of love for virginity, but out of a lack of husbands. For the Apostles, originating from the Jews and instructed in their laws, addressed the preaching of the Christian religion in such a way that they were still bound by the sanctions of the old law—and this they deemed necessary not for the justification of the flesh, but for the harmonious and apt observance of the law and for the accurate conduct of duty. For it was provided for by the ancient law in a miraculous way, lest the daughters of Israel be given away to foreign nations, so that they might not draw them away to the worship of idols. Therefore, every one of the believers at that time was ordered no longer to ^D give away his own virgin to Jews, but to Christians who were of like faith and like mind. But since the proclamation was new, there was not yet in every place a multitude of Christians or of Christian teaching. Those, therefore, who then had virgin daughters, finding no Christians to whom to give them in marriage, kept their own virgins for a long time. But those who were past their prime fell into fornication due to the urgency of nature. The Apostle, therefore, seeing the loss occurring through this strictness, allowed it, saying: "But if any man think that he desireth his own virgin." And he did not say, "his own virginity." For he was not speaking of one's own body, but of a father who is the guardian of virginity. But if we should say that he calls his own virgin his own body, nothing will prevent it. He says, therefore: "He standeth steadfast in his own heart," and what he must do, he says, "let him marry"; he does not sin. "Let him marry," even if they are not well-provided; he does not sin. And for this reason, "Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed."

si cupis, quidquid dicit, "Volo omnes esse sicut meipsum"; illud unum dicit: *Si non continent, nubant*.

VI. Furthermore, when he was giving precepts to the unmarried, he said: *But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: it is good for them if they so remain, even as I*. How then did he use this expression: *Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not a release*? Does it not seem that he is establishing a law contrary to the decree of his Lord, who proclaimed: *He who does not leave father, and mother, and brothers, and wife, and children, and daughters, is not my disciple*? And how does he who commands one to leave behind an honorable spouse and father, say in another place: *Honor thy father and thy mother; which is the first commandment in the promise*; and: *What God has joined together, let no man put asunder*? ^B But all divine words are not to be referred to allegories, but are to be accepted as they stand. They require consideration and understanding, so that the force and power of each argument may be grasped. But tradition is also necessary. For not everything can be gathered from the Holy Scriptures. Wherefore the holy apostles handed down some things in writings, and other things in traditions; as the holy Apostle says: *As I have delivered to you*; and elsewhere: *So I teach, and so I have delivered in the Churches*; and: *If you keep it: unless you have believed in vain*.

The holy Church of God has therefore received this tradition from the apostles: that to betake oneself to marriage after having vowed virginity, is seen to be entangled in a crime. But the Apostle wrote: *If a virgin marry, she has not sinned*. How then do both these things agree with each other? ^C But he is speaking of that virgin who has not vowed her virginity to God, and because of the scarcity of those who had believed in Christ at that time, these things were of necessity carried out in that manner. And that this is so, the same Apostle will teach us, saying: *But the younger widows avoid. For when they have grown wanton against Christ, they desire to marry, having judgment, because they have made void their first faith*. If therefore even a woman who has become a widow after having experienced the world, because she had been dedicated to God, would have judgment if she married afterwards, having made void her first faith; how much greater is the judgment on the virgin who, even without experience of the world, has dedicated herself to God, and yet marries? ^D How has she not all the more grown wanton against Christ, and made void the greater faith, and shall possess judgment as one who has relaxed her own purpose according to God?

[a] *Note on church traditions regarding the authority of what is handed down. Closely related to this is that passage of Basil to Amphilochius, On the Holy Spirit: Of the dogmas and preachings kept in the Church, we have some from written teaching, and others we have received having been handed down to us in a mystery from the tradition of the apostles; both of which have the same force for piety, and no one will gainsay these, whoever has even the slightest experience of ecclesiastical institutions. See the rest.*

^A VII. Let them therefore marry, let them bear children, let them manage households. This short and mean discourse is directed against those who think perversely among themselves regarding every subject of ecclesiastical preaching. This doctrine indeed rejects all those who call themselves Apostolics and Encratites; as well as those who are in a certain way "softer" within the Church, and who persuade women, by relaxing the contention of the perfect course, to abandon it altogether. But whoever removes the virginity of God from the midst, entangles himself in sin and judgment, and brings ignominy upon the contest. For the athlete who violates the laws of the contest is scourged and cast out from the contest. Thus, he who has corrupted virginity is repelled from that very course, and from the crown and the reward. But truly, judgment is better than condemnation. For they who, so as not to be brought into infamy among men, commit secret fornication, do not bind themselves to the monastic life or pledge of continence before men, but before God, who knows the hidden things and will reprove all flesh at His coming, regarding ^B the things in which each person has sinned. It is better, therefore, to have one sin, and not more. It is better for one who has fallen from the course to take a wife openly for himself according to the law, and after a long interval of penitence following his virginity, to be admitted again into the Church, as one who has acted wrongly, as one who has lapsed, and has been broken, and is in need of a binding, rather than to be wounded daily with secret arrows and the wickedness brought upon him by the devil.

^C VIII. In this way the Church is accustomed to preach. These are the medicines prepared for healing; these are the kinds of apothecary's work; this is the preparation of the holy oil in the Law; this is the noble faith, fragrant with the scent of aromatics, which has the power to bind the athlete entering into the contest, and warns him to strive in the course, so that he may be able to win the crown. This is the work and business of God, which gathers all for the royal administration, just as it gathers purple from the sea, wool from sheep, flax from the earth, byssus, silk, red-dyed skins, and precious stones—the emerald, the pearl, the agate—stones, I say, which, although they differ in color, are yet equal in value. But it does not reject gold and silver, and incorruptible woods, ^D and brass and iron, and not even goats' hair. And that tabernacle was of such a kind formerly, but now the house of the tabernacle is firmly established in God, and its foundation consists in virtue. Therefore, let every heresy that rises up against the truth cease, or rather, let it remove itself from the truth.

And let these things suffice up to this point. Now, after we have struck and left this proud viper behind, just as one would that kind of serpent which is called the javelin, or the blind-worm, or the mouse-catcher, with the wood of the cross—creatures which do not so much have [deadly venom]...

^A properly depicted, let us despise them and pass on to the next, beloved.

AGAINST THE SABELLIANS,

I. Not many years ago, a certain heretic named Sabellius arose; for he is recent, and from him the so-called Sabellians take their name. He, with a few exceptions, taught the same things as the Noetians. Many of this sect are found in Mesopotamia and in the parts of Rome, being carried away by a certain madness.

For he and his Sabellians teach that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are the same, so that in one hypostasis there are three names, or as in man there is body, soul, and spirit. And the body, so to speak, is ^B the Father, the soul is the Son, and the spirit is the Holy Spirit in the divinity, just as it is in a man. Or as if in the sun, which is one in hypostasis, there are three energies: I mean the illuminating power, the warming power, and the very shape of its circumference. And they say that the warming [power], that is, the hot and boiling, is the Spirit; the illuminating is the Son; and the Father himself is the form of the entire hypostasis. And they say that the Son was sent forth at a certain time, like a ray, having accomplished everything in the world pertaining to the evangelical dispensation and the salvation of men, and was taken up again to heaven, like a ray sent forth by the sun and having run back into the sun. But the Holy Spirit is sent into the world, and successively to each one of those deemed worthy; and he gives life to such a person, and makes him boil, warming and heating him, so to speak, through the power and ^C presence of the Spirit. And these are the things they teach.

II. They use all the Scriptures of both the Old and the New Testament, but they select certain phrases according to their own perverted mind and folly and madness. First, the statement which God said to Moses: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord. You shall not make ^D for yourself other gods. There shall not be any new gods for you,” since “I am the first God, and after these, and besides me there is no other God,” and whatever else is adapted to their own mind, which they abuse to confirm their error. Furthermore, they usurp from the Gospel that saying: “I am in the Father, and the Father is in me,” and, “We two are one.”

But they have drawn all this error and the strength of their error from certain Apocryphal books, especially from the so-called Gospel of the Egyptians, to which some have given this name. For in it, many things of this kind are reported mysteriously, as if in a corner, from the person of the Savior, as if He himself were revealing to the

disciples that He is the same as the Father, the same as the Son, and the same as the Holy Spirit. Then, whenever they encounter any of the simpler or more artless sort, who do not possess the precise knowledge of the divine Scriptures, they lead them into this question: "What should we say, good sirs? Do we have one God or three gods?" When the religiously minded person, not yet polished with perfect knowledge for the sake of avoiding such errors, hears this, he is immediately disturbed in his mind, assents to their deception, and is found denying the God, he is found denying the existence of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

^C III. Furthermore, the perpetual enemy of the human race has breathed/inspired these men from the beginning, so that through one way or another, in whatever manner he might, he may circumvent the greatest number possible and lead them away from the path of truth. For that there is truly one God, and there is no other, the holy Church of God clearly confesses and is in agreement. We do not introduce a plurality of gods; rather, we proclaim the monarchy. And in proclaiming the monarchy, we do not err; but we confess the Trinity, a monad in the Trinity, and a Trinity in the monad, one godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. For the Son did not beget Himself, nor did the Father cease to be Father in order to be Son; nor has the Holy Spirit ever named Himself Christ, but rather the Spirit of Christ, and given through Christ, proceeding from the Father, and receiving from the Son. The Father is subsistent, the Son is subsistent, the Holy Spirit is subsistent. But the Trinity is not some confusion, as Sabellius thought, nor is it altered from its own eternity and glory, as Arius, speaking vanity, dogmatized. But the Trinity was always Trinity, and the Trinity never receives addition, being one godhead, one lordship, one glory to be preached and celebrated, but a Trinity that is numbered: Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit. Not as if one thing were called by three names, but the names are truly perfect, the subsistences are perfect, with nothing altered. The Father is always Father, and there was no time when the Father was not Father, being perfect and always subsistent as Father, and the Son, always being perfect, always subsistent, begotten from the Father in truth without beginning, and without time, and inexpressibly; not a brother-fellow to the Father, not having begun to be, nor ever ceasing, but always a genuine Son existing with the Father, begotten from the Father without time, being equal, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not created. But the Father is not the same as the Son, nor is the Son himself the Father. And if God is Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit.

IV. For the Spirit is always with the Father and the Son, not a brother-fellow to the Father, not begotten, not created, not a brother of the Son, not a descendant of the Father, but proceeding from the Father, and receiving from the Son, not alien to the Father and the Son, but of the same substance, of the same godhead, from the Father and the Son, with the Father and

^A the Son, the Holy Spirit is always subsistent, the divine Spirit, the Spirit of glory, the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of the Father. For: "The Spirit of the Father who speaks in you," and, "My Spirit is established in the midst of you." Third in name, equal in divinity, not altered from the Father and the Son, the bond of the Trinity, the seal of our confession. For the Son says: "I and the Father are one." And he did not say, "I am one," but the words, "I and the Father," denote the Father as subsistent and the Son as subsistent. And he said, "We two," and did not say, "The one." And again, "We are one," and he did not say, "I am one." Likewise: "Going, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Being placed in the middle, the articles of the syllable "of the," "of the," and "of the." And Matthew refutes Sabellius, who introduces a blending. For where it signifies truly Father, truly Son, truly Holy Spirit; and since the Trinity is of one rank, and named in one name of Trinity, it refutes Arius, who imagines a certain lower standing in the Trinity, or an alteration, or a difference. For even if the Father is proclaimed as greater by the Son, he most fittingly procures the glory for the Son. For whom was it fitting to glorify the proper Father, if not the genuine Son? But when he wishes again to speak of equality, so that some might not fall away, thinking less of the Son, he says thus: "He who does not honor the Son, as he honors the Father, does not have life in himself"; and, "All things that are the Father's are mine." And what is that, "the things of the Father," if not: because the Father is God, I am God; the Father is life, I am life; all things that are the Father's are mine?

^B V. See then, Sabellius, and carefully observe; open the eyes of your heart, and do not be blind; let your mind and the minds of those who have been deceived by you come together with the holy John at the Jordan. Open your ears, and hear the voice of the prophet saying: "I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness." Hear the Forerunner of the Lord, who deserved to be called an angel, who received the Holy Spirit from his mother's womb, and leaped when Mary entered. He, while still contained in his mother's womb, recognized the arrival of his own Lord and leaped; to whom the duty of manifesting the preaching of the divine Word and of preparing the way of the Lord was granted. Apply faith to this, and do not stray from the goal of truth. Behold, he offers you testimony. First, when he ^C acknowledges his own Lord, he speaks thus: "I have need of thee, and thou comest to me." Then, when he had said, "Suffer it now, that all justice may be fulfilled," and he had been baptized by him, the divine Gospel reports that John gave testimony with these words: "That the heavens were opened, and I saw the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove descending and coming upon him." And a voice from heaven: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." There was then in heaven

the Father, O contentions man, and the voice was coming from above. If, then, the voice was from above, distinguish for me your distorted line of reasoning. To whom was the Father speaking, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased"? And who was this? And why did the Holy Spirit descend in the form of a dove, even though the Holy Spirit did not assume a body? For the Only-Begotten alone took it on, and He was made man perfectly from the ever-virgin Mary, through the Holy Spirit; not from the seed of a man, but the Word, who is the Architect, fashioned for Himself a body from Mary, and a human soul and mind; and He is still man, having perfectly received everything and united it to His own divinity; not as one who merely dwelt in a man (God forbid!), but the holy Word Himself, God the Word, became man. ^B

VI. Now for what reason does the Spirit appear in the form of a dove, except to persuade you not to blaspheme, O you who imagine yourself wise yet understand nothing, and so that you do not think the Spirit to be a mere mixing together with the Father or the Son? For this reason, even though the Holy Spirit did not assume a body, He took the form of a dove, in order to show and refute your error, that the Spirit is a subsisting subject in Himself, and the Father is a subsisting subject, and the Only-Begotten is a subsisting subject; but without the divinity being divided or its own glory being lowered. And you see how the Trinity is enumerated, with the Father crying out from above, the Son being baptized in the Jordan, and the Holy Spirit coming down in the form of a dove. Tell me, I pray you, who is He who said: "Behold, my Servant shall understand, my beloved, in whom I am well pleased, whom my soul has chosen. I will place my Spirit upon him, and he shall announce judgment to the nations. He shall not strive, nor cry out; nor shall his voice be heard in the streets. A bruised reed he shall not break, and a smoking flax he shall not extinguish, until he shall bring forth judgment unto victory," and the rest? Can these things not have the implication of a Trinity, O contentious man? Did the Father perhaps speak these many things in the prophet concerning Himself? And who is He concerning whom it is written: "The Lord said to my Lord, 'Sit at my right hand'"? He did not say: "Come up into me." Or that other text, which is written in the Gospel: "And he ascended into heaven and sat at the right hand of the Father; and he is coming to judge the living and the dead." Or again, why did the two men who appeared in white garments not persuade you when they said to the disciples: "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in the way you saw him being taken up"? And whom was the blessed Stephen looking at when he said: "Behold, I see heaven opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God"? But you, O man ignorant in all things, by not understanding the voice of the holy Scriptures, have harmed yourself all the more. ^{C D}

^A having fallen away from the holy faith of the truth of God.

VII. For He truly said: *I am the first, and I am the last, and besides me there is no other.* For in truth there are not many gods, but one God, the first and the last, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; the Trinity is not a mixing together, nor is it divided from its own identity, but the Father truly begat the Son, and the Son is truly begotten of the Father, subsisting in His own person, lacking any beginning or time; and the Holy Spirit is truly from the Father and the Son, endowed with the same divinity, proceeding from the Father, and always receiving from the Son. There is one God, the first and the last. ^B But again, for the sake of another economy, it is also sung from the person of Christ Himself. For since our Lord Jesus Christ has appeared to the prophets many times and has announced that His coming would take place, but some did not receive Him, expecting another in His place, therefore, against those who were entangled in the superstitions of idols and had brought the multitude of gods into the world, so that the sons of Israel might not be struck with wonder and turn astray, worshipping the idols of the Amorites, and Hittites, and Canaanites, and Perizzites, and Hivites, and Girgashites, and Jebusites, and Arkites, and Assannaeans—as it had been prophesied to them—they worshipped Beelphegor, and Chamos, and Astarte, and Mazuroth, and Neaste, and Beelzebath, ^C and the other idols of the nations. Therefore the Lord Himself said: *I am who I am*; I am the first and the last; so that He might turn them back from the error of the fables of the nations, who worship the multitude of gods.

And because they were going to reject the coming of the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, He spoke these words to the Jews: *I am the first and the last.* The first, namely, who arrived here endowed with flesh, and the last, who is to come to judge the living and the dead. He who indeed suffered on the cross and was buried, and was raised from the dead, and with the same body was gloriously taken up into heaven, ^D and was united to the glory of His divinity, and illuminated with a new splendor, so that He can no longer be handled, nor can He sustain death. *For Christ has risen,* says the Scripture; *death shall no longer hold dominion over Him,* says the Apostle. And see how the exactness of the Scripture holds firm, and safely guides man, so that he may not fall off to either side from the truth; so that when the mind wishes to invent a multitude of gods, it may immediately hear: *The Lord your God is one.* But when the descendants of Israel expect another Christ besides the One who has already come, let them hear in turn: *I am the first and I am the last*; and: *I am the A and the Ω*; the A, clearly, looking downward, and the Ω looking upward, so that what is said may be fulfilled: "He who descended, He is

^A he who also ascended above all principality, and power, and dominion, and every name that is named." And lest you should perhaps suspect otherwise; and for the sake of what was said: *I am the first, and I am the last*; and: *I am the A and the Ω*; and: *The Lord thy God is one*; and: *I am who am*; that no one should deny the Son and the Holy Spirit, on this account He says: "My Father is greater than I." And: "That they may know Thee, the only true God, and whom Thou didst send, Jesus Christ." Not that the Son is not true God, but that He might draw the name of the Trinity into one unity, and exclude the mind of men from a multitude of gods to one divinity.

VIII. But if any one, having lapsed into error, should think that only one ^B is called the true God, namely the Father, and that the Son indeed exists but is not true God, He refutes such a one again in another way, saying: "I am the true light, which enlighteneth every man coming into this world." But concerning the Father He speaks thus: "God is light." He did not say: "True light," so that from the fact that He called Him both true God and true light, we might understand the divinity of the Father to be equal to the Son, and that of the Son to the Father. And from the fact that both the Father and the Son are called light and God, and that here the name "true" is not added—which indeed was not necessary, since there would be no doubt about that matter—for by these words, ^C of God and light, a perfect and the same kinship, if I may so call it, of the Father with the Son, and of the Son with the Father, is clearly declared. And thus all the insanity of your falsehood is refuted. For the Father is indeed Father, and the Son is Son, and the Holy Spirit is Holy Spirit, and that very Trinity is one deity, one glory, one lordship. To whom be glory, honor, power: to the Father in the Son, to the Son in the Father with the Holy Spirit, for ever and ever. Amen.

But after we have brushed off this heresy, like a lyben, or a molurus, or an elops, or some other most atrocious kind of serpent, which, however, could not harm us at all with its bites, and have crushed it by the power and virtue of the Holy Trinity, proceeding to the rest in our discourse, ^D let us first invoke the same God as the helper of our poverty and weakness; relying on whose protection, we may be able to set forth both what is said or done by each heresy, and their refutation at the same time.

ADVERSUS ORIGENIANOS, Priores which are also called foul, which is heresy XLIII or LXIII.

I. Some represent the Origenians: though this class of men is not spread everywhere. But in order, I think, after those previous heresies, this heresy appears. And they are called Origenians: but for what reason we do not yet fully know, whether from Origen the Adamantine, called the Syn...

- ^A tactes, that is, the "lucubrator," [(22)] or if it belongs to someone else, I do not know. Nevertheless, we have obtained this name.

This heresy among them is considered to be, as it were, a likeness of that of Epiphanes, which I previously set forth in the heresies concerning the Gnostics. These people read various books of the New and Old Testaments. They reject marriage, yet they do not cease from obscenity; they defile their own body, and mind, and soul in sensuality. For some are in the guise of monks, and the women who are with them are in the guise of nuns. They are corrupt in their bodies, for while they satisfy their own lust, they employ an act—to put it more decorously—like that of the son of Judah called Onan. ^B For just as he would join with Tamar in body and satisfy his lust, but would not accomplish the procreation of offspring according to the procreation given by God, but rather did harm to himself in the manner by which he committed that shameful act, so too do these people use those who are thought to be their spouses, performing this forbidden work. For among them, it is not chastity that is held in high esteem, but a feigned chastity called by that name, an ambition even to ensure that the woman thought to be "corrupted" by whoever it is does not become pregnant, or that she might not bring forth any fetus, and that men might not discover it; for they desire to be held in honor and esteem among those who know them because of their supposed asceticism of chastity. Yet this is their work, and others perform this same foul act in their own ambition, not through women but in other ways, defiling themselves with their own hands. And in the same way they imitate the aforementioned son of Judah, polluting the earth with their forbidden works and foul drops, and rubbing their own emissions into the earth with their feet, so that their seeds might not be snatched away by unclean spirits for the purpose of receiving a pregnancy.

^C II. They use, as I said, various books of the Old and New Testaments, and also certain apocrypha, especially the so-called Acts of Andrew and others. Indeed, they themselves have often boasted that they do this openly. Moreover, they hypocritically accuse those clerics in the Church who possess the women called "beloved," or fellow-lodgers, as if they too committed this deed in secret for the sake of human shame, so that they might conceal themselves in that wickedness, while on the surface—because of the modesty of the people—they glory in the name of chastity. And some of those people have reported to me certain men who are now deceased, claiming that they had committed this kind of shameful act, and that they had heard this from the very women whom those men had ^D forced. Among them, they brought forward the name of a bishop. In a small city of Palestine, the man who had administered the bishop’s office for many years, and who had

^A women of this kind waiting upon him—I mean those called subintroductae—had them as part of his domestic staff; and we know him to have even been among the number of the confessors. But for those who affirmed this concerning him, and who claimed to have learned it from the women themselves, we thought no credence should be given. For the wickedness of those who were making these claims brought upon us a certain necessity, so that we were forced to believe at times, and at others not to believe, that which they reported concerning the infamy of that old bishop after his death. For the cause of the accusation that reached him was of such a nature: one of that faction had been caught in the sin of sexual intercourse with a woman. And as he was being refuted by us, he offered this excuse: that he had learned the manner of this foul pleasure from the woman with whom he had fornicated, even though she was already withered by time and was an old woman; and that he had been taught by her so to use the union as to scatter the detestable fluid upon the ground.

^B III. And this is the foul practice of these people, which deceives their minds and originates from diabolical blindness. I have not deemed it necessary to bring forward the testimonies by which they fall, lest we seem, while wishing to speak accurately for the refutation of the illegal lewdness of each heresy, rather to invite those whose minds are always unstable and fickle, and who are prone to hunt for evil over goodness for themselves. But for the refutation of this terrible and creeping heresy, I shall rather append a few things out of many.

Whence, I ask, O you people, did you invent the notion of this illegal practice? For in the first place, who does not see—to speak generally—that your teaching is of demons, and that it is a contrivance devised by those whose minds have been deceived and corrupted? For if sexual intercourse is altogether evil, then the evil is not in the procreation of children, but in the union of bodies. How, then, are you, who have been overcome by pleasure, united in body? And if it is not evil to be united in body, then it is not evil to bring to completion that which has been conceived. ^C For either a man, having renounced it, should not cultivate the things of the earth—just as Abel was a shepherd of sheep, but Cain was one who worked the land. If, however, one does cultivate the land, like Noah, for it is written that "he became a man of the earth," and he planted a vineyard—he did not plant a vineyard so that it would not bear a grape cluster; but he planted it, and he drank from its fruit, and he was drunken, as it is written. And it was right to grant pardon to the one who had become intoxicated. For being pleasing to God, he did not fall into that drunkenness out of debauchery, but—being perhaps overcome by grief—he was possibly dazed; and not being able to tolerate both, due to his weakness and old age, he fell into infirmity, ^D not that he might be mocked by his son. But the one who mocked him took the curse upon himself, that those who offer insults to their fathers might be punished, as well as those among you who

^A stir up thoughts against the knowledge of God and His well-ordered disposition.

IV. For even if marriage is not to be honored as much as virginity—and it is true, virginity is to be placed above it—yet that which is called true virginity is noble and virtuous; it is not cut off. Moreover, honorable marriage does not forbid procreation, nor does it forbid those things well-created by God as if they were shameful. Indeed, it does not otherwise handle the guidance of the marriage union ordained by God. For virginity is, in truth, as that which is praised by the holy Apostle, who says: *The unmarried woman is anxious about the things of the Lord, how she may please the Lord, so that she may be holy in body and in spirit* (1 Cor. VII, 34). He said this to show that a solitary way of life does not admit of even the least suspicion of error. We know, however, that Abraham also engaged in procreation, ^B yet he was a friend of the Lord, as were Isaac and Jacob, and those who followed them. They neither defiled themselves with lawless actions, nor were they polluted by abominations, nor did they hold a contrary view toward the procreation of children through honorable marriage, which was well ordained by God. Nor did those among them who practiced chastity and virginity violate the laws of the contest, or pervert the virtuous manner of the struggle by some sort of trickery. Elijah did not even enter cities for the most part, nor did he associate with women; but he lived constantly in the deserts, just as Elisha did, and John, and all those who, to imitate the great character of the angels, ^C according to the evangelical command of the Lord, made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.

Finally, while we could bring forward many things regarding these matters, and refute their mind, which is mocked by the devil, by means of infinite testimonies and authorities from Scripture, we shall be content with these few. For it is manifest in every way that their actions do not proceed from prudence, nor is such knowledge from God; rather, this mockery and falling away is the result of demonic influence and wicked labor. Having ^D rejected this, therefore, just as we would the terrible viper called the *scytale*—which, though small in body, breathes a fearful venom and inflicts harm and destruction upon those who approach it—let us crush it and go forward to the things that follow, invoking God as our helper for the divine undertaking of the work we have begun.

AGAINST ORIGEN ADAMANTIUS, Heresy XLIV or LXIV.

I. Origen, also called Adamantius, follows. Origen, who was also named Adamantius—from whom those called Origenists derive their name, whose errors Epiphanius attacks most copiously, for they, more than others...

following this. He was a child indeed of Leonides, a most blessed and holy martyr; and he himself also, having suffered many persecutions in the early time of his youth, being a man learned in Greek education and reared in the Church, was recognized in the times of Decius the emperor ^A in Alexandria. For he was by race an Egyptian, having had his habitation and rearing in Alexandria, and perhaps at one time attended schools in Athens. And it is said that he suffered many things for the holy word of the faith and the name of Christ, being dragged about in the city many times, reviled, and subjected to intolerable tortures. For in fact, at one time the Greeks, having shaved him near the ascent of the so-called Serapium—which is their idol—and having seated him there, commanded him to distribute palm branches to those who were going up to perform impious rites and to worship the idol. For such is the habit of the priests of their idols. But he, taking them, with a loud voice and a bold spirit, not fearing nor hesitating, cried out, saying: "Come, take not the branch of the idol's temple, but the branch of Christ." And there are many brave deeds which the ancients report handed down regarding the man. ^B

But the prize of his reward did not remain...

[alt-version omitted]

^A ...most blessed and holy martyr. But he also endured many evils in persecution during the first years of his life. And when he reached man's estate, having been thoroughly polished in Greek letters and reared in the bosom of the Church, he became renowned at Alexandria under the Emperor Decius. For he was Egyptian by birth, and had obtained his home and education in Alexandria. And I do not know if he perhaps attended schools in Athens for some time. But he is said to have suffered very many things for the Christian religion, for the faith, and for the name of Christ. For indeed he was dragged about in the city repeatedly, subjected to insults, and committed to the most savage questionings and torments. Among other things, the Greeks once had him shaved on the steps of the temple of Serapis (which is their idol) and ordered him to distribute palm branches to those who were approaching to perform execrable rites and worship the venerated image. For this is the custom of their priests of idols. But Origenes, having accepted the branches, with a loud voice and constant mind, without any fear or hesitation, so vociferated: "Approach, take not the branch of the temple of the idols, but the branch of Christ." Besides these, there are very many other excellent deeds of the man which the ancients have handed down concerning him. ^B ...professed himself a most bitter enemy for all time; nor did he hesitate to engage in vehement altercations with many on this account, using as helpers Jerome and Theophilus, and he especially agitated John of Jerusalem and Ruffinus. But there was also that one cause why he disagreed with Chrysostom, because the latter was unwilling to condemn Origen before the decree of a general synod. See what Jerome wrote against Ruffinus and John of Jerusalem, as well as Socrates, Sozomenus, and Nicephorus. Origenes was already of extreme old age under Decius, and lived on as far as Gallus and Volusianus. But why [Epiphanius] should say he flourished or was famous under him [Decius] rather than under the emperors who intervened, I cannot sufficiently wonder. For from the times of Severus onwards, he was in the greatest admiration of all. Read the sixth book of Eusebius' *History*, where he has described the deeds of Origenes most accurately. You will find that he had great favor and recommendation not only among Christians, but even among the emperors themselves. For he is said to have been summoned by Mammaea to Antioch, and he gave letters to Philip and his wife. What, therefore, was the point of making mention by name of Decius, and indeed of him alone? Nay, that which increases the admiration is that Epiphanius wrote in his book *De ponderibus et mensuris*, p. 174, that Origenes flourished from the time of the Emperor Decius to Gallus and Volusianus and beyond. In the tenth year of Severus, Leonides, the father of Origenes, suffered martyrdom, when Origenes was in his seventeenth year, as Eusebius is the author in book VI, chapter 2. That year was about 202 of Christ; for Severus began his empire in the year 193. If this is so, Origenes will have been born in the year 186 of Christ. He lived for sixty-nine years, as the same [Eusebius], book VII, chapter 1, testifies. Therefore he dies in the year 254, or the one following, in which Gallus and Volusianus were killed. Now the first year of Decius falls in 251 of Christ, in which year Origenes had indeed reached his sixty-sixth year. It does not therefore begin from that time at last. Indeed, I fear that here too ^C Epiphanius may have been mistaken for Severus. For in his book *De ponderibus et mensuris*, after he has recounted some prominent martyrs who had suffered under Decius, such as Babylas, Fabianus, and Alexander, he adds: Then he subjoins the rest of the narrative concerning his departure into Palestine, and his retreat of years in the city of Tyre, which he sets forth more fully in this place. Yet it is necessary that these things happened long before Decius. It seems, therefore, that Decius inconsiderately slipped in for Severus. ^D ...should be after that departure which Eusebius mentions, lib. VI, cap. 17, by which, under the Emperor Alexander, Origenes, already strengthened in age and erudition, went into Greece from Palestine. The same one also narrates, cap. 3, that he finished his commentaries on Ezekiel in Athens. ...can be attained by nothing else than conjecture. Which, if I am not mistaken, Origenes suffered under Severus while still a youth. See chapter 3 of Eusebius. And for that reason, indeed, I suspect that he was shaved by the Gentiles, because the ministers of the Egyptian gods were shaven, as Synesius, lib. *De encomio calvitii*, Plutarch, *Tractatus de Iside*, and several others signify. ...history, and recall the fall into doubt, the ecclesiastical annalists, in the year 253, number 120, and subsequently. Indeed, what is more, they render this place, where that narrative is contained, suspect, as if it had been wrongly inserted by someone. The latter of these is clearly false, the former is not sufficiently proven, and both rest on lighter conjectures than that faith should be taken away from a most ancient and holy Father in this part. It is a fabrication, they say, and a contrived calumny, that which is cast by some concerning the fall of Origenes. Why so, in the end? Because none of the ancient writers, who either published apologies for Origen, or who on the contrary attacked him with their own writings,

^A did not remain. For because of the excellence of his holiness and his education, he was brought into great envy, and this matter whetted the magistrates and prefects all the more. Then, in truth, the artificers of wickedness, by the cunning of the devil, devised a way to drive the man to the necessity of baseness, and determined such a punishment, that to bring about the defilement of his body, they procured an Ethiopian. Origenes, not bearing this diabolical machination, uttered that voice, by which, of the two things proposed to him, he chose rather to sacrifice. Although it is not said by the common people that he did this entirely of his own volition; but when he once assented that he would do it, the heathens assert that, incense being placed in his hand, they shook it off into the fire upon the altar. In this way, he both fell from the glory of the martyrs and confessors who were in his time, by the judgment ^B of those who were judging, and was cast out from the Church. This happened at Alexandria; where, since he could not bear the mockery of those taunting him, he went away from there, and established his domicile in Palestine, or the land of Judaea. It happened by chance that, having set out for Jerusalem, and being as he was an excellent and most learned interpreter of the Holy Scriptures, he was solicited by the college of priests (for he himself, too, is said to have reached the degree of the priesthood before he sacrificed) to speak words in the Church. And when, as I have said, he was almost forced by those who at that time held the priestly dignity in the Church to do so, he stood up on his feet, and omitting the remaining verses, ^C minit. Yet we oppose Epiphanius, than whom we ought to seek neither an older nor a more weighty author; who reported that very thing concerning Origen as a discovered fact and in no way doubtful. In which it is greatly to be pondered, as often as Epiphanius proposes something of this kind, which pertains to the envy and ignominy of someone, even an otherwise heretical and nefarious man, if it be of doubtful and inconstant fame, it is signified by him with some excuse and hesitantly; and this is primarily guarded against, lest by commemorating an uncertain thing he impose a certain infamy and disgrace upon someone. But in this place he used no such caution, but, since it was certain concerning the fall and the casting of the incense, he made this one exception, which, if it be true, serves to relieve Origen, namely that it is tossed about in the sermons of some, that Origen did not by any means burn the incense himself, but that when it was placed in his fingers, it was shaken off into the fire upon the altar by the heathens. Therefore, that Origen consented to the sacrifice and the greater part of the crime, Epiphanius did not in the least doubt: whether this deed was performed by his own hand, though forced, that indeed he did doubt. The others who were either older than Epiphanius, or were contemporaries of his time, partly dissimulated out of love for Origen, and partly, because it was not at all relevant to the matter, passed over it in their writing. And Eusebius indeed, as an admirer of Origen, seems to have done so intentionally in order to omit it; for he kept silent about none of those things which tended toward his commendation, and brought nothing which might serve to diminish his reputation. The rest, as well as the supporters and the adversaries of Origen, when they had come to the contest and disputation concerning his impious dogmas and errors, easily despised the rest. And truly, it was most just that it be passed over in silence by most holy men concerning that crime, ^D of which they knew he had repented so greatly, lest they should seem to want to insult the memory of the man and to calumniate, rather than to condemn his errors. Concerning others, whose writings do not exist, we can pronounce only rashly. The other conjecture in the Annals has no more truth, and even less probability. For it is most false that this scrap was woven into Epiphanius, since neither can there be a doubt about the style itself, and the arguments by which it is produced are light, nay, are none. Epiphanius, he says, in the book *On Weights and Measures* taught exactly the opposite. For he writes: Origen flourished from the times of Decius up to Gallus and Volusianus. Where the word *flourished* does not mean the same as *lived*, but signifies the splendor sought from doctrine. And if Origen had fallen at that time, Epiphanius would not say that he flourished. But truly *acmauzein* and *to flourish* among chronologers is nothing other than to be commended by the public, and to be engaged in some clarity of name because of learning or virtue. This fame and splendor of doctrine, indeed, neither the earlier guilt of idolatry, which repentance had washed away, ought to have snatched from Origen, nor could the later infamy of so many and so manifold heresies erase it. Furthermore, we demonstrated a little earlier that Decius was falsely used here by Epiphanius instead of Severus. Following these, Augustine is objected against us, who, although he borrowed everything concerning Origen from Epiphanius, did not sprinkle a single word about that most shameful fall. But whether this notable work of Epiphanius, *Against Heresies*, was read by Augustine, can be doubted for the reasons which we have explained at greater length to the reader in the preface which we prefixed to the work itself. In vain, therefore, as indeed it appears, has the faith of that narration and of this place been solicited in the annals, since no sufficiently firm reason has been adduced for overturning it.

^A ...having come, as the Psalm says, *“But to the sinner God said: Why dost thou declare my justices, and take my testament by thy mouth?”* [Ps. XLIX, 16] having folded the book, he delivered it back, and sat down with weeping and tears, all who were present weeping together with him.

III. And after some time, as many urged and compelled him, he happened upon a certain Ambrose, a man of distinction in the imperial courts (some designate this Ambrose as a Marcionite, others a Sabellian); he, at any rate, persuaded him to turn away from the heresy, to anathematize it, and to embrace the faith of the holy Church of God. The aforementioned Ambrose, since he had been involved in a great heresy, and was a man of learning and diligent in reading the divine Scriptures, because of the depth of the thoughts contained in the divine books, requested that Origen explain them to him. ^B And the latter, wishing to satisfy the duty and exhortation of that man regarding the whole of Scripture, as one might say, to become an interpreter and expounder, applied himself—and this in Tyre of Phoenicia, as the story goes—for twenty-eight years to a life of exceeding excellence, and to study and labor, with Ambrose providing all that was necessary for his food, as well as for the scribes and those serving him, for paper and other expenses, and Origen spending his labor upon the Scriptures with nights of watching and the greatest industry. Hence, he was the first who diligently ^C sought to assemble the six interpretations: those of Aquila, Symmachus, the Seventy-two, and Theodotion, as well as the Fifth and Sixth editions, with the placing of each Hebrew word alongside them, and of the very elements themselves; and from the parallel, directly opposite on a second page, using the Hebrew language by word, but written in Greek letters, he made yet another composition.

^A Thus it is that these volumes are called the Hexapla, because they include the Greek translations, together with two parallel columns of the Hebrew nature, in Hebrew and Greek letters; so that the entire Old Testament is contained within what are called the Hexapla, through also the two Hebrew wordings. The man had labored with ambition to complete this entire work; yet he did not bring his name and glory to an unquenchable end. For it happened that his vast learning led to a great fall. Since, in the very intent to leave no part of the divine Scriptures uninterpreted, he entangled himself in the introduction of sin and set forth deadly words, from which originated the so-called Origenists—not the first ones, who are of notorious turpitude. For I cannot say for certain, as I have already stated regarding those men, whether they took their beginning from Adamantius Origen, or from someone else who was also called Origen. However, they say that this same Origen devised something for his own small body; some say he cut a nerve so as not to be troubled by pleasure, nor to be inflamed and set on fire by bodily movements; others say No, but that he devised a certain medicine to apply to those parts, and to dry them up. There are those who attribute other things to him, as that he found a certain medicinal herb to aid the memory. We do not consider the grand and magnificent things reported about him to be altogether worthy of belief; nevertheless, we did not wish to pass over matters that have become common gossip.

^C IV. As for that heresy, the author of which he was, it first spread in the land of Egypt, and today it thrives most among the most prominent people, those who seem to adopt the monastic life, and who by nature retreat into the deserts and choose poverty. This heresy is both terrible and worse than all the old ones, whose errors it embraces. For even if it does not compel its followers to commit acts of turpitude, it nonetheless plants an absurd and impious opinion about the Godhead through maximum turpitude. For from this fountain of error Arius took his pretexts, and those who followed him, the Anomoeans and others of that kind.

For this man, having dared in the beginning to speak, asserts first that the only-begotten Son cannot see the Father; but also that the Spirit cannot behold the Son, nor do angels see the Spirit, nor do men see the angels. And this is his first fall. For he considers him to be from the substance of the Father, yet at the same time created. He wants it to be said that the Son is called such only by grace. There are also other, greater falls of his. For he says that the human soul pre-exists before the body, and that souls are angels and upper powers which, because they contracted sins, were for the sake of punishment enclosed in this body; and consequently were sent away by God to undergo penalties, so that here they might receive the judgment of their prior condemnation. For which reason…

he says, the body is called `δέμας` [a frame or bond], because the soul is bound within the body; ^A in which he brings to light the old dreams and trifles of the Greeks. Indeed, he adapts some myths to this same belief. For he says that we call it `ψυχή` [soul] because it has been cooled [ἐψύχθαι] from above.

He fabricates testimonies in accordance with his own mind from the holy Scriptures, which are not so and were not given in such a way. For regarding the Prophet’s statement, "Before I was humbled, I committed a fault" [Ps. 118:67], he says that the statement is that of the soul itself, as if it had committed a fault up in heaven before it was humbled in the body; and regarding the statement, "Turn, my soul, into thy rest" [Ps. 114:7], he thinks this refers to the one who has acted manfully and excellently in this world, and because of his illustrious deeds and life tempered by righteousness, turns himself toward that supreme heavenly rest. Six hundred such things could be mentioned. Moreover, he narrates that Adam lost the glory of the divine image that he possessed. Hence, he says, is why mention is made of the "garments of skin" in Scripture: "He made them garments of skin, and clothed them" [Gen. 3:21]—which he takes to mean the body. And there is a great deal of mockery uttered by him. He also makes the resurrection of the dead incomplete, at times presenting it in his discourse, at times denying it ^B altogether, and at other times saying that only a part of it will rise. Furthermore, he allegorizes whatever he can: paradise, its waters, the things above the heavens, and the water under the earth. He does not cease to babble these and similar things; we have already discussed these matters concerning him in other places.

V. But it will cause no trouble even now to recount his reversal and hypothesis in this heresy against him, and to make the refutation from the very things proposed by him. For his subsequent absurdity is great, as is his pursuit of a corrupted concept, which has stepped outside the truth. For he seemed to speak against all the heresies before him and to overturn each one; yet afterward he himself disgorged a heresy that is no ordinary one into the world. It is our pleasure to subject his contrived opinion to testing, first by adducing what was said by him, and then by bringing forward what must be said by our mediocrity against him. These are the things which he introduced in the first Psalm ^C for the life of men. For he is always slipping in every Scripture, and he has fallen short in the literal meaning in necessary matters. And since the mass [of his work] is great—for it is said that he has produced a great compilation—for he did not refrain from saying what he thought regarding every single Scripture, as I said. And as much as has been said in his discourses and through his prefaces regarding character and the natures of animals and other things, he often uttered clever things while rambling; but as for the things he dogmatized regarding dogmas and faith and higher contemplation, they are the most absurd of all ^D that came before him and

those who came after him, if you except the profanities and filth of other heresies. ^A

And he truly seems to have embraced the way of life of the ascetics, just as I have explained before. For this reason, some say that his stomach failed due to a certain refined manner of life, and fasting, and abstinence from all living things. But let us now bring forward his own words, taken from his commentaries on the first Psalm, and from the considerations published on the same, and from his treatises on dogmas, using the exact words he wrote, so that no one may say that we have slandered his words. ^B And it is from this place in particular that we wished to translate; not because he fell from the truth only in these commentaries on the first Psalm, as I have often testified; for he wandered plainly in everything; but because there are countless monuments left by him, and by collecting a few things from that Psalm—from one, or two, or three words—we shall reveal all his wickedness regarding things that pertain to the faith: and we shall necessarily refer to the same words he used. It is therefore the foundation and ground of every such utterance that you, studious auditor, should understand that the Son of God is most manifestly preached by him as a creature; and from that rashness regarding the Son, you may know that the Holy Spirit is also brought in by him ^C as a creature. From the beginning, therefore, let us review the Psalm, up to that very word, just as Origen himself wrote it, in the same words as him.

From the commentaries of Origen on the first Psalm.

VI. The divine oracles testify that the holy Scriptures are closed and sealed; and this is done by the key of David, and perhaps also by the seal, concerning which it is written: “The holiness of the seal unto the Lord.” This ought to be understood regarding the power of God, who bestowed them, which is evidently adumbrated by the seal. ^D For that the Scriptures are closed and sealed, John declares in the Apocalypse in these words: “And to the angel of the Church which is in Philadelphia, write: These things saith the Holy, the True, he that hath the key of David; he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth. I know thy works; behold, I have set before thee an open door, which no man can shut.” And a little later: “And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice: Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof? And no man was able in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, to open the book, neither to look thereon. And I wept, because no man was found worthy to open the book, neither to look thereon. And one of the elders saith unto me: Weep not: behold, the lion of

the tribe of Judah, the root of David, [is worthy] to open the book and its seven seals. Regarding the fact that it is sealed, Isaiah says only this: And all these words shall be unto you as the words of this sealed book, which if they give to a man learned in letters, saying: Read this; he will answer: I cannot read, for it is sealed. And this book shall be given into the hands of a man who does not know letters, and he will say: I do not know letters. These things are to be thought to be spoken not only concerning the Apocalypse of John and the prophecies of Isaiah, but they are universally to be understood as applying to the entire Holy Scripture, as is confessed even by those who have attained even a moderate knowledge of divine letters. For they are filled with the wrappings of riddles, and parables, and dark sayings, and various other kinds of obscurity, which are difficult for the human mind to comprehend. Wishing to demonstrate this, the Savior also says that the key was in the possession of the Scribes and Pharisees, who did not struggle to find the way to open [the truth]. And, "Woe unto you lawyers," He says, "for ye have taken away the key of knowledge; ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered." ^B

VII. These things have been proposed by us as a preface, for we have been urged by your great love of learning, and persuaded by your kindness and moderation, most holy Ambrose, into a most great struggle—one that without doubt exceeds our strength and capacity. Since for a long time, having perceived the magnitude of the danger, I resisted not only debating about the Holy Scriptures, but much more writing, and leaving [works] to posterity; [yet] you coaxed me in every way and with all sorts of enticements, and brought me to this by certain divine promptings. Therefore, you shall be a witness to me before God, when He shall inquire concerning my life and my writings, with what purpose of mind this was undertaken by me. And sometimes we attain the truth, sometimes we either break through too violently, or we seem to say something. Furthermore, we have searched into what is written, not so as to despise that excellent saying: "When you speak of God, you are judged by God." Likewise that other: "To speak even true things concerning God is no small danger." Therefore, since nothing can be excellent without God, and especially the understanding of the divinely inspired Scriptures, we ask that you would deign to beseech the Father of all, God, through our Savior and High Priest, the begotten God, and to obtain for us from Him this, that we may first be able to seek rightly. For the promise of attaining is set before those who seek; but I know not whether those who do not strive toward it by the way and by reason are counted by God among those who seek. Thus far the words of Origen. ^C

VIII. Against this arrogant man, inflated by the opinion of himself, and [who is] an investigator of things that cannot be investigated, and an expounder of heavenly things—this man who has filled the world with chatter, just as one superior to us has previously said concerning him—the first discussion to be handled is concerning the begotten God. And ^D that there are many identical expressions and homonyms in life, this is entirely evident. And if [the subject] be examined by another...

word had been used by someone else, we could have supposed that it was uttered with a straight and sincere mind. But now, since in many other places we find him separating the only-begotten God from the divinity and substance of the Father, as well as the Holy Spirit, it is clear that ^A he said this, namely "begotten God," because he determined Him to be a creature. For as some wish to sophistically deceive us, and say that "begotten" [genēton] is equal to "begotten" [gennēton], it is not to be admitted that this is said of God, but only of created things. For "begotten" [genēton] is one thing, and "begotten" [gennēton] is another. Whatever therefore was said by him, namely "begotten God," we ask first: in what ways is the God who is honored by you through this term created? And how will He still be worshipable, if He is created? Remove the rebuke of the holy Apostle against those who attribute divinity to created things; and grant to me a God who is worshiped according to the pious faith, who no longer worships the creation, but the Creator; and the sequence of your erroneous logic will be consistent with the piety of the Fathers according to you. But you cannot show this. And if you dared to steal from somewhere, and to do violence to the text, not even in this ^B will you turn the reasonable logic of the pious into such depravity, O you god-forsaken one! For your own mind and reason contradict you. For everything that is created is not to be worshiped, as I said. But if it were worshipable, with so many other created things existing, it would make no difference if we, along with the one Creator, also worshiped all the rest of the created things that are fellow-servants with us and under the same designation.

IX. Let us see through the four Gospels, through which God the Word, having come to us, arranged our entire life, whether Christ has ever said: "God created me," or, "My Father created me." Let us see also whether the Father has declared in any one of the Gospels that "I created the Son, and have sent Him to you." But let this suffice concerning this matter. For as for testimonies, we have often brought forward many against those who foisted a creature upon us. Nevertheless, it will not be annoying at present to make clear how easily that error can be refuted, and thus to address that man, who seems wise to himself. ^C Can that one be a creature, my man, who said: "I am in the Father, and the Father is in me," and, "We both are one"? Can he be something different, who has the equal honor of the Father? For no one knows the Son, except the

^A Father, and no one knows the Father, except the Son. And the other: "He who sees me, sees the Father." But the things which have been argued by the same person against the resurrection, we will bring forward shortly, maintaining the order, from his very words, and by a single utterance we will reveal his entire opinion, and we will show how much infidelity is in that doctrine. And although he has often treated this argument copiously, and has uttered huge trifles in various books, I shall be content for his refutation with those things which, in his commentaries on the first Psalm, he persuades himself were set forth against those who believe the resurrection with certain hope and confidence.

Ex Origenis commentario

X. ^B There is, however, this passage: "Therefore the ungodly shall not rise in judgment." Then, just as is his custom to deceive by comparing editions, he says, "So say Theodotion, Aquila, and Symmachus." Then finally, mocking the children of the truth, he adds: "Relying, he says, on the authority of this passage, certain of the more simple among the faithful deny that the wicked will be partakers of the resurrection, or that they will be deemed worthy of God's judgment; nor do they express clearly enough what kind of resurrection or what sort of judgment they imagine for themselves. And although they might seem to express their opinion about these things, the inquiry itself will convict them, and show that neither can that which is consequent and coherent be maintained by them, nor is the mode and reason of the resurrection and judgment understood. If, therefore, we ask whose future resurrection it is, they answer, 'Of the bodies which now surround us.' When we press further as to whether it is of their whole substance or not, before they have diligently considered this, they declare it will be of the whole. But if we, accommodating ourselves to their simplicity, and not disputing anything about the flux and mutable nature of bodies, question them again with doubt, whether all that blood will rise again, which has flowed out from time to time when a vein has been cut, and whatever else the power of diseases has consumed of the flesh, and all the hairs that have ever grown, or only those which were present at death: sometimes they stumble at this question, and say that it must be left to God to decide whatever He wills concerning these things; ^C but at other times, as if agreeing, they assert that only those hairs will rise with us which we possessed at the end of life. But those among them who are more stout-hearted, so that they may not be compelled by logic to gather up the blood—that which has often been separated from our bodies—and the flesh that changed in diseases into sweat, or any other kind of matter, they declare that our bodies will rise such as they were at the time of death."

XI. These are the cavils of that aforementioned self-styled wise man proposed against the truth; which I have necessarily had to set forth, so that I might make it entirely plain to those desirous of understanding the matter, how little and how unfaithfully he thinks about the resurrection. For he also ^D brings forward other things in succession concerning the same Psalm. He says:

^A Therefore the ungodly shall not rise in judgment. From this point he also attacks those who define a secure resurrection and who believe with constant hope and faith in the resurrection of the dead, as if they were whole, having spoken many wicked things; and by introducing a certain sophistical surmise—not something credible, but syllogistic—he attempted, for the destruction of those persuaded by him, to overturn the very confession of our hope in the resurrection, from those things which happen to us according to nature. But I, not wishing to appear better than those who have already labored well before me and most justly overturned his entire contrived rhetorical knavery, since I am a man of mediocre talent, deemed it right to be content with those things which the blessed Methodius said in the discourse he wrote On the Resurrection against the same Origen. These I shall transcribe word for word here. Methodius, therefore, speaks as it is written below.

Epitome of the Dogmas of Origen from Methodius.

XII. At this point, therefore, the simpler among the faithful, relying most of all upon this, deny that the ungodly will be participants in the resurrection, neither do they sufficiently explain what they understand by the resurrection, and what sort of judgment they imagine it to be. For even if they seem to pronounce their own opinion on these matters, yet from the inquiry itself it will be evident that they are ^B by no means able to preserve what follows as a consequence. Wherefore, if we interrogate them: Whose resurrection is to be? They answer: Of the bodies with which we are now clothed. Then, upon our pressing them further with the question: Whether it is of their whole substance or not? before they carefully weigh it, they define it as being of the whole. But if we, accommodating ourselves to their simplicity, inquire further by doubting: whether that blood is restored which has been poured out again and again from a vein that has been opened, and likewise all the flesh, and the hairs which have ever grown, or only those which had flourished at the time of our departure? they take refuge in saying that it must be left to God to accomplish what He wills. But those among them who are more stout-hearted, that they may not be compelled by logic to gather together the same blood which happened to be separated from our bodies many times, say that the body as it exists at our end will rise again. But we posed a further difficulty: because the bodily nature is mutable, and just as ^C food is assimilated into our body and changes its likenesses, so also our bodies are changed and become parts in flesh-eating birds and beasts ^D and...

are consumed. These in turn, being devoured by men or other animals, are changed in their turn, and become the bodies of men or other animals. And since this happens frequently, it must necessarily follow that the same body becomes a part of many men, time and again. Whose body, then, will it be in the resurrection? And in this way we shall fall into a depth of ^A foolish babbling, as if deprived of reason, and collapse into the most absurd of trifles.

XIII.

XIV.

as regards the quality of Peter and Paul, who represent the bodily, in accordance with which quality even scars from childhood remain on their bodies, and certain other characteristics, such as freckles ^A.

Moreover, if there is anything similar in this form, by which Peter and Paul are characterized, which is the bodily aspect that is again bestowed upon the soul in the resurrection, it is changed for the better, though it is not altogether the same as that which was set down as the primary substrate. ^B And just as the form remains until the end, even if the features seem to have much variation, so too must it be understood in the present case that the form is the same as the future one, although there will be a very great transformation for the better. For it is necessary that the soul, existing in bodily places, should use bodies suited to its ways. And just as if it were necessary for us, having become aquatic, to live in the sea, it would certainly be necessary to have an arrangement of limbs similar to that of fish, so too, for those destined to inherit the kingdom of heaven and to dwell in different places, it is necessary to use spiritual bodies, not because the former form is extinguished, even if the change to something more illustrious and glorious occurs; just as the form of Jesus, and of Moses, and of Elijah was not other in the transfiguration than it was at the beginning.

XV. Therefore, let it not offend you if one were to say that the primary subject matter will not be the same at that time, since reason itself declares that it cannot remain the same even for two days, if one is willing to pay attention. Moreover, it is worth noting that a different body is sown and a different one rises. For a natural body is sown, a spiritual body is raised. ^C And the Apostle adds to all this, teaching us that we are almost certain to put off the earthly quality, while the form remains preserved in the resurrection: "But this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does corruption inherit incorruption." For perhaps, indeed, something excellent will be attributed to the body of the saints, so that the property of the flesh itself may be preserved, yet it will no longer be flesh, but that which was once impressed upon the flesh as a kind of unique mark, this same thing will be signified in the spiritual body.

Now, as regards those passages of Scripture which are objected to by our brethren, we can briefly respond to them, and first to that which they bring forward from Ezekiel. For if we wish to attend to the mind and purpose of the simpler folk, which they have proposed to themselves in the words of the prophet, the consequence is that not even a resurrection of flesh is seen, but only of bones, and skins, and nerves. And it must also be pointed out to them that they are carried away, as those who have not understood what is written.

^A For if they are called bones, these bones must certainly be understood in a spiritual sense; just as it is not the case where it is said, *All my bones are scattered* (Ps. XXI, 15); and, *Heal me, for my bones are troubled* (Ps. VI, 3), since it is manifest that the name of "bones" is not used according to the common acceptation. Accordingly, it is immediately subjoined in the same discourse, because they themselves say: *Because our bones are dried up*. Do they, therefore, say, "Our bones are dried up," wishing to rise again having been gathered together? But this is impossible. They would rather say, "Our bones are dried up," having been in captivity and having lost all vital moisture. Therefore, they also bring in the statement: *Our hope has perished; we have been cut off*. Wherefore, that promise of the resurrection made to the people is a certain future awakening from that ruin and, as it were, death in which they were extinguished when, on account of their sins, they were delivered into the power of the enemy. Furthermore, sinners are also said by the Savior to be ^B sepulchers full of bones and all uncleanness. But it befits the divine majesty to open the sepulchers of each one, and to lead us out from the sepulchers restored to life, just as the Savior drew Lazarus out.

XVI. Now, as for those who object with this passage: *There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth* (Matt. VIII, 12), it must be argued against them that, just as in this life every member was fashioned by that supreme Creator for some use, so too the teeth were made for the purpose of breaking down solid food. What need, therefore, have they of teeth, who are tormented in the underworld? For I do not think they would say that they are going to eat anything there. To these points they must be taught that not all things are to be taken exactly as they are written. Therefore, it is written in another place: *Thou hast crushed the teeth of sinners* (Ps. III, 8); ^C and elsewhere: *The Lord has broken the molars of the lions* (Ps. LVII, 7). For who is so foolish as to persuade himself that God, while preserving the bodies of sinners, breaks only their teeth? Just as, therefore, if anyone wishing these things to be taken literally, is driven by the difficulties into an allegorical sense, so too one must inquire likewise concerning the gnashing of teeth in those who are subjected to punishments; insofar as the soul has a certain power of mastication, by which, at that last time of judgment, when a question is held regarding sins, it will gnash with its teeth in a certain manner, just as teeth are accustomed to collide. That statement, however, *Fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell* (Matt. X, 28), perhaps teaches us that the soul is incorporeal, or perhaps it also indicates that it will not be punished without a body; concerning which body, as regards its form and the primary underlying matter, we have discoursed a little earlier by natural reasoning.

^D But as for that saying of the Apostle, *He will also make alive our mortal bodies* (Rom. VIII, 11); since our mortal body is not a partaker of the true life, this can declare that this corporeal form which we have mentioned before, which is of a mortal nature, when *Christ, our life, shall appear* (Col. III, 4), is also to be changed from that state in which it was a body of sin, after, of course,

^A having been made spiritual. And as to *But someone will say: How are the dead raised, and with what manner of body do they come?* (I Cor. XV, 35), he clearly indicates that the primary underlying matter will not be raised. For if we have rightly taken the example, it must be said that the seminal reason, having taken hold of the available matter within the grain of wheat, and having passed through all of it, and having taken hold of it of the same kind, applies the powers it possesses to the earth, water, air, and fire that were there before, and, having overcome their qualities, transforms it into that of which it is itself the creator; and thus the stalk is completed, differing to the highest degree from the original grain in size, shape, and diversity.

From the same Proclus. XVII.

God has called us bound by the earth because of our communion with the body, nor that David is on that account to be called bound. For these matters are precisely what should be recalled, in which they especially appear to have fallen away from the truth. Having therefore said what is appropriate concerning the leather tunics, and that our first parents lived with bodies before these were fashioned, and were partakers of immortality, and further, that the body cannot be considered as chains and a prison; since I have argued this as much as was necessary, O judges—for it is you whom I call the judges of my words, O most excellent Theophilus—I shall then turn to the matters that follow, in accordance with the promise I made regarding what was proposed, so that we may see more clearly what we desire. ^B

XVIII. After the Artificer of all things, God, had established the whole in an orderly manner, like a great city, He adorned it by commanding it with the Word, and He fitted every element to Himself in harmony; and He filled all things with the varieties of living creatures, so that the world might be perfected and grow into beauty, having brought forth shapes of every nature alive and animate. He placed the stars in the heavens, the birds in the air, the four-footed animals on the earth, and the swimmers in the water. Finally, He introduced man into the world, having prepared the whole for him like a most beautiful house, as a kind of image expressed after His own likeness, having fashioned him as a beautiful statue in a bright temple with His own hands. For He knew that whatever He should fashion with His own hand must necessarily be immortal, inasmuch as it is the work of immortality. For from immortality come immortal things, just as evil things come from wickedness and unjust things from injustice. For it is not the work of justice to do injustice, but of injustice; nor, conversely, is it the work of injustice to act justly, but of justice; just as it is not the work of incorruption to cause decay, but this is the property of corruption; and to make things immortal is not the work of corruption, but of incorruption. And to say it in one word, whatever the agent is like, it necessarily makes that which is produced by it like itself. Now God is immortality, and life, and incorruption; but man is the work of God. Whatever is fashioned by immortality must necessarily be immortal. Therefore, man is immortal. For this reason, God fashioned man with His own hand, whereas He commanded the air, the earth, and the water to bring forth the other kinds of living creatures. ^C

Man is most truly said by nature to be neither a soul without a body, nor a body without a soul, but that which is composed into one form of goodness from the conjunction of soul and body. From this, indeed, it seems to be inferred that man was made immortal and free from all corruption and diseases. And divine Scripture also abundantly teaches us this. For regarding other creatures, which are wont to grow and age through the changes of time, it is said: "Let the waters bring forth reptiles of living souls, and flying creatures flying above the earth according to the firmament of heaven"; and, "Let the earth bring forth the living soul." ^D

^A When it comes to man, however, it is not said as it was for those, "Let the earth bring forth," or anymore, "Let the waters bring forth," or, "Let there be lights." But, "Let us make man according to our image, and according to our likeness, and let them rule over the fish, and the birds of heaven, and all the cattle"; and, "God took dust from the earth and fashioned man."

^B XVIII. And in order that you may perceive the difference even more—how he is distinguished from all and everything, and in having obtained the second place of dignity after the angels, man is found to be immortal—come, let us again discuss this very subject according to the true and orthodox reasoning. For to other animals, life was granted by the instilling of that spirit which is diffused through the air. But to man, this was bestowed from an immortal and superior substance. "For God breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul." It was commanded that they serve and be subject to authority, but to him, that he rule and exercise authority. To them, different forms of nature were given, and shapes, as many as the solid and visible nature brought forth at the command of God; but to him, a God-like and God-resembling nature, and everything accurately perfected toward that primal and only-begotten image of the Father. "For God made man; according to the image of God he made him."

^C Hence, God also took care for the permanency of his own statue, so that it might not be vulnerable to corruption—just as artisans are wont to provide for the statues they make. For they are concerned not only for the beauty and comeliness of their statues, so that they may be exceptionally fine or magnificent, but they also strive to provide as much immortality as they can to these very works, so that they may remain intact and not at all dissolved for as long a time as possible. They say that Phidias did this among others. For he, after having fashioned the Pisan image (made of ivory), ordered oil to be poured at the feet in front of the statue, to keep it immortal, so far as possible, in its power.

^D And so, if the creators of things made by hand devise these things, would not that most excellent craftsman, God, who can create all things even out of nothing, much more necessarily have fashioned his own image gifted with reason—that is, man—to be entirely indestructible and immortal? Or did he rather allow him to be dissolved so ignominiously and to be corrupted and perish—that very image which he deigned to polish with his own hands in a singular way, which he expressed according to his own image and likeness, as it were a "cosmos of the cosmos," for whose sake the world was made? This can by no means be said. For he who, puffed up with a vain opinion, dared to assert this, would approach near to madness.

^A XIX. But you, Aglaophon, perhaps considering with a less attentive mind the things that have been proposed, might object: If that animal existed as immortal from its origin, how could it ever have been mortal? Since whatever is immortal must necessarily be what it is perpetually, and not degenerate or transition into a baser and mortal nature; for this is impossible, otherwise it would not be immortal. But I shall reveal to you the cause of this thing. For when he was furnished with free will for the choice of the good, and had received that law, the most wicked envy, supervening, ruined him. For God created man for incorruptibility, and made him an image of His own eternity. For God did not make death, nor ^B does He delight in the destruction of the living. By the envy of the devil, death entered into the world, as the Wisdom of Solomon testifies. But it must necessarily be asked again, whence death originated, if God did not make death—if you say it came from envy, how then did envy prevail more than the divine will? But this is a wretched and detestable point to raise. For if you reply that it is from the devil, why then do we say the devil came to be at all, if he was created?

XX. And indeed, the one who created him ought to appear the author of evil. But God is in every way blameless of evils; therefore, the devil is unbegotten. ^C And if he is unbegotten, he is also impassible, and imperishable, and lacking nothing. For these things must necessarily belong to the unbegotten. But the devil is brought to nothing and is punished. Now, that which is punished is altered and undergoes suffering. But that which is unbegotten is impassible; therefore, the devil is not unbegotten, but created. And if he is created, and all that has been created came to be from some beginning, there is a creator both of him and of the devil. And is that one also unbegotten, or created? But only God must be conceived as being unbegotten; for there is not, in ^D the sum of all things, any other creator at all besides Him. "I am the first," He says, "and I am after these things, and besides Me there is no other God." Nor can anything be fashioned or created contrary to His own will. For even the Son confesses that He can do nothing of Himself, unless He sees the Father doing it. "For whatever the Father does," He says, "these things the Son also does." Nor is there any hostile thing, or one that opposes or is anti-God to Him; for if there were anything that resisted God, it would cease to be entirely, its constitution being dissolved by the power and strength of God. For it is possible for Him alone, having created, to also dissolve even immortal things.

XXI. What then shall the devil be called? A spirit, evidently, that has to do with matter, as was said, O Athenagoras, [alt-version omitted] having become...

^A It is created by God, just as the rest were, O Athenagoras, just as the other angels were sown by the same. To them, both matter and the forms by which matter was affected were entrusted for care and administration. For the reason for constituting the angels was that they might render to God a vicarious service in those things which had been ordained and disposed by Him, providing the governance. For God, who holds dominion and empire over all things, was to undertake the common and general care of all, steering the whole universe unswervingly, as if it were a ship, by the rudder of His own wisdom, while the angels respectively assigned to this task sustained the singular function and care. ^B But the others, indeed, persisted in that station for which they had been created and constituted by God. The devil, however, acted impudently, and in the administration of those things that had been entrusted to him, having conceived envy against us, showed himself most evil. Just as also those who afterwards burned with concupiscence for bodies, and had the custom of fornication with the daughters of men. For that which was conceded to men was also granted to them by God, so that both parties might have a free counsel of will, that whether they obeyed His word they might enjoy His association and be participants of felicity, or if they refused obedience, judgment might rightly be exercised upon them. Moreover, the devil was like a certain morning star, Lucifer. How did Lucifer, who arose in the morning, fall from heaven? He was indeed a morning and bright star. But he fell and was dashed to the earth, having managed contrary things for man. For the Divine is accustomed to be indignant against the proud, and it restrains the more insolent spirits. And it is pleasing to declare this same thing in verses:

^C The head, alas, and end of evils for all, the dragon, You beget a heavy treasure of evils: Blind error, leader of the world in ignorance. Who takes pleasure in the sad mourning and lamentations of mortals: You, arming the impious hands that hate a brother Against a kindred head for unspeakable crimes, Forced Cain to defile the earth first With gore-stained blood. Then, because the first parent Fell from the happy life to the earth, That fraud of yours is to blame.

^D XXII. And in this manner, indeed, the devil. But death itself was found for the disciplining of men; just as beatings are accustomed to be applied for the correction of little children who are learning the rudiments of letters. For death is nothing else than the separation and disjunction of the soul from the body. What then? Is God in any way the author of death? For you might say this; and the same argument recurs to us. But far be it from us to say so. For neither are teachers the cause of boys being pained by stripes, in the first place or primarily. Death, therefore, is good, if, just as for children, towards

^A Since they are the primary and principal causes, why are children affected by the pain of stripes? Death, therefore, is a good thing, when it has been devised as a means of correction, like stripes, to restrain children. I do not mean the death of sins, O most wise men, but that by which the soul is separated from the fellowship of the body. For since man was made free and his own master, and had received a will of his own choice and power for the inclination towards the good, as I have said, and had heard: "Of every tree that is in the paradise ye shall eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ye shall not eat of it. In the day that ye eat of it, ye shall surely die"—by eating of it, and having been lured by the devil's cunning—he who persuaded him to listen in various ways—he set at naught the commandment of God; and this became for him a stumbling block, and a snare, and a thorn. For God did not make evil, nor is He in any way at all the author of evil. But everything that has been made by Him with the power of self-determination, if it does not keep the law which He justly set down—the law to be observed—is called evil. And the most grievous injury is to disobey the bounds of justice, which God established according to the self-determination of the creature. ^B Hence, after man had been defiled and polluted, having revolted from the decree of God, and had imprinted upon himself many stains of the wickedness which that prince and father of error had sown—having conceived, according to the Scripture, toil, so that he might always have the man imaginatively inclined and stirred toward unrighteousness—God the Almighty, seeing that an immortal evil had been brought into being through treachery, just as the devil was also a deceiver, therefore made for him the garments of skins, as it were clothing him in death, so that by the dissolution of the body, all the evil that had been born within him might die.

^C XXIII. It has already been discussed and demonstrated that the garments of skins are not the bodies. Nevertheless, let us state it again (for it must be said many times). Before the making of them, the first-formed man himself confesses to having bones and flesh, when indeed, having beheld the woman brought to him, he exclaimed, "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called woman, because she was taken out of her man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife; and they shall be one flesh." For I will not endure certain men who babble and shamelessy distort the Scripture, so that the resurrection might not be for them a progress of the flesh, postulating "intelligible" bones and "intelligible" flesh, and ^D turning their allegories up and down in one way or another. And that these things are to be taken as they are written is confirmed by the authority of Christ, who, when asked by the Pharisees about the divorce of a wife, answers: "From the beginning He who created them made them male and female," and said, "For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother," and the rest. For how, in relation to

^A souls alone is the saying, "Increase and multiply," to be referred? Or that other: *God took dust from the earth, and formed man*? This latter seems to have been spoken strictly of the body. For the soul did not derive its substance from the dust or from those heavier, concrete substances. Thus it is proven most truthfully that man was endowed with a body even before those skins of leather were put on him. For it is certain that all these things were pronounced before man's fall; but the matters concerning the tunics [were pronounced] only after the fall.

^B Wherefore we must now consider the things we have in hand, since we have abundantly demonstrated that those leathern tunics were not the bodies, but were a mortality fashioned after the manner of animals—for this is what remains. For this reason, he is exiled outside the bounds of paradise for this very cause. For it is not that God cast man out because He did not wish him to pluck and eat from the tree of life (for he could indeed have lived forever, had he eaten from that life-giving tree from time to time), but, as we have said, He thought he must take heed lest evil become immortal. Otherwise, what point was there in sending Christ from the heavens to the earth, if He had altogether wished man, without having tasted of life, to perish utterly? But if an opponent should object that God did this as though moved by some repentance, his argument is feeble, introducing a God who changes His mind. But God is neither ignorant of the future, nor the author of evil; rather, He is good above all, and foreknows the future. Wherefore it is not to be thought that He cast him out so that, if he were to eat from the fruit of the tree of life, he might be preserved forever; but rather that, first of all, sin might be put to death by mortality, and so that, when he had died, and sin had been, as it were, consumed and melted away, man, having been raised to life and made purer, might partake of life.

^C XXIV. Nor is there any reason why a foolish person should dare rashly to declare that these things were pronounced otherwise. For whoever absolutely denies that this flesh is capable of receiving immortality is suffering from a disease of madness and uses contumelious words against God. For why is Adam cast out after the leathern tunics are sewn, and why is he prohibited from reaching for the tree of life and living, if it is absolutely impossible for man to lead a life with a body forever? For that prohibition was issued as if, by tasting that life, he could have escaped death. For so it says: *And the Lord God made for Adam and his wife tunics of skins, and clothed them. And God said: Behold Adam is become as one of us, to know good and evil. And now lest perhaps he reach forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever. And the Lord God sent him out of the paradise of pleasure, to work the ground from which he was taken. And he cast out Adam.* Therefore the body could have lived forever and become immortal, had it not been prohibited from tasting of life. But it was prohibited for this reason: that sin, having been killed along with the body, might die, and that the body

^A might be resurrected, with sin having perished. Therefore, in order that man might not be a certain immortal and everlasting evil, as I have said, nor foster within himself the dominance of sin—inasmuch as it sprouted in an immortal body and had immortal food—for this reason God decreed him to be mortal, clothing him in deadness. For those leather tunics signified this: that through the dissolution and division of the body, all sin from the very bottom might be rooted out and destroyed, so that not even the slightest part of the root might be left from which new shoots of sins might again bubble forth.

XXV. For just as a wild fig tree born in the structure of magnificent temples, having grown into expansion and size, and having spread its manifold branches of roots through all the joints of the stones, does not cease growing until, with the stones ^B having been dislodged from the place where it sprouted, it causes the whole thing to fall to ruin, and then, with the wild fig tree removed, the living stones can be restored to their own places so that the temple itself is preserved unharmed, having no longer any of the evils by which it was being destroyed, while the wild fig tree itself, pulled up from its lowest roots, dies—exactly in the same way, God the Architect dissolved His own temple, man, who had produced sin like a certain wild fig tree, and allowed him first to be overcome by the temporary incursion and force of death, as it is written, and then raised him to life, so that the flesh, endowed with the same parts, ^C might rise again, with the sin dried up and dead, like a certain restored temple, immortal and unharmed, with the sin having been destroyed and put to flight from the foundations. For as long as the body is still alive and has not yet died, sin must also live with it, hiding its roots within us, even if it is held in check on the outside by the cuts of corrections and admonitions. Since, therefore, it would not happen after being enlightened that one would do wrong, inasmuch as sin would have been altogether and purely removed from us—yet now, even after believing and coming to the water of purification, we are frequently found to be in sins—for no one can so boast of being free from sin as not even to think of injustice at all. Wherefore it is evident that sin is now held in check and lulled to sleep by the faith, so as not to bear harmful fruits, ^D but it is not yet rooted out to its very roots. For now we restrain its shoots, as it were—that is, wicked thoughts—so that no "root of bitterness" growing up might cause trouble, not allowing the closed mouths to open and yawn toward the sproutings of the word, like an axe cutting toward its roots that grow below; then, however, even the thought of evil at all will be made to disappear.

XXVI. For our word is not without the testimony of Scripture for those who wish to speak the truth sincerely. For the Apostle also knows that as yet the root is not [removed] from men

for he says at one time, "For I know that there dwelleth not in me, that is, in my flesh, good," declaring that to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. And at another time, "I delight in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members." Thus it happens that sin has not yet been cut off from its very roots; for it has not died completely, but lives. For how could it be that before man has been delivered to death, in order that when he has been corrupted and consumed with him, it itself might be thoroughly extinguished and perish—like a plant that dies when the soil in which it was hiding its roots is dissolved—man should rise again to life having no longer any implanted root of bitterness? Therefore, as a remedy for the rooting out and utter destruction of sin, our Helper and true physician, God, has applied death as a sort of medical aid, so that the evil awakened in us, as we are immortal, might not remain eternal, and so that we, who are in a very bad condition and have fallen away from our own virtue after the manner of the sick, might not remain longer in that state, nourishing the great disease of sin within perpetual and everlasting bodies. And thus, for the recovery of the salvation of both, namely, of soul and body, God has devised death as a kind of medical purgation, so that He might render us immune to all harm and whole.

^C XXVII. Come now, since for such things many examples are needed, let us consider these things especially from this point, nor let us depart from this argument before our discourse ends in a clearer explanation and proof. It seems to me, therefore, that it has happened as if some most skilled craftsman were to melt down again a fine statue, fashioned by him out of gold or some other material and elegantly polished in all its members to perfection, because he suddenly observed it defiled by some very wicked man who, unable to endure the beauty of the statue out of envy, had endeavored to inflict some blemish upon it, so that he might reap a vain fruit from his own malice. For observe, O most wise Aglaophon, that if the craftsman does not wish the statue, which he has labored upon with such great study and diligence, to remain defiled and blemished, he will be moved again to melt it down, so as to make it such as it was before. But if it does not please him to melt it down again and to gather it into one, but only to amend and correct it as it stands, it is necessary that the image, heated by fire and reshaped by the craftsman’s art, should no longer remain the same, but should appear altered and distorted. Wherefore, if he wishes his work to be excellent and free from all blemish, it must be broken up and melted down, so that the things that have been acquired, and all the alterations resulting from his malice and rott-

rotting, may be destroyed by the remodeling and melting down, and the statue itself may again be rendered whole and unharmed, and as similar to its original self as possible. For it is not the case for a statue to be destroyed by the same craftsman, even if it is dissolved back into its material; rather, it is possible for it to be restored. Whereas for blemishes and wounds to be destroyed is possible—for they are melted away—but for them to be restored is not possible, because in every art, the excellent creator does not look toward the uglier thing or that which has been achieved, but toward the proportion and uprightness of what is being created.

For God appears to me to have arranged things in the same way regarding us. For when He saw man, His most beautiful handiwork, being basely affected by malicious designs and envy, He, being benevolent, could not bear to leave him in such a state, lest he remain defiled for all eternity, retaining that everlasting stain within himself; but He dissolved him into material again, so that through the refashioning, all the blemishes in him might be melted down and vanish. For what the melting down of the statue is there, that is death and the dissolution of the body here; and what the remolding of the material and restoration to its original luster is there, that is the rising again after death here. The prophet Jeremiah also corroborates this. For he teaches precisely this in these words: "And I went down," he says, "into the house of the potter; and behold, he was working a work upon the stones, and the vessel which he was making in his hands fell, and he made it again another vessel, as it pleased him to make it. And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, If as this potter, shall I not be able to do this to you, O house of Israel? Behold, as the clay of the potter, so are you in my hands."

[XXVIII] For observe how, as I said, after man had transgressed, the mighty Hand did not see fit to leave its work—as if it were counterfeit, unfairly damaged by a wicked one with malicious accusations—to remain in such disgrace and reproach; but after melting it down, He again worked it back into clay, like a potter who, by refashioning it, causes all the blemishes and fractures in it to vanish through that refashioning, so that the whole might come into existence once again irreproachably and acceptably. "Or does not the potter have power over the clay from the same lump to make one vessel for honor, and another for dishonor?" Which is to say (for this is what the Apostle seems to me to mean): Does not God have the power, by refashioning and restoring the form of each individual from the same material, to raise one to honor and glory, and another to dishonor and condemnation? To dishonor, indeed, those who have lived basely in the habit of sins; but to honor those who have adapted their lives to righteousness. This was also declared by Daniel [in the words]: "Since many of those sleeping in the dust of the earth," he says, "will rise, these to eternal life, and these to reproach and eternal shame; and those who understand will shine as the brightness of the fir-"

firmament." ^A For this is placed within our power, not that we should completely root out the evils of wickedness, but that we should not allow it to grow further and bear fruit. For the total and complete removal and destruction of its roots is accomplished by God at the dissolution of the body, as has been said; but the partial removal, to prevent it from sprouting, must be performed by our own efforts. From this it follows that he who has nurtured that evil stock until it has grown in breadth and stature, and who has not, so far as he was able, made it sterile and repressed it, must pay the penalty; for he had the power and the ability to do so, yet he chose to prefer the harmful over the beneficial to his own soul.

XXIX. Therefore, let no one, being the cause of his own evil, cast blame upon the divine nature with an intemperate tongue, as though it did not justly distribute the rewards of virtue and vice to each. For who are you, O man, who answers back to God? Will the thing molded say to the molder, "Why did you make me thus?" For how can he say this, when he has chosen wickedness by his own impulse and will? And for this reason he will not say to God, who judges by the unchangeable decrees of justice, "Why did you make me thus?" ^B Just as an expert javelin-thrower, the Apostle casts profound and convoluted arguments of discourse into the midst, making the treatment of his readings appear deep and shrouded, though it is most true and orthodox, and contains nothing neglected or impious. For to those who do not encounter these words with diligence, but rather in a base manner, it sometimes appears that he speaks in a disjointed and inconsistent way; but to those who are diligent and of a sober mind, how full of order and truth they are! ^C Those who apply themselves to them with an awake mind judge all things that have been pronounced according to the order and the truth of the matter.

But to discuss these things more accurately now would be a task of great labor in itself. Moreover, it is ridiculous, having abandoned the argument that we have undertaken to treat, to divert ourselves to other things. For these things have been said by us for the sake of those who, in the manner of fools, desire of their own accord to be wicked. Since, therefore, it has been most clearly demonstrated thus far that death is not inflicted upon man for the sake of any evil, it behooves one who has not attended to these matters negligently to understand the resurrection of the bodies. For is not death useful precisely on this account, that through it those things which in a certain way plunder our nature are destroyed? Even if, at the time it is brought upon us, it may seem somewhat annoying, like a medicine which is given to a sick person, being very bitter. ^D But lest we dispute too often about the same argument, come now, since we have confirmed the word from the song of Deuteronomy, let us proceed to examine what follows.

XXX. For these words: "I will kill and I will make to live; I will strike, and I will heal, and there is no one who can deliver from my hands," which are brought forward by God, what else do they teach us, except that for this reason the body is first killed and dies, so that it may afterwards rise again and live? It is struck first and broken, so that it may be saved and restored to health. And in no

^A way does anything have power to remove us from His great and mighty hand unto destruction and death—neither fire, nor death, nor darkness, nor chaos, nor corruption. For who, he says, shall separate us from the love of Christ? (who is interpreted as the hand of the Father and the Word). Tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written: For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. But in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us. Most truly, so that it may be fulfilled, as I said: "I will kill, and I will make to live; I will strike, and I will heal." And there is no one who shall take us out of the love of God which is in Christ Jesus, for destruction. Therefore we were accounted as sheep for the slaughter, so that, having died to sin, we might live to God. And let these things be considered up to this point; what follows next must now be addressed.

XXXI. If everything that is generated is unhealthy—for in this way the adversary objects: "And both in generation itself and in nourishment, it—he says—is increased by that which comes in, and is diminished by that which departs; but things that are not generated are healthy, and do not become sick, nor do they have need, or desire; but things that are generated crave both sexual intercourse and food. Now to desire is to be sick, while not needing and not desiring is to be healthy; but generated things are sick because they desire, while things not generated are not sick. Things that are sick suffer either by the excess or the deficiency of what is added and taken away; and that which suffers both withers and perishes; wherefore it is also generated. Man is generated; therefore man cannot be impassible and immortal." But the argument falls down on these very points. For if everything that comes to be or is generated perishes (for it makes no difference to speak in this way, since even our first parents were not generated but were created), and if the angels and the souls are created (He who makes his angels spirits), then according to their ^B opinion the angels and souls perish. But neither the angels nor the souls perish; for they are immortal and invincible, as He who made them willed them to be. Therefore man is also immortal. But that other position is not acceptable, to say that the whole is to be utterly destroyed, and that earth and air and heaven will cease to be. For it will indeed be burned up for purification and renovation, ^C when the whole world descends, being flooded with fire, but it will not go into destruction and absolute corruption. For if it were better for the world not to be than to be, why would God have chosen the worse by creating the world? He would have acted in vain. Therefore, God ordered the creation that it might exist and remain, just as Wisdom also, through which it subsists, confirms, saying: "For God created all things that they might exist; and the generations of the world are wholesome, and there is no ^D potion of destruction in them."

^A And Paul clearly supports this, saying: "For the expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God." For the creature was made subject to vanity, he says. ^B And by the creature, he expects to be delivered from such bondage, wishing now to call this world the creature. For it is not the things that are invisible that serve corruption, but these things that are seen. The creature, therefore, remains, having been renewed to a better and more becoming state, rejoicing and exulting in the resurrection for the sake of the sons of God; for whose sake it now groans and travails in pain, and it itself awaits our redemption from the corruption of the body, so that when we have been raised from the dead and have shaken off the mortality of the flesh, according to that which is written: "Shake thyself from the dust and arise; sit down, O Jerusalem." And when we have been delivered from sin, it itself also shall be delivered from corruption, no longer serving vanity, but righteousness. "For we know that every creature groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body." And Isaiah says: "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain"; and again: "Thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited." For in truth, God did not create this whole universe in vain, and fruitlessly, and for destruction, ^C according to the opinion of most foolish men, but that it might exist, and be inhabited, and remain. Hence it is necessary that the earth, and the heaven after that conflagration and heat of all things, should exist. But why it is necessary for this to be so requires a longer discourse to explain. For this universe will be reformed, not into some idle matter that it possessed before its constitution, and into which it might have been dissolved, nor will it be reduced to absolute ruin and corruption.

XXXII. But, the adversaries will object: If this whole universe does not perish, how does the Lord say that heaven and earth shall pass away? ^D And how does the prophet say that heaven shall perish like smoke, and the earth shall be worn out like a garment? But we shall reply that this is the custom of the Scriptures, to call the restoration of the world and its transformation into something better and more excellent "perishing," inasmuch as the prior form perishes in that change into a state that is the most pleasant of all; for there is no contradiction or absurdity in the divine words. For "the fashion of this world passeth away," it is said, and not the world itself. It is, therefore, the custom of the Scriptures to call the change toward the better, and sometimes—

^A a change of the former shape, and to call it destruction. Just as if someone were to call the transition from the shape of an infant to the perfect man "destruction," when his age is being led toward the magnitude and beauty of maturity. "For when I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away the things of a child." [1 Cor. xiii, 11] For it must be supposed that while the creation is to be shaken, as if it were to die in the conflagration, it is to be built up again, and not that it is to perish; so that we who have been recreated may dwell in a recreated world, tasting no sorrow; or according to what was said, "Thou shalt send forth thy spirit, and they shall be created; and thou shalt renew the face of the earth," in the hundred and third Psalm, [Psal. ciii, 30.] God having finally arranged the surrounding air to be most temperate. For since there will be an earth even after this age, it is absolutely necessary that there be those who will inhabit it, no longer to die, or be wedded and bring forth children, but like angels, without turning back, to perform the best works in immortality. Wherefore it is nonsense to ask in what manner of life the bodies will then exist, if neither air, nor earth, nor any of the other things that follow will exist any longer.

^B XXXIII. It is, moreover, a matter worthy of consideration, Aglaophon, that he errs and is greatly deceived, if I may be permitted to speak boldly about these things, when he discusses them. For after he had said that the Lord, answering the Sadducees who were tempting Him, asserted that those who shall attain to the resurrection shall then be as angels, he added: "But the angels, being without flesh, dwell in the peak of blessedness and glory. Therefore, we who are intended to be made equal to the angels must likewise be stripped of flesh, even as they." He did not realize, my excellent friend, that He who created and adorned the universe out of nothing ^C bestowed that same condition of immortality not only upon angels and His ministers, but also upon principalities, thrones, and powers. For the race of principalities is one thing, and that of the powers is another; for there is not one rank, and one constitution, and one tribe, and one family of the immortals, but races, and tribes, and differences. And neither do the cherubim, departing from their own nature, change into the form of the angels, nor do the angels in turn change into those of others. For they must be what they are, and what they were created. For if man, who was established to inhabit the world and to rule over all that is in it, being immortal by the original disposition, will never be changed from being a man, neither into ^D the form of the angels, nor into that of others; because not even the angels are changed by being transformed into the original idea of others.

For in fact, Christ came preaching not that the human nature should be transformed or refashioned into another, but that it should return to what it was from the beginning, before it fell—that is, being immortal. For it is necessary that each of those things which have been produced should remain in the form and condition of its own nature, so that all things may be filled by all: the heavens by the angels, the throne by the powers, the lights by the ministers; and further, the more divine places and the purer lights by the seraphim, who stand by the great Counsel ^A that governs all things; and the world by men. But if we were to grant that men change into angels, it would follow that we must also say that the angels change into powers, and these into one thing and another, until the argument, having ascended to the heights, falls into danger.

XXXIV. That God fashioned the human being as a defective thing, or failed in his design, and later thought to make him an angel out of repentance, like the basest of craftsmen, is wrong; nor did He create man because He had intended to make an angel at the beginning and had not succeeded. ^B This is weak. Why, then, would He make man and not an angel, if He had been thinking of making an angel and not a man? Was it because He could not? That is blasphemous and impious. Or was He occupied with an inferior task while deferring what was more excellent? That, too, is completely absurd. For God neither errs in creating what is good, nor does He defer it, nor is He powerless; but He possesses the power to act how He wills and when He wills, since He is Power itself. Therefore, ^C wishing man to be man, He created him from the beginning. And if He wills to do this—and He wills what is good, and man is a good thing, and a human being is defined as that which is composed of soul and body—then man will not exist outside of a body, but with a body, so that another human being might not be born, distinct from the human being. For it is necessary that all the immortal genera be preserved by God. For, says Wisdom, God created man for incorruption, ^D and made him an image of His own eternity. Therefore, the body is not utterly destroyed, since man is composed of body and soul.

XXXV. And see, I pray you, how the Lord willed to teach these same things to the Sadducees, who rejected the resurrection of the flesh. For this is the doctrine of the Sadducees. Whence, having contrived that parable about the woman and the seven brothers, which they proposed against the doctrine of the resurrection of bodies: "There came to Him," it says, "the Sadducees, saying that there is no resurrection." Therefore, if there were no resurrection of the flesh—if only the soul obtained salvation—Christ would have agreed with them, as though they were thinking correctly and well. But instead, He replies, saying: "In the resurrection, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in heaven." This is not because they do not have flesh, but because they do not marry or take wives, but are henceforth without any corruption. And He adds that in this respect we are made like the angels, so that just as the angels are in heaven, so we too shall be in paradise, no longer given to marriages or banquets.

but occupied in contemplating God and cultivating ^A life, under the presidency and guidance of Christ. For He did not say, "They shall be angels," but "as angels," as if to say, crowned with glory and honor, as it is written, but varying a little from the angels, and being near to being angels. Just as if one were to say: When there is order in the air, and calmness, and night, and all things of the moon are adorned with its ethereal light, the moon shines as the sun. And yet we would not testify that the moon is the sun, but that it is like the sun. Just as that which is not gold, yet is by its nature very close to being gold, is said to be "like gold," and not gold itself. For if it were gold, it would not be called "like gold," but gold. But since it is not gold, but is close to being gold, and assumes the appearance of gold, it is called "like gold." ^B

In exactly the same way, when He says that the saints will be like the angels in the resurrection, we are not to understand this as if He intended that the saints should be changed into the nature of angels in that resurrection, but merely that they will be close to the condition of the angels. Therefore it seems to me most foolish to conclude: Because Christ predicted that the saints in the resurrection would be seen as angels, therefore these bodies are not to be resurrected. Especially since the very word declares the action of what happens. For "resurrection" is used not of that which never fell, but of that which fell and rises again. Just as when the prophet says: *And I will raise up the tabernacle of David which has fallen.* That longed-for tabernacle of ^C the soul fell and collapsed upon the earth of clay. For it is not that which does not die, but that which dies, that is inclined. But the flesh dies; for the soul is immortal. And so, if the soul is immortal, but the body is a corpse, those who say that there is a resurrection, but not of the flesh, deny the resurrection; because it is not that which stands, but that which has fallen and inclined that is raised up, according to what is written: *Does he who falls not rise again, or does he who turns away not return?*

XXXVI. That the soul is immortal, the Lord has taught openly, both through Himself and through Solomon. Through Himself indeed, in the story of the rich man ^D and the poor Lazarus: the one of whom He wished to rest in the bosom of Abraham after putting off the body, while the other He condemned to torments; and from these He introduced him as conversing with Abraham. He showed the same clearly through Solomon in the book which is inscribed Wisdom, where it is written: *The souls of the just are in the hand of God, and torment shall not touch them. They seemed to die in the eyes of the foolish, and their departure was considered a misery, and their journey from us an extermination. But they are in peace, and their hope is full of immortality.* Therefore, it is the resurrection of the body, and not of the soul; for no one raises that which is standing.

but rather the one who is lying down; just as one does not provide a remedy to a body in health, but to one that is suffering.

But if someone should stubbornly insist on saying that the resurrection is to occur for the soul, and not for the flesh, there is great folly and unreasonableness in such a person. For he must first assert the corruption and dissolution of the soul, in order to conclude that the resurrection belongs to that part; otherwise, he would not appear to be merely raving, but to be arguing something with some degree of coherence. ^A Yet, even so, we must grant him the right to define the soul as mortal. For one of two things must necessarily be assumed: either that the Lord spoke the truth when He taught that the soul is immortal, and that it is a most false claim to say that it is corrupted; or else that it truly is corrupted, and that Christ taught erroneously when He declared it to be deathless and immortal—both in the narrative concerning the rich man and the poor man, and in the vision in which Moses and Elias appeared. But the Lord did not speak otherwise, nor did He lie. ^B For He was not showing the apostles an idol or a phantom on the mountain when He presented Elias and Moses to them, in order to deceive them, but by truthfully appearing, they were as they were. So that, one might say, even the most slow-to-learn could understand that the soul is immortal, and be assured that it is incorruptible.

XXXVII. Therefore, the resurrection is of the flesh, not of the soul, so that the tabernacle of David which has fallen into corruption may rise again; and having risen, and having been rebuilt, it may abide inviolable and eternal, as in the days of old. ^C And we must not imagine that God intends to build David a house of stone, nor that He constructs some exquisite dwelling in the heavenly kingdom. Rather, He is speaking of the flesh, which is the tabernacle of the soul, which He molded with His own hands. But you, most wise Aglaophon, must consider these things in this way. You will grasp them most easily if you attend to the likeness of those who sleep and those who awaken. For if sleep follows wakefulness, and waking follows sleep, this is surely some meditation on resurrection and death: inasmuch as

Because sleep and death are twins, it is just as necessary for returning to life to follow death, that the life of the body should succeed it, since a person is also said to be awakened from sleepers. For just as waking follows from sleep, and he who sleeps does not remain in the same state forever in order to sleep perpetually, but rises again in turn; ^D so too shall life follow from death, and he who has died does not remain in the same state after death. For if waking succeeds sleep, and arousal succeeds falling, and restoration succeeds demolition, is it not the case that from that which has inclined and is dead, a resurrection is to be expected? For we do not confess these things in vain—that after bodies have died, they will revive again. And you may see this same thing not only in sleep and waking, but also—if you wish—in seeds and plants, how all these things proclaim the resurrection.

For consider the seeds, how they are cast into the earth naked, as he says, and without flesh, and being brought to completion, they are given back. For if the seeds were truly to die and to rot, and if it were no longer possible for anything to come to life and grow from these seeds, what other lot would remain but for all things to be consumed and to perish in death?

^A XXXVIII. But let us, for the present, refrain from saying more on these matters, most excellent Theophilus, as well as you other judges of our arguments. Let us take up, however, the matters that follow in order, as they are far removed from what is right. For he, forcing the interpretation of the sixtieth Psalm and applying it quite inappropriately—as he says—to the resurrection, claims that it should be understood as applying only to the human form. And that you may not say that he teaches these things in an obscure manner—for he did indeed set this forth—I shall clarify this meaning for you more plainly here. You have surely seen, I suppose, an animal skin or something similar filled with water, such that if it is emptied little by little, and filled little by little, it always shows the same form. For whatever the container is like, the contents must necessarily take on its shape. For come, when the water flows out, if someone pours in as much as is drained away, not allowing the wineskin to be completely emptied of water, it is necessary that what is added appear as the whole, because it is the very same thing that contains the flowing and leaking liquid.

^C Whoever, therefore, wishes to compare the body with these things will do so without any shame. For in the same way, the food that is introduced in place of the flesh that has passed away is changed into the shape and appearance of the containing form. And as much as is distributed to the eyes becomes like the eyes; as much as to the face, becomes like the face; and as much as to other parts, becomes like them. So that each person appears to be the same, not because the original flesh remains as the underlying matter, but because of the form, by which the incoming material is shaped. Therefore, if we are not the same, even for a few days, regarding the body, but rather regarding the form within the body—for this alone has remained from our beginning—then in that time we will be even less the same regarding the flesh, but rather we will be the same according to the form which even now is always preserved and remains in us. For what the skin is in that former analogy, that is the form in this one; and what the water is there, that is exactly what our subject is, the part that is added and removed. Just as, therefore, even when the body is not the same, the species and figure of the form is nonetheless preserved; so too, even if the body is not the same, the form, having grown into something more glorious, will no longer be shown in a corruptible body, but in an impassible and spiritual one. As, for instance, in Jesus at the trans-

- ^A figuration, when he went up into the mountain with Peter, and Moses, and Elias, who then appeared to him.

XXXIX. But so much for these matters: for this is the sum and substance of the dogmas of Origen. But if any of our opponents, putting forward the body of Christ, and because he is called the first-born of the dead and the first-fruits of them that sleep, should argue that, just as he rose again, so all things must likewise be expected to rise again, in order that, as Christ has been raised, so also God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep through Jesus; and that the body of Jesus was raised, and that it consisted of the same flesh and bones, as Thomas was persuaded—to these we should reply: The body of Christ was not produced by the will of man, ^B nor by the pleasure of a meeting in sleep, nor conceived in iniquities, nor entwined in sins, but was created of the Holy Spirit, and the power of the Highest, and of the Virgin. But yours consists of sleep, and pleasure, and filth. And for this reason also the wise Sirach declares: For when a man dies, he shall inherit serpents, and beasts, and worms. And in the eighty-seventh Psalm: Shall you do wonders for the dead, or shall physicians raise them up, and shall they confess to you? Does any one tell of your mercy in the grave, and your truth in destruction? Shall your wonders be known in the dark, and your justice in the land of forgetfulness? And other such words of Scripture may be gathered by anyone who wishes, ^C lest, if we should attempt to gather and recount them all copiously, our discourse might grow to a greater length.

Follows from Methodius.

XL. When Proclus had with difficulty made an end of speaking, and there was silence for a long while among those present, and they were sufficiently prostrated by unbelief, when I perceived that he had ceased, I lifted my head little by little and took a breath, like those who sail upon a sea when the storm has begun to abate, although I was still trembling and gripped by vertigo (for to confess the truth to you, I had been struck and as if overwhelmed by the great abundance and power of his speaking). I turned to Auxentius, and calling him, "Auxentius," I said, "I do not think that the poetic line was used to no purpose:

*For when two walk together.*

For the adversaries are two. Therefore, the strength of both must be withstood by both of us. For I choose you as my helper and fellow-combatant in the battle against them, that there may be no..." ^D

^A I choose to be an advocate, lest Aglaophon, with Proclus and Origen, instructed by arguments meant for refutation, should overthrow the resurrection. Therefore, we must resist their sophistical calumnies, and their arguments, by which they attack the faint-hearted, are in no wise to be feared. For there is nothing sound or firm in them, but merely an outward embellishment of words, contrived for display and for the admiration of the hearers; a certain enticement of persuasion—not for the sake of truth or any utility, but for the sake of ostentation—so that they may display clever and artfully devised discourses to their listeners. And hence it sometimes happens that those discourses which are deduced from mere probabilities, and are adorned for show and pleasure, seem to others superior to those which have been weighed by the most accurate standard of truth. From this it comes about that teachers no longer strive for that which is best and full of gravity, but look only to that which pleases and is carried along by popular favor, as the sophists are accustomed to do, who, receiving payment for their discourses, barter away the praise of their learning as at a paltry price. In ancient times, moreover, there was the utmost brevity in interpretation, since they strove most of all not to delight the hearers, but to benefit them.

^B But after the faculty of interpreting the Scriptures was granted to everyone without any difficulty, and all, puffed up with pride and high opinion of themselves, became dull and blunt toward that which is right, they truly made great progress in the subtlety of reasoning, and chased after the artifice of speech, just as if they were possessed of the knowledge of all things; for they were ashamed to confess that they had need to be taught, and preferred rather to wrangle contentiously and to spring forward like masters. From this, then, they grew bold, and slipped away from that pious and gentle faith—whereby one believes that God is able to do whatever He has promised—and fell into empty questions and blasphemies, not understanding that words were not devised for the sake of works, but works for the sake of words; just as in medicine, through which the sick must be cured, the words are confirmed by the deeds by which the sick man represented as healed. Whereby, tempered with a certain most fitting harmony, we might have such a mind as would manifest a character consistent with most excellent discourses, like a lyre, not jarring or discordant. For we must cultivate justice with every effort of the soul, in order that we may truly be in possession thereof and not merely seem to be, so that we do not pursue the study of wisdom as if limping, nor strive for glory more than for truth, nor put on a certain fine face and empty appearance, and take upon ourselves all the trappings and apparatus of hypocrisy.

^{C D} 41. There are indeed, there are those who sell themselves by the artifice of discourse adorned for tragic display, as women are wont to do; who, to entice and deceive, employ external bodily cultivation and enticement, unless those who are yet younger, protected by faith and sobriety, cast their eyes upon them with the utmost caution of soul. Wherefore, one must diligently

^A avoid, before we have understood the whole matter accurately, allowing such speeches to take root in our minds. For it often happens that deceivers outstrip the labor of teachers, no differently than the Sirens conceal their cruelty and hatred toward men from those who flee from them by the sweetness of their voice. If this is not so, I said, Auxentius, what is your opinion on this matter? The same as yours, he replied. Therefore, we declare all sophists of the contrary opinion to be imitators of images of truth, and ignorant of truth itself, just as painters are. For they too strive to imitate shipbuilders, and the ships themselves, and helmsmen, while lacking skill in shipbuilding and steering. Do you wish, therefore, that we should scrape away the colors and persuade the children, who are transfixed by the admiration of those paintings, that it is neither a ship that appears to be a ship, nor a helmsman who appears to be a helmsman, but a wall decorated on the outside with colors and pictures for their pleasure? But, good sir, I said, that those who have fashioned such works with a variety of colors are imitators only of the image of a ship and a helmsman, and not of the ship itself, is a long premise for those who wish to hear it, but nevertheless it is useful. For if one takes away the words of the divine ^B Scriptures, with which they distinguish their own opinion so as to deceive—just as if with a various kind of paint—and which they arrogantly call justice and truth, while being utterly ignorant of justice, how ridiculous do you think they would appear, stripped of such terminology? Wonderfully so, he said. Then I said: Do you prefer to be the guide of this path, Auxentius, or should I take the lead? It is fair, he said, that you should lead. For you initiated this discourse.

XLII.

it will no longer receive a body that casts it down into destruction and injustice. This too was said. And I said, Do you consider this to have been said well and rightly? And what difference does this make to you, he said? But you will not refute the argument. Nor do I refute the soul, I said. But, he said, because of the things you have said, so that the argument may be examined, tell me, is it said well and rightly? Does it seem to you to be posited well and rightly, that one who says things contrary and inconsistent to himself? Not at all. What then? Does it seem to you that it is ignorant ^A to feign the truth in this way? Most of all, he said. Do you not then accept the one who extends sins to the false member of arguments? Not at all. What then?

Therefore, you will not prove even your own self to be speaking ignorantly. For having granted that souls had sinned incorporeally, having slipped from the commandment, and having interpreted your statement—that God later gave them skins for their lawlessness, that they might provide compensation by bearing the dead, having interpreted the bodies as skins—as the argument proceeded, you forgot what you posited at first: that the soul is not able to sin by itself. For you say that it is not at all naturally disposed toward this, but that the body has become the cause of all sorts of evils for it. Then, so that it might not again be incited to injustice by the body, as happened before, in this way it will exist for ages without it. And yet you said first that the soul had sinned in paradise before the body, when it was still blessed and painless. For having transgressed the commandment, after it had been ^B already mastered by the persuasion of sin through the serpent, the body was given to it as a punitive bond ^C just as, when the sin had now prevailed because it had obeyed the serpent, the body was placed around it in the manner of a bond as a place of punishment.

Therefore, either the former or the latter is not correct. For either it sinned before the body—and it will not at all be the case that if it does not receive a body it will not sin, and the superfluous discussion is useless regarding the non-resurrection of the body—or it sinned with the body, and the skin tunics cannot be thought to be bodies. For it is found that man transgressed (against) the divine commandment before their creation, and for the sake of which the tunics are created, covering the nakedness brought upon them from their sin. But am I persuading you, and do you see how you posited things that contradict themselves, and has this become clear to you? Or do you not yet understand, Aglaophon, I said, what I mean? I understand, he said, and I no longer need to hear a second time; but I did not realize that I spoke incorrectly. For it is necessary for me, having granted that the skin tunics are the bodies, to confess that even before the soul came into the body it had sinned, on account of which the transgression occurred before their creation. For ^D because of the transgression the tunics were for them, and through them the creation of these for them, and not the transgression happens because of the tunics; and

from this admission one must agree that it is not that this body is the cause of wickedness, but rather the soul itself in itself. Wherefore, even if the body does not arise, it will sin, since it sinned also before without the body. And it is foolish to say that the body cannot rise again, for the reason that it might be the cause of sinning for the soul. For it will sin, just as it sinned also before the body, and likewise after the putting off of the body, even if it does not receive the body back again. Whence it is necessary for me, on account of these things, neither to accept for myself nor to hear from another that the leather tunics are the bodies. And if I were to accept it, I must also agree to the things that have been said. ^A

XLIII. To this I said: But that, O Aglaophon, does it not seem to you to have been wrongly stated? What is that? he asked. The body, I said, to assert that it was fashioned like a bond and fetters against the soul: because the prophet also says that we are in bonds upon the earth, and David calls us fettered? Then he: I cannot, he said, answer you readily. But why do you not dispute with someone else? And I (for I perceived that the man was blushing, and fearing to be refuted in the argument), Do you suppose, I said, that I was led by envy to want to refute you, and not rather that I wanted to declare what was the intended premise? But come now! Let it not weary you to be questioned. For you see that this discussion has arisen for us not on small matters, but on that, to be sure, of how one must believe. For I do not think any greater evil can befall a man than, concerning necessary things, to have conceived a false opinion about them. Clearly therefore, I ask, and readily answer what is asked; and if I seem to have proposed anything less true, refute it, led by a greater zeal for truth than for me. For I think it is a far more excellent good to be refuted than to refute; by how much it is a greater thing for oneself to be snatched from evil than to snatch others. Come then, comparing our words with one another, let us consider if they differ at all from each other. For the things about which we contend are not trivial, but of such a kind that it is more excellent to know them, and most shameful to be ignorant of them. ^B Accordingly, you do not think the body rises again: but I do. Very much so, he said, and for the things I have said. And you, I said, also said it was a bond, and a prison, and a tomb, and a burden, and fetters; but I do not say so. True, he said, you speak truly to me. And yet, through intemperance, and wandering, and grief, and anger, and in a word, through all the other evils of which you asserted it is the cause, you said the soul's impulse toward better things is hindered, and it does not allow us to pass through to the comprehension and knowledge of things that truly are. For even if we attempt to hunt down any of the things that are, a darkness always falling in shrouds the reasoning, not permitting us to look upon the truth clearly. For the investigation through our ears is filled with deception, as you said; and the investigation through sight is also of deception, and that through the other senses is of deception as well. ^C You see, he said, O Eubulius, how I am ready to consider the flesh so great an evil. ^D

^A

XLIV. Therefore, I said, if you would praise me all the more, if according to your view the body is thought to be a bond, it cannot in any way be considered the cause of wickedness and injustice to the soul, but on the contrary, [it is the cause] of temperance and discipline. Consider it in this way, so that you may better grasp what I mean. Where do we take those who are suffering in their bodies? Is it not to physicians? It is clear, he said. And where those who sin? Is it not to the judges? It is necessary, he said. Therefore, I said, they pay the penalty for what they have done, do they not, and justly? Yes. And is everything that is just, good? He agreed. And he who judges justly does well; for does he not judge rightly? He assented. And what is good appears to be beneficial. Therefore, they who are judged receive a benefit. For by these torments their wickedness is removed, being restrained, just as diseases are removed by the incisions and medicines of physicians. For to have one who has acted unjustly pay the penalty is equivalent to the soul being corrected and casting off the great disease which is injustice. He agreed. And what then? Do you not say that, in proportion to the sins committed, punishments are justly applied to those who are punished, just as surgeries are applied to those being treated in proportion to their wounds? He nodded his agreement. Therefore, he who has committed sins worthy of death is punished with death, he who has committed sins worthy of stripes with stripes, and he who is worthy of bonds with bonds. He agreed. And he who is sentenced to bonds, I said, or stripes, or some other such punishment, is penalized in order that he may stop, having repented of acting unjustly, and may be straightened by torments just like a piece of wood that has been warped? You speak most truly, he said. For the judge punishes him not on account of the past crime, but for the sake of the future, so that he may not do it again. This is clear, he said. For the bond clearly removes from him the impulse to act unjustly, not allowing him to do what he wishes. True. Therefore, he is restrained from sinning, since the bonds do not allow him to live freely and pursue his pleasures, but rather constrain him and teach him to honor what is just until he unlearns [his habits], and through admonition becomes temperate. It seems so, he said.

^B Consequently, the bond does not become the cause of wrongdoing, as it seems. For it disciplines and makes men more righteous, being an antidote—bitter and stinging, it is true, but medicinal—for the soul. It is clear, he said. For what else? Come, let us examine the preceding points again. Did you not posit that the body is a bond for the soul on account of the transgression? I do posit it, he said. And is it your opinion that the soul sins with the body, if indeed adultery, murder, and impiety are sins which the soul commits along with the body? ^C He nodded his agreement. But did we not agree that the prisoner is unable to act unjustly? We did agree, he said. And that he is restrained while distressed by his bonds? Yes. And is the flesh a bond for the soul? He nodded his agreement. But do we sin while being in the flesh, with the flesh also agreeing with us in this? We do sin, he said. ^D

But can he who is bound sin? And to this he likewise gave his assent. For he is pained and restrained. Rightly so, he said. For is he not hindered by his bonds? There is no doubt, he replied. But is the body an administrator for sinning? It is, he said. Yet does a bond restrain? He nodded. It follows, therefore, according to neither your opinion, Aglaophon, nor that of another, that the body is a bond; but it is an assistant to the soul for either purpose, that is to say, as much for good as for evil. He conceded.

^B XLV. Since these things are so, it is your task, Aglaophon, to clear up what you posited before. For you were saying that the body is the soul's bond, prison, and fetters. These things do not at all agree with what you have just said. For how can they agree, if indeed it is necessary that the flesh be considered a bond, yet the soul uses it as an assistant for wickedness and as a confederate in that very bond, which is impossible? For if it was given as a place of torment because of sin, so that the soul, being afflicted with pain, might be educated to worship God, how can the body assist and cooperate with it to do evil? For bonds and guard-houses, fetters, and in short all such instruments of punishment which pertain to the reformation of men, are endowed with the power of restraining the sins and crimes of those who are being punished. For a bond is not applied like some sort of guard—so that a criminal may commit greater crimes—but so that in that way, being tormented by the bonds, he may desist from committing outrages. And for this reason, ^C evildoers are constrained by judges with bonds, because they are prevented from doing anything evil, even against their will. Indeed, sinning is proper to free men who are their own masters and whose life no one observes, not to the bound. But man first committed parricide, like Cain. Then he grew in infidelity, venerated idols, and fell away from God. How, then, is it possible that the body was attributed to him as a bond? Or how, when man had already entangled himself in sins before the body, did God add the body to him as some sort of protection for greater sins? And finally, how, after that bond was fashioned, did He speak thus: "Behold, before thy face I have set life and death; choose life: good and evil; choose the good"? Or likewise: "If ye be willing and hearken to me"? For these things seem to be said to him as one endowed with liberty, not to one compelled by bonds and necessity. So that it follows entirely that the body is not to be considered in the place of fetters, or a guard, or bonds, ^D nor are souls called "bound to the earth" because of these things, as if God had condemned them with certain earthly shackles. For how can that be true, since it cannot be demonstrated by any reasoning? But it is also clearly absurd to think that the body, in that eternal life, will be far from the soul, because those things are a bond and foot-shackle for it;

and we shall be—that is why it will not rise. ^B XLVI. For what other reasonable and certain argument can be shown to those who are troubled by this, that it casts flesh into a trap, as if paying the penalty for sins committed? This is something closer to folly than to true orthodoxy. For if, as we have already explained above, souls possessed bodies before the transgression, how is it that they are later, after the transgression, cast into a body as into a trap, when there is no time in which they sinned before they received the body? For it is not the act of a sound mind to say sometimes that souls sinned because of the body, and at other times that, because they sinned, for that reason [the body] became a bond and a trap for condemnation. For if they sinned because of the body, then the body must have been with them from the beginning, even before the sin. For how could they have sinned because of something that did not yet exist? But if the body is considered once again to be a trap, fetters, and a bond for it, then it is no longer the compound that is the cause, but the soul alone that has sinned. For what is prepared for the sinner after the act of sinning? Bonds, traps, and fetters. ^C But we have already acknowledged that the body cannot be a bond for the soul, since the body cooperates toward both things—both toward what is just and toward what is unjust—whereas a bond prevents one from doing injustice. Therefore, as I say, it is one of two things: either we sinned from the beginning with a body—and no time appears in which we existed without a body, and the body is a joint cause for both evils and goods for the soul—or we sinned living without a body, and the body is entirely free from any cause of wickedness. But without a body, the soul is not overcome by irrational pleasure. Yet the first-created were overcome, being lured by irrational pleasure. ^D Therefore, the soul was with the body even before the sin. For concerning the point that it cannot be thought to have become a bond for punishment because of the transgression, so that the soul, according to them, might have unalloyed and continuous torment by carrying a corpse, I think I have already demonstrated these things fully with every proof. Whence it is groundless and unacceptable to posit that the body is a trap and bonds, and that God brings souls into a trap to exact punishment, casting them down from the third heaven because they disobeyed the commandment from above. For looking at what, would anyone believe what has been so rashly said by them? Even though the Psalm does not say so, they explain it under compulsion. But I will bring forth the passages themselves, so that the mythical character of their interpretation may be apparent, as they do not rightly wish to understand the Scriptures. For there are

^A things said in that psalm, in some such way as this: "You have tested us, O God, you have melted us as silver is melted. You have brought us into the trap; you have laid afflictions upon our back. You have set men upon our heads. We have passed through fire and water, and you have brought us out into a place of refreshment." And they immediately add: "These words are spoken by souls that have been brought down from the third heaven, where the paradise is, into the body, as into a trap and a wrestling ground." For in the words, "We have passed through fire and water," he says, it denotes the passage of the soul into this world through the womb, since it is brought forth into such great heat and moisture; or it denotes the fall from the heavens into this life, passing through the fountains of fire and the waters above the back of the firmament. To all of whom I wish to stand in opposition. Come then, Aglaophon, you yourself make the reply on their behalf, as to what they might say.

^B XLVII. For, in the first place, that paradise, from which we were cast out in our first parent, is without doubt an excellent place in this earth, set apart for the exquisite and most pleasant rest and dwelling of the pious. Thence, moreover, the Tigris, the Euphrates, and the other rivers take their source, whose channels and currents overflow into our continent. For they do not rush down into the earth having fallen from the sky. Nor, indeed, could the earth have endured such a mass of water cast down from on high with such a great impetuous force. Nor does the Apostle place paradise in the third heaven, if one ^C can penetrate his words with a certain subtle understanding. "I know," he says, "a man caught up to the third heaven, and I know such a man, whether in the body or apart from the body, God knows, that he was caught up into paradise." By these words he signifies that two things of the greatest moment were revealed to him, since he was clearly taken up twice; first to the third heaven, and then into paradise. For these words: "I know such a one caught up even to the third heaven," demonstrate that something peculiar was shown to him when he was raised to the third heaven. But that which follows: "And I know such a man, whether in the body or apart from the body, that he was ^D caught up into paradise," demonstrates that another thing was revealed and indicated to him again in paradise. Wherefore those are tuneful trifles, and are tragically fabricated for pomp and show, to assert that souls are sent down from heaven, and that, having fallen into this lower world, they pass through the fiery fountains and the waters that are above the firmament; for Adam also was by no means cast down from heaven, but from that paradise which had been planted in Eden toward the east. For the sin was not committed before he put on a body, as we have shown.

The body itself is not a snare. But it was only after the soul ^A became fused with the body that the fall occurred; for man is this compound, and his descent here was from paradise. But Aglaophon did not attend very carefully to the meaning of that passage, but instead insisted upon disputing things that cannot be understood in any way, and set out to explain that psalm according to the opinions of wicked men, concerning which we shall say no more.

XLVIII. For I wish, since we have once come to expose their wickedness, to strip away even the pretext for this prophecy of theirs. "Thou hast tested us, O God, and hast tried us with fire, as silver is tried." Since the martyrs are continuously tested ^B by the onset of tortures in their trials (for often the responses of the prophets are fulfilled in our own faith), and have wrestled both piously and most courageously, they give thanks to God saying, "Thou hast tested us," for He, in order that they might attain greater glory with Him, willed them to be endangered by various labors, and set before them the victory of a truly Olympic contest. And consider how clearly what Solomon pronounces concerning the martyrs is in harmony with these words; for the discourse is not devoid of the testimony of other Scriptures: "God tested them, and found them worthy of Himself. As gold in the furnace He tested them, and as a whole burnt offering of sweet fragrance He accepted them; and in the time of their visitation" ^C, etc., having said before: "For if they have suffered torments before men, their hope is full of immortality. Having been chastened a little, they shall be greatly benefited." Furthermore, in the 123rd Psalm, it is said: "If it had not been that the Lord was with us, when men rose up against us, they would have swallowed us alive. Our soul has passed through a torrent; our soul has passed through the unbearable water. Blessed be the Lord, who has not given us for a prey to their teeth. Our soul as a sparrow was delivered from the snare of the hunters. The snare was broken, and we were delivered." It is the martyrs who are chanting. There are two choirs of the triumphant martyrs, one belonging to the New Testament and the other to the Old, ^D who respond to one another in the honor of God, the patron and king of all, with the modulation of this hymn: "Thou hast tested us, O God; Thou hast tried us with fire, as silver is tried. Thou hast brought us into the snare; Thou hast laid tribulations upon our back." This signifies the tribunals of the Gentiles and the trials by which, being afflicted and seared as if by fire, they were most powerfully tested. "For test me," he says, "O Lord, and try me; burn my reins and my heart." It is permitted for Abraham also to say these things, when his inward parts were seared as if by a certain fire for the sake of his only-begotten son, and he preferred the command of God, after hearing, "Abraham,"

^A spare your son, and cast away the sword." "You have tested us, O God; you have refined us as silver is refined." Job, too, may utter the same words, after his body had dripped with purulent matter, and he had endured the insults of his friends, and was afflicted with bodily torments; when he had heard God speaking to him through the storm: "Do you think I have spoken to you for any other reason than that you might appear righteous?" Let him say, I say: "You have placed tribulations before us, O Lord, that you might test us as gold is tested in a furnace." The three youths in the furnace, sprinkled with dew so as not to be consumed by the fire, may also sing along: "You have tested us, O God; you have refined us as silver is refined. We have passed through fire and water; and you have brought us out into a place of refreshment." Would that it might be granted to me, Methodius, at some time, O omnipotent and eternal God, Father of Christ, when on your day I shall have passed through the fire without any pain, and escaped the force of the waters which have been changed into a burning nature, to say: "I have passed through fire and water; and you have brought me out into a place of refreshment." For this is the promise issued by you to those who love you: "If you pass through the water, I am with you, and the rivers shall not overwhelm you. And if you pass through the fire, you shall not be burned; the flame shall not consume you." But concerning the interpretation of that psalm, enough has been said thus far.

XLIX. Now that matter must be considered, in which those who are deluded after the manner of sleepers by various dreams boast that the Apostle said these things: "I was alive once without the law"; and they immediately shout that this describes the life of our first parent before the body and the prescription of the law, as those things which follow make one believe: "But I am carnal, sold under sin"; because otherwise a man could not have been brought under the power and dominion of sin, and, having violated the commandment, be sold, unless he had existed endowed with flesh. For the soul by itself cannot be taken ^C by any sin. Because of this, he acutely added immediately: "I am carnal, sold under sin," when he had said before: "I was alive once without the law." When they said these things, very many were turned to astonishment and amazement. But now, after the truth has been most manifestly revealed, it is evident not only that they have wandered far, but that they have even arrived at the height of blasphemy. For whereas they want souls to have lived before the precept, devoid of body, and not to be able to be overtaken by any sin by themselves, having fallen into another opinion thereafter, they have overturned their own dogma, or rather, themselves. For they make bodies for them later as if for a punishment, because they sinned before the body. Indeed, insults also occur to them, as they assert that the body is like chains and fetters, and they babble other foolish things of this kind.

But in truth, as I have said, the matter stands in the contrary way. For the soul ought to have been joined to the body even before sin. Otherwise, since the soul is void ^D of any

^A capacity for sinning by itself, it could not have sinned at all before the body. But if it did sin, it was not then unimpeachable of itself in regard to sin, but was rather both vulnerable and susceptible. Hence, also, even if it does not receive this body, it will sin, just as it sinned before receiving it. Why then did it receive the body at all later, after it had already sinned? Or what need of a body had it? If it were, for instance, that it might be tormented and feel pain, how is it that, with the body, it rather indulges in luxury and debauchery? And further, how does its power of free choice appear to exist in this world? For it lies within our own power to believe, and to not believe. And where it lies within our power to believe and to not believe, it is in our power to act rightly or to sin, and in our power to do good or to do evil. ^B But also, how can the judgment be expected as something future, in which God will recompense each one according to his deeds and practices? How could it not be considered as already present, if to be begotten and to enter into a body is for the soul effectively to be judged and to receive its recompense; and if to die and be separated from the body is nothing other than to be liberated and to come into a refreshment, for the reason that, having sinned before the body, it is thrust into the body as though into condemnation and a penalty, as you maintain? The argument has demonstrated sufficiently and in superabundance that it is impossible that the body should be regarded as a torture chamber and shackles for the soul.

^C 50. It would suffice, therefore, having shown from the Scripture itself that the first-created man existed from soul and body before the transgression, to put an end to the discourse on these matters here. I, however, will now pass through the main points, only endeavoring to refute the grounds of their arguments, so as not to exceed the proportion of the discourse. For it is possible for you now to perceive, O judges, that the passage, "I was once living without the law," spoken in the Epistle to the Romans, cannot apply to the conduct of the soul before the body, according to their view, just as the things which follow these words indicate. Even if this excellent physician of the Scriptures, by cutting away the parts that follow, violently bent the mind of the Apostle toward his own opinion, acting in this very ^D unskillful—nay, rather, childish—manner. For whereas he ought to have arranged the members of the divine words just like the limbs of bodies in their proper joining and articulation, so that the entire and natural form of the body might be preserved, he, on the contrary, neglecting the sequence of the Scripture, has rendered the body mutilated, just like a Scythian cruelly destroying and chopping limb by limb a hostile body. But let us let these things pass. Yet they will say: "Why were these things pronounced by the Apostle, if you deny that they are as you have said?" I answer that he used the word "law" for the "precept." For let it be granted, first, according to your hypothesis, that he called the precept a "law"—not on that account, however, did he assume that the first-created lived without bodies before the precept, but rather without sin. For the time from their creation until the precept is indeed short, in which

they lived without sin, but not without corpus; nor did he confirm that the body is subject to death. 577 ^B

51. But if they raise an objection again, saying: "Why then is the wisdom of the flesh said to be hostile to God? For it is not subject to the law of God; neither indeed can it be" (Rom. viii, 7), one must answer that they are greatly deceived at this point. For he does not declare that the flesh itself cannot be subject to the law of God, but the wisdom of the flesh, which differs from the flesh. Just as if one were to say: "The dross of silver, because it has not been sufficiently refined to be fashioned into a suitable vessel, is not subject to the craftsman; nor can it be." For it must first be separated and refined. And yet, he does not for that reason deny that the silver can be fashioned into a useful vessel, but only [denies it of] that which is copper-like in the silver and the other hardness. So also, when the Apostle speaks of the wisdom of the flesh, he does not say that the flesh itself cannot be subject to the law of God, but the wisdom which is in the flesh, by which term he signifies its propensity toward pleasures and lusts. ^C This he sometimes calls elsewhere the "old leaven of malice and wickedness" (1 Cor. v, 7), urging that it be utterly destroyed by us, and sometimes a "law warring against the law of my mind, and making me captive" (Rom. vii, 23). For if he were saying that the flesh itself cannot be subject to the law of God, then, in the first place, as often as we acted intemperately, or committed theft, or perpetrated other things of this kind through the instrumentality of the body, we would seem to be undeserving of blame before a just judge, since the flesh is absolutely incapable of being subject to the law of God. For why should the body be blamed if it lives according to the necessity of its nature? But neither could the body be led to chastity or virtue, if by the condition of its nature it were unable to be subject to the good. For if the nature of the flesh is such that it cannot be subject to the law of God, and the law of God is righteousness and temperance, then it would not be possible for anyone to remain a virgin, nor to be continent at all. But if they are virgins and are continent, it is evident that they are subjecting the body. For otherwise it is impossible to be continent from sin. Therefore it is not true that the body cannot be subject to the law of God. For if it were true, by what reasoning would John have subjected his own body to chastity, or Peter to holiness, or the others subsequently to righteousness? Why also would Paul have admonished thus: "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that you should obey the lusts thereof; neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God" (Rom. vi, 12, 13)? And likewise that other saying: "As you have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto sanctification" (ibid. 19). ^D

^A LII. This, therefore, he understood: that this tabernacle can be corrected and converted to what is good, so that sins might be utterly extinguished within it. For what other way is there by which a man can be brought into a certain servitude of justice, unless he first subjects the members of his flesh—that they may no longer obey sin, but righteousness—and orders his life as is worthy of Christ? Since indeed both the act of sinning and the act of not sinning come about through the body, which the soul uses as an instrument for either virtue or vice. For since "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. vi, 9-10); and since all these things are performed and strengthened by the agency of the body: no one can be justified unless he first overcomes them. He indeed overcomes these things who turns himself toward temperance and faith; thus it is brought about that the body can be subject to the law of God. For the law of God is temperance. Wherefore the Apostle does not assert that the flesh itself cannot be subject to the law of God, but the "wisdom" of the flesh (Rom. viii, 7), that is, its impulse and its ardent, inflamed cupidity toward injustice. For this reason he commanded it to be purged, even to the point of struggling against the gluttonous intemperance of the belly, showing that such desires and pleasures are to perish, and striking shame into those who think that to live in such luxuries is to live at all; those who consider the belly to be their God. "Let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die" (1 Cor. xv, 32)—as do certain voracious bodies that are abandoned to nourishment, occupied entirely with tables and banquets.

After having used these words: "Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them" (1 Cor. vi, 13), he added: "Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body. And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power. Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body" (1 Cor. vi, 13-20).

^C LIII. In this, I would have you note that, because this body is capable of receiving the law of God and immortality—if it should be purged of the intemperance of those burning appetites, being in no way stained by the prurient touch of unlawful incitements—for this reason these things were spoken by the Apostle. For what else is that which

^A in joining with her through the conjunction of limbs, and through a certain communion becomes one with her, beyond that external body, by whose ministry all those abominations of the commingling of bodies and of burning lust are perpetrated? Whence also, "Every sin whatsoever a man doeth, is without the body; but he that committeth fornication, sinneth against his own body." For pride, and unbelief, and anger, and hypocrisy are sins of the soul. Fornication, however, and wantonness, and luxury belong to the body; with which a soul can neither fly toward the truth, nor be subjected to the decrees of temperance; but both must necessarily fall away from the kingdom of Christ. Furthermore, if our bodies, preserved in holiness, are the temple of the Spirit dwelling in us, and the Lord resides in the body, and the members of the body are the members of Christ, then the body is altogether subjected to the divine law, and is capable of inheriting the kingdom of God. "For He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken," He says, "your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you," that this mortal may put on immortality, and the corruptible should put on incorruption, and death may be swallowed up in victory. For the Apostle was not disputing in this place about any other body, but precisely about this one, which is extinguished and brought to an end by death, through which it is possible both to fornicate and to act wantonly. ^B 58 LIV. But if they suspect that there is some difference between "body" and "flesh" (so that we may even allow them to reason about this with some subtlety), and they imagine that the body is one thing—as, for instance, the proper property of the soul itself, which cannot be perceived by the eyes—while the flesh is that external thing which is seen by the eyes: it will be necessary to refute them by showing that not only Paul and the prophets attribute the term "body" to this flesh, but also other philosophers, among whom, indeed, the precision of terms is strictly observed. For "flesh" in general, if they wish to examine these things scientifically, is not properly said to be the entire bulk of this tabernacle of ours, but a certain part of the whole, just as bones, or nerves, or veins are; but the "body" is the whole. Whence also physicians, who discourse accurately concerning the nature of bodies, consider this thing which is visible to be the body. Indeed, even Plato himself does not ignore that this is the body. For in the Phaedo, Socrates ^C says: "Shall we not consider death to be the same, namely the departure of the soul from the body? And is it true that to die is for the body to exist separately by itself, apart from the soul, and for the soul to exist separated from the body?" What of blessed Moses (for let us also come to the divine Scriptures)? Does he not understand the same thing to be the body that we speak of, when he says, in the laws of purification, "And he that hath touched the unclean person shall wash his clothes; and he shall wash his body with water, and shall be unclean until the even"? And what shall we say of Job? Does he not also understand this same thing which is extinguished by death to be the body, saying, "My body is covered with the putrefaction of worms"? But also Solomon, that "into a malicious soul wisdom shall not enter" ^D

^A, nor shall she dwell in a body subject to sin.

And in Daniel it is written regarding the martyrs: "The fire did not rule over their bodies," it says, "and the hair of their head was not singed." And the Lord in the Gospel says: "Therefore I say to you, Do not be anxious about what you shall eat or what you shall wear. Is not the soul more than food, and the body than clothing?" And the Apostle no less, by these words, "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body," ^B demonstrates that the body is that with which we are clothed; and again: "But if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also." And again: "If the foot should say, 'Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body,' it is not for that reason not of the body." And again: "And Abraham, not weakened in faith, did not consider his own body to be dead." And again: "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what he has done through the body, according to what he has performed." And again: "For they say, 'His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak.'" And again: "I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know." And again: "So ought men to love their own wives as their own bodies." And again: "Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, and soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." ^C But those who do not accurately understand any of these things have judged that the Apostle fluctuates and is carried about in a disordered way, as if his thoughts and the sentiments of his words were completely lacking in stability and firmness, and as if he pronounced things which were subsequently retracted, such as the flesh sometimes rising and sometimes not rising.

LV.

is without the boundary ^A by which one must conduct oneself, nor possesses an independent power of reason, through which it might choose what rule of life to use, in order that it might be individually honored or blamed, must be shown to be exempt from all such accusation; for it cannot desire those things which are not forbidden to it. And even if it should desire them, it will not be held blameworthy. For desire does not fall upon things present and subject to our power, but rather upon things that are present, yet not within our power. For how could anyone desire or yearn for that which is not forbidden to him, and of which he is not in need? For this reason, "I would not have known desire, unless the law had said: You shall not desire." For having heard, "But from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. For in the day that you eat from it, you shall surely die," then eventually I conceived the desire, and I began to travail ^B. For the one who desires does not desire the things he has, and over which he has power, and which he uses, but rather those things from which he is forbidden, and of which he is deprived, such that he does not possess them. Wherefore it was well said: "I would not have known desire, unless the law had said: You shall not desire." Which is to say: "You shall not eat from it." For from there, sin found a place and an opportunity to approach, to mock me and to lead me astray.

LVI. For once the commandment had been given, the devil found an opportunity through that commandment to work desire in me, having urged me on and cleverly invited me to fall into the appetite for forbidden things. For without the law, sin is dead. For as if the commandment had not been given and did not yet exist, sin was inactive. I, however, lived blamelessly before the commandment, not having a boundary and regulation by which it was necessary to live, and by falling from which I would commit sin. But once the commandment arrived, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment which was for life was found by me to be for death; because after God had legislated, and had specified what was to be done and what was not to be done, the devil worked the desire in me. For that exhortation and instruction of God which was given to me was for life and immortality, so that by obeying it and living according to it, I might have a life that is unharmed and most blessed throughout eternity, and always blooming toward immortality, and joy. But for me who violated it, it turned into death and condemnation. Since the devil, whom he now called by the name of sin, because he is the artisan and discoverer of sin, having found an opportunity through the commandment, mocked me, and once mocked, he killed me, having managed it so that I became subject to the judgment: "For in the day that you eat from it, you shall surely die." So that the Law is holy, and the commandment of God is just, and holy, and good. For it was not given to do harm, but to save. For let us not think that God does anything at all useless or harmful. ^D

What then, has that which is good become death to me, for the legislation of the greatest good, which was destined to give a like result, was given? God forbid! For God's commandment was not given that I should be enslaved to corruption and ^A should have the stains of destruction branded upon me; but rather that the devil, by means of that which is good, might be revealed to have maliciously devised evil against me, so that the finder and architect of sin might be shown up and convicted of being a sinner in the highest degree, and he who had managed affairs contrary to the law of God might be distinguished from the good. For we know that the law is spiritual; and therefore it is the cause of no harm to anyone. For spiritual things dwell far from irrational desire and sin. But I am carnal, sold under sin. For instance: "I, being carnal, and placed in the midst of evil and good, as one possessing free will, so that it might be in my power to choose what I wish (for He says, 'I have set before thy face life and death'); having inclined toward disobedience to the spiritual law—that is, the commandment—and toward obedience to the material—that is, the advice of the serpent—I am, by reason of such a choice, sold, having fallen under sin, to the devil." Whence, from that point on, wickedness, having besieged me, settles in and takes up residence in my flesh, just as a drone flying ^B around and buzzing about a honey-comb, often settles upon it; and, by reason of the penalty imposed on the one who broke the commandment, I was sold to wickedness. Wherefore, I do not understand what I do, as I consider what I do not wish. For the saying, "What I do, I do not understand, and I do what I hate," is not to be taken as meaning that one is actually performing and committing the evil, but it refers only to the thinking, since thoughts foreign to us frequently fly upon us and make us imagine things against our will, while the soul is led away by thoughts into many things.

LVII. For it is not at all within our power not to think or to think of base things, but it is in our power to use or not to use ^C these thoughts. For we cannot prevent these notions, which are breathed in from outside for our trial, from falling upon us, but we can refrain from consenting to them and from using them. Otherwise, how would the Apostle—in the least measure!—commit the evil that displeased him, and in the least measure do the good that pleased him, if he were not speaking about foreign thoughts, which we sometimes consider even unwillingly and for reasons we do not know? These we must overturn and silence, so that, if we do not expand, they may not gain hold of the ends of the soul. For it is impossible for goodness to spring up in us while these are occupying us. Rightly, therefore, he said: "For what I do, I do not understand. For I do not do what I wish, but what I hate, that I do."

We wish, indeed, that things which are in no way fitting, and which are illicit, should not even enter our thoughts. For that is truly perfect goodness, which restrains from evil not only in the execution, but even in the thinking. ^A And that which we wish to be good is by no means brought to pass, but rather the evil which we do not wish. For thoughts come upon our heart and enter, even against our will, frequently a myriad of things about a myriad of things, filling us with curiosity and irrational preoccupation. Therefore, to wish not even to have these thoughts is in our power, but to succeed in having them entirely extinguished so that they no longer occur to us, is not (as I have said) in our faculty, but only in how we make use of them, or do not make use of them; so that the meaning of this passage is: "For I do not do the good which I wish." For I wish not to think on things that harm me; since this is good and blameless, according to the saying: "Faultless in deeds, and in mind a perfect square." ^B And this good which I wish, I do not do; but the evil which I do not wish, I practice. I do not wish to think, and yet I think the things I do not wish. And see, I pray you, whether it was not for this very reason that David besought God, being indignant that he should ponder in his mind things he did not wish to: "Cleanse me from my hidden things," he says, "and spare thy servant from others. If they do not gain dominion over me, then shall I be blameless, and I shall be cleansed from a great transgression." But the Apostle also says in another place: "Destroying speculations and every loftiness that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and taking captive every understanding into the obedience of Christ."

^C LVIII. But if anyone, daring to oppose these statements, should object that the Apostle is teaching this not only regarding the thought of evil, which we turn away from and which we flee, but also that it refers to the very work and action itself, when he speaks thus: "For I do not do the good which I wish, but the evil which I do not wish, this I do"—I would bid this person, if he speaks truly, to explain what that evil was which the Apostle hated and did not wish to do, and yet did all the same, or that good which, although he desired to perform it mightily, he was in no way able to. ^D Nay, but how often, when he wished to perform good, did he not actually accomplish the good he wished, but rather the evil which he did not wish? Was it, for example, that wishing to revere the one true God, he could not, but what he did not wish—to worship idols—this he was able to do? Or did he not do the self-control he wished, but performed the licentiousness at which he was offended? And to sum up: did he practice drunkenness, luxury, anger, injustice, and the other duties of wickedness when he did not wish to, while the things he did wish—justice and holiness—he could not pursue? And yet that same man, in the midst of the Churches, with the greatest intensity of soul, urged all to avoid...

^A wickedness, exhorting them not only that those who perpetrate crimes and are devoted to them should be reserved for destruction and the wrath of God, but further, that those who consent with them in such wickedness as this should likewise be condemned. He contended mightily that offices of justice should be performed by us pure and sincere from every stain. For every sin and attempt is brought to effect by the assistance of the flesh. Therefore, very often in his Epistles, clearly inculcating these same things to us, he bids us to flee and turn away. "Be not deceived," he says, "neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners shall inherit the kingdom of God."

And the chief point, exhorting us to escape and shake off sin entirely from every side, he declares: "Be ye my imitators, even as I also am of Christ." He proposed these things not as a matter of ^B doing and committing what he did not wish, but only of taking thought. Otherwise, how could one be a perfect imitator of Christ? But now, since bestial thoughts often fall upon us, filling us at one time or another with desire and curiosity, "Like onto swarms of dense flies," therefore, he said, "For what I would not, that do I." These must indeed be constantly cast out from the soul, so that we do not incline at all to the doing of what they suggest. For in order that we may be enrolled in the kingdom of heaven, after we have made trial of ourselves through all pleasures and pains, to see whether we are constant ^C and immutable, and everywhere incorrupt like gold tested by fire and flame, having not departed from our own virtue, then indeed our soul is troubled and distressed by very many things. Wherefore we must courageously oppose their efforts. Just as soldiers are accustomed to behave; who, when they see themselves besieged by enemies, disregarding their arrows and those other missiles of theirs, for the sake of saving the city go forth against them with great spirit, and leave no diligence undone, until they have turned their mass to flight and driven them outside their borders. For you see how thoughts, because of the sin that dwells in us, arise from without, just as rabid dogs or wild and bold robbers who are always spurred on against us by that tyrant and prince of injustice, testing us, whether we are strong enough to resist them and to stand in battle array against them.

LIX. ^D Come then, O soul, take heed lest at any time you be broken and snatched away into that transgression; for we cannot free you with any price of redemption. "For what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" And indeed it would be a desirable thing, and most full of joy, if we had no adversaries and enemies. But since this cannot be, and we by no means attain what we wish. For we wish to have no one who drags us toward the perturbations of the soul; for in this way it would be possible to obtain salvation without sweat and labor.

^A Let us not yield, therefore, O soul, let us not yield to the wicked one, but let us take up the armor of God

that protects and fights on our behalf

LX. ^C So then, if you remember, we were discoursing: from the time when the first man was circumvented and violated the command of God, sin, propagated from that contumacy, came to dwell in him. For thus did sedition first arise; and we began to be entangled in turbulent agitations and alien thoughts. For, having been deprived of that divine inspiration and being utterly exhausted, those muddy desires filled us, which the wily and deceitful serpent cast into us, when we had otherwise barely traversed the circle of the divine precept in a short space of time. Therefore God devised death for the destruction of sin for our sake, so that, having flourished among us who were immortal (as has been said), it might not remain immortal. Hence, undoubtedly, the Apostle says: "For I know," he says, "that in me, that is, in my flesh, there does not dwell good." By these words he signifies the sin that was introduced into us through desire as a result of that violation of the divine command; from which sin, as if from certain sprouts and shoots, voluptuous thoughts thus arise within us. For there is a double kind of thought within us: one which is accustomed to be stirred up from that concupiscence which resides in our body, which, as we said before, ^D from the fraud of the material spirit...

^A and its artifice, proceeds. Another thing is that which is derived from the law of the commandment—the law, I mean, which we have drawn in as something innate and born with us by nature, and which stimulates and raises up our mind toward honesty. From this it comes about that the divine law, in what pertains to the mind, brings us pleasure: for this is the interior man. But because of that sin which dwells in our flesh, we are delighted by the law of the devil. For that law which fights against the divine law and resists it, placed in the desire of our mind, is that very thing which produces turbulent thoughts, entwined with the dregs of matter and scattered toward impropriety, and which has an altogether huge allure toward pleasures. ^B

LXI. For the Apostle appears to me to plainly distinguish three kinds of law in this place. One of these is in agreement with the good that is innate in us, which he clearly calls the law of the mind. The second is that which, having been forged from the impression of the most wicked one, throws our soul into thoughts and phantasies most full of disturbance, which he said opposes the law of the mind. The third kind is that which has hardened through sin out of desire itself in our flesh, which he names the law of sin dwelling in our members. This, also, that wicked enemy, invading and sitting upon it, often stirs up against us and drives us to injustice and wicked deeds. For that law which is breathed in from the outside by the wicked enemy, and through the senses, like a certain sticky and clinging trail of bitumen, is poured into the soul itself within, is corroborated by that other law which desire itself derives into our flesh. For there appears to be in us one thing which is better, and another which is worse. And when that which is better becomes stronger than the worse, the whole mind is carried toward the good, as if by a certain impulse. But when that which is worse has abounded and weighed it down with its own heaviness, and is said to fight against the good that is in us, the man is led back in the opposite direction toward all kinds of phantasies and worse thoughts. ^C

LXII. And for this reason, the Apostle desires to be delivered, judging that to be death and destruction; just as the Prophet also says: "Cleanse me from my secret faults" (Ps. xviii, 13). For the words themselves convey this: "I delight," he says, "in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law warring against the law of my mind, and bringing 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?" (Rom. vii, 22-24). Where he does not declare the body to be death, but evidently the law of sin, which resides in our members, and through the transgression of the commandment makes dens within us, and finally draws our soul away to the slaughter of injustice by deluding it with various images. Wherefore, ^D immediately in the same disputation he subjoins of what kind that was from which he desired to be delivered, and by whom he was to be delivered: "The grace of God through Jesus Christ" (ibid. 25). For I desire that it be diligently noted that, if he had called this body death, as you think, Aglaophon, he would never have invoked Christ as the one who was to deliver him, as if [he were] the one from whom he was later to be snatched away from such a calamity.

^A For what is more wonderful, or what greater [benefit] have we obtained from that coming of Christ? And why did the Apostle, at all, speak out in this way—as if he were able to be delivered from death by God through the coming of Christ—when it happened to everyone, even before Christ came into the world, to die? For everyone, at the departure from this life, was set free by being separated from their bodies. And in the same way, all souls—both those of unbelievers and believers, and those of the unjust and the just—were separated from their bodies on the day of death. ^B What, then, did the Apostle strive to obtain beyond the others who had spent their lives in unbelief? Or why did he desire to be released from the bonds of the body, a thing that was necessarily destined to happen even against one's will, for it is appointed for all to die and for their souls to be separated from their bodies, if indeed he supposed the body to be the death of the soul? Therefore, O Aglaophon, he does not call this body death, but the sin that has dwelt in the body through desire—from which body God rendered him free and unencumbered through the benefit of Christ's coming. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set us free from the law of sin and death, so that He who raised Jesus from the dead, through His Spirit that dwells in us, might also give life to our mortal bodies, with the sin that is in our body having been condemned to destruction; so that the righteousness of the natural law, which drew us toward the good, might be manifested—[though] it appeared how weak it was—which, before the coming of Christ, was enslaved under the power of sin ^C and burdened by earthly cares. For the power of the good, implanted by nature, which had succumbed to the desire innate in bodies, God confirmed and strengthened by sending His Son from heaven, who assumed flesh similar to ours. For it was truly, and not in mere appearance, that which it seemed to be, so that, with sin having been condemned to death, it might no longer bear fruit in the flesh, and the righteousness of the natural law might be fulfilled, abounding in obedience to those who walk not according to the desire of the flesh, but according to the desire of the Spirit and his guidance. For the law of the Spirit of life, which is the Gospel—being different from the aforementioned laws—having been established by the proclamation of the Gospel for obedience and the forgiveness of sins, has set us free from the law of sin and death, having completely conquered the sin that reigned over the flesh.

^D Whatever, therefore, is usually proposed from the Apostle's words, yet understood wrongly, I have explained to you thus far, O Theophilus. Now I shall turn to other matters, after I have found a helper to explain this discourse. For the things that follow are difficult indeed, and not easy to refute. On this account I approach them more sluggishly and timidly, seeing that the demonstration of them will be long and difficult, unless some breeze from [the] wisdom

^A suddenly breathing down from heaven might, just as for those sailing in the midst of the deep, restore them to a waveless harbor and a more secure demonstration. Thus far the part from Methodius.

LXIII. These things, then, are taken in order from the writings of the blessed Methodius, who is also called Eubulius, regarding the aforementioned Origen and his faith, depraved by sophistical fallacy, discussed in this same book on the resurrection. We have thought that what has been set forth here is sufficient against his trifles and his impious doctrine, by which he has corrupted the life of the human race with that added-on pagan superstition and wickedness. For Methodius, that man of great learning and most keen patron of the truth, has argued many other things in the same book concerning this subject, in almost as many verses as have been excerpted by us. Nevertheless, since we had initially resolved that in treating each heresy we would say only a few things for its refutation (for they are numerous), we have thought it sufficient to have translated thus far from his work. Therefore, since we have still drawn forth some things from our own scarcity against the unrefined loquacity of the man, ^B we shall make an end of our fighting against him, after we have offered the prize and honor of victory to God the author of victory, who for his own singular humanity always adorns the Church with amaranthine crowns—that is, with the dogmas of the truth. Let us then also, according to our strength, speak against him.

You, then, my man, as I have previously indicated above, throw this against us in jest, that "Was God perhaps a tanner, that he should make leather garments for Adam and his wife, when no animals had yet been slaughtered?" But if, he says, animals were slaughtered, these were not leather garments, but we are clad in the earthen body. And from every side he is caught following the device of the devil and the craftiness of the serpent, working into humanity the corruption of unbelief, just as that serpent previously deceived Eve and always corrupts ^C the minds of the simple-hearted by his cunning in their thoughts. Let us see, therefore, if the things said by you can stand, since you have labored so much and have vainly undertaken the contest for the writing of so many books. For if it is true, as is noised abroad concerning you, that you have written six thousand books, O labor-in-vain, and have spent all that effort on reproaches and the deceits of vanity, and have rendered your work heavily and vainly, having corrupted those necessary things you have set down, you have procured for yourself a labor hopeless in its trading. For if the body does not rise, neither will the soul inherit anything. For the communion of body and soul is one and the same, and the labor is one. ^D Resurrection, however, is a re-

^A-sult of your own confession, though you acknowledge it only with a specious phantasm, not truly, compelled to use the name alone. For what resurrection of the soul can be spoken of, when it neither falls nor is committed to burial? But it is clear from the very name that resurrection is of the body that has fallen and been buried, as is proclaimed everywhere and in every Scripture by the sons of truth. But if it does not rise, then the resurrection proclaimed through all the Scriptures does not exist. And if there is no resurrection, the expectation of the resurrection of the dead is in vain. For the resurrection is not of souls, which have not fallen, but of bodies that have been buried. And if a part of the body is raised by the resurrection and a part is laid aside, what, then, will be the state of that part? For it cannot be that parts arise in the body while other parts are laid aside and abandoned.

That there is a natural body and there is a spiritual body is not to be understood as if the spiritual body were one thing and the natural body another, but that both are considered one and the same; it is the same body that is natural and it is the same body that is spiritual. For when we are in this world and perform the corruptible works of the flesh, the bodies are natural. For we perform service to the soul in this world amidst perversities, as you yourself have also said in part. But when we are raised to life, the soul is freed from that servitude, and the administration of the Spirit follows continuously; which from here on holds the earnest and pledge, just as it is written: “If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.” But if we walk by the Spirit, we live as though killing the actions of the body. Therefore, there are no longer any marriages, no longer any desires, no longer any struggles for those who have professed continence, no longer lapses contrary to chastity, and finally, none of the actions of such a kind remain, which are done in this life. But as the Savior asserts, those who are considered worthy of that resurrection neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels.

LXIV. As Enoch was translated, so that he should not see death, and was not found.

^A And you see that the very same body, the psychic one, is the very same spiritual one, just as our Lord also rose from the dead, not by raising another body, but the very one that was, and not something other than the one that was, but by transmuting that very one that was into spiritual subtlety, and uniting it into a wholly spiritual [body]: entering when the doors were shut—which cannot happen to our bodies here, because of their coarseness and because they have not yet been united into spiritual subtlety. What, then, was it that entered when the doors were shut? Something other than the one that was crucified, or the one that was crucified itself? Surely, Origen, you will not be able not to acknowledge that it is the very one that was crucified. For he convicts you through the precision of Thomas, saying to him: "Be not faithless, but believing." For He showed the print of the nails, and the print of the spear, and left the scars themselves upon the body, even though He had united the body into one spiritual unity. He could, therefore, have erased the scars; but He will not erase them, in order that He may convict you, O driven-by-a-godless-spirit. Was it then the body that was buried in the tomb for three days, and rose with Him in the resurrection? For He showed both bones, and skin, and flesh, as He said: "See, that a spirit has not flesh and bones, as you see Me having." How then did He enter when the doors were shut, if not to show that what was seen is a body, and not a spirit, but a spiritual body, even though it was one with the soul, and the divinity, and His whole incarnation? But that which was once coarse became spiritual, that very one that was crucified, and that very one that was held became unholdable, united and mingled with the divinity, and no longer dissolving, but remaining forever, no longer dying. ^B For Christ has risen from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep; He no longer dies, death no longer has dominion over Him.

LXV. But that you may know this also, for what reason Christ is called the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep, even though He was not the first of all to rise—for before Him, Lazarus was raised by Him, and the son of the widow, and others; and through Elijah, and through Elisha—because those who were raised all died again, thus Christ is the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep; for *having risen, He no longer dies*, as the future resurrection is to be through His life and philanthropy. And if He is the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep, and His whole body rose with the divinity—His incarnation having risen, and with nothing of it being left behind, neither body nor anything else—for "Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hades, nor wilt Thou allow Thy Holy One to see corruption." ^C And that which is said concerning the soul in Hades signifies not being left behind; and [that which is said concerning] the Holy One, in order to show the holy body, [signifies] not having seen corruption, but having risen incorrupt, in the three days, and being united to incorruptibility for all eternity. ^D You observe, then, that it is the same body, both psychic and spiritual, as our Lord also rose from the dead, not to recall another body to life, but that same one which had been His, and none other than it. Yet it was so, that the Spirit might convert that same body into its own tenuity and subtlety, and fashion it wholly spiritual. Wherefore He entered while the doors were shut; which, in this life current, cannot happen to our bodies, because they are concrete and coarse, and have not yet coalesced into that spiritual tenuity. What body, therefore, is it that entered when the doors were shut? Is it another than that which was fixed to the cross, or is it that same one that was raised upon the cross? Whithersoever you turn yourself, Origen, you cannot but confess that it is that same one which was affixed to the cross. For He Himself convicts you through the accurate inquiry of Thomas, when He said to him: "Be not faithless, but believing." For then He showed the traces of the nails and of the spear; and thus He left the scars themselves in the body, although He had fashioned it into a spiritual unity. He could indeed have abolished the scars themselves; but He did not wish to, in order that He might convict you, O furious man. Wherefore, the same body was shown then which had been buried in the tomb for three days, and with it had been raised in the resurrection. For He demonstrated bones, skin, and flesh, as He said: "See that a spirit has not flesh and bones, as you see Me have." How then did He enter when the doors were shut, except to prove that it was a body which they saw, and not a spirit, joined with the soul and the divinity, and with the whole nature of man. But it was, as I said, a spiritual body; and that which was once coarse was rendered subtle: that which had been acted upon and made subject to the cross, was now no longer subject to the power of any; and thus, being joined with the divinity, and as it were tempered, it could no longer be dissolved, but remained exempt from death, for all eternity. *For Christ has risen from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep; He no longer dies, death shall no longer have dominion over Him.*

LXV. And that you may understand for what cause Christ is called the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep, although He was not the first of all to rise—for before Him Lazarus had been raised by Him, as well as the widow's son, and certain others; add also the fact that some were restored to life by Elijah and Elisha; that you may therefore understand that point, take it thus: Since all those who are said to have risen have died again, Christ is deservedly called the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep; for after He rose, He no longer dies, which is the pattern of the future resurrection, which we shall obtain by the benefit of His life and humanity. But since He is the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep, His entire body, with the divinity—that is, everything that pertains to the assumed humanity—has risen, so that nothing of it at all has been left behind, not a body or anything of that sort. "For Thou wilt not abandon my soul in the inferno, nor wilt Thou give Thy holy one to see corruption." Where that which is said concerning the soul in the inferno, that it is not...

^A abandoned, signifies it being destitute; but He added "holy one," in order to show the holy body, which did not see corruption, but after three days rose again, incorrupt and endowed with immortality forever.

But you, O man, affirm that these bodies of ours are the "garments of skin," even though the sequence of the discourse nowhere ^A holds this, but rather [it comes] from those seeds sown in you from the beginning from the myth-laden teaching of the Greeks, and because of the evil-minded logic aroused in you there, I mean that disbelief concerning the resurrection of the Greeks who led you into this. For "the natural man," he says, "does not accept the things of the Spirit; for they are foolishness to him, because they are spiritually discerned." For if indeed the garments had been given to those around Adam before the disobedience, your lie would be somewhat plausible, and capable of deceiving; but since it appears that they were fashioned after Eve, from whence then was she fashioned if not from a body? It is plain. ^B For it says, "He cast a trance upon Adam, and he slept, and He took one of his ribs." Now a rib is nothing else but a bone. And He built flesh in its place. Since then flesh is named, how is the making of it still awaited? But even earlier it says: "Let us make man according to our image, and according to our likeness." And it says, "He took dust from the earth, and fashioned the man." But dust and flesh are nothing else than a body. Then afterwards: "And Adam, having stood up from the sleep, said: This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh." But the garments of skin did not yet exist, that allegory of yours had not yet been ^C devised. Therefore "bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh," are clearly to be understood as bodies, so that Adam and Eve were not in the least lacking in bodies. And he took from the tree, and ate; just as he was deceived by the craftiness of the serpent and became rebellious against God. "And they heard the voice of the Lord walking in the paradise in the evening; and Adam and Eve hid themselves at the tree." And God says to Adam: "Where are you?" And he, being exposed, answers: "I heard Thy voice, and I hid because I am naked." But what then did He call naked? Did He mean the soul or the body? And as for the fig leaves, what were they covering? The soul or the body? "And who told you," He says, "that you are naked, unless you have ^D eaten from the tree from which I commanded you alone not to eat?" And he says: "The woman whom Thou gavest me, she gave to me, and I ate." But from where was the woman given if not from the rib, that is, from the body, before the garments were given to them? And He says to the woman: "Why did you do this?" And she: "The serpent deceived me, and I ate, and I gave to my husband." After these things God inflicted the curse: to the woman indeed pain, and to the man to eat his bread in sweat. And after these things He says: "Behold, Adam has become as one of us. Lest he extend his hand, and take of the tree, and eat, and live forever;" and after other things: "And God made garments of skin, and clothed those around Adam, and cast them out of Paradise." And you see that vain is the

new and empty opinion invented by you. For the bodies of our first parents existed for some time before.

^B LXVI. But if this examines you, and you are unable, thinking in an animal way, to receive the grace of the Spirit, O faithless man and worse than the infidels, tell me, I pray, how much miracle does each work of God contain? How was the heaven stretched out and expanded on high from nothing? Whence was that brightness of the sun kindled, or was it itself created with the moon and the stars? From what prototype material was the earth taken, which was produced from nothing? From what kinds of nature were the mountains hewn? Whence the constitution of the whole universe, which God brought forth from nothing? Or whence are the clouds composed, by which the heaven is suddenly covered? Whence was Moses, the servant of God, able to command the host of gnats and lice by the order of God? How did he turn [the] wooden rod into a living and creeping serpent? How could it be that the hand of Moses should be changed into snow? Thus therefore [it] pleased God at that time, O most faithless of mortals, and He made skins—and indeed real garments—without any animals, without any human art and manifold labor, as He willed, for those around Adam; just as from the beginning, as soon as He willed, the heaven and all things were produced. And concerning these things we have spoken often, both in other places and above. And for those who desire life, the way of salvation is ready, and the refutation of most faithless error is easy. But for those who refuse the training and instruction of salvation, not even a whole age would suffice for disputing, since their ears are eternally stopped up, like the adder that closes its ears so as not to hear the voice of the enchanters, of the wise charmer, as it is written in the sacred Scriptures. But I trust that this discourse will be most fruitful for the sons of truth, even though we pursue it more extensively in this place.

LXVII. I shall now come to the intended discourse on the resurrection. For whenever you deceive the ignorant, putting aside your own opinion, O vain worker, and say: "Some of the simpler sort imagine that the impious will not attain a resurrection."

^D For it is not only that one thing that is in the body, but beasts are also born from us, namely, lice and nits, which are neither outside the body nor counted as any part of the body. And no one ever sought to preserve a nit excreted from his body, but sought rather to kill it; nor does he consider the destruction brought by it as a loss. But neither, if that should be lost and extinguished, would he reckon it a damage. Thus, those things which have flowed from us, even if your opinion says so, will by no means be foolishly sought for by us. Nor would God bring these things into our composition and arrangement, but as filth existing from the garment itself, from

the garment which, for the sake of decorum, has been cast away, he would in a second ^A leave it behind. But that perfect and complete garment, neither lacking nor redundant, the Creator could return to its proper state according to the singular skill of His art; for all things are in His power. But if this were not so, O most unholy of men, and one turned to madness by that wordy craftiness of yours, our Redeemer and Lord, and Son of God—who for this very purpose came, that He might provide for us the most certain hope of life, and who, that He might establish for us the credibility of His words, wished to express many things within Himself—could, I say, have laid aside a part of His body and raised up another part; just as that wordy refutation of yours of the true faith and that multitude of most absurd reasonings, O lover of contention, declares. But He, straightway refuting your manner of reasoning, pronounces thus: *Unless a grain of wheat falling into the ground dies, it remains alone; but if it falls and dies, it bears much fruit.* ^B

What then was that grain of which He spoke? There is no one who doubts, and it is established by the confession of the whole world, that the Lord spoke of Himself, that is, of His own body and that most holy flesh which He took from Mary, and of His entire humanity. But as for his using the terms "falling" and "dying"—just as He says in another place: *Where the corpse is, there the eagles will be gathered*—He referred to the three-day slumber of His body, which not even you can deny. For the Divinity Itself is devoid of sleep, cannot fall or be overcome, nor is it in any way mutable. The grain of wheat, therefore, died and was raised up again. Was the whole grain, then, raised up, or was some part of it left behind? Was it another grain than that which existed before, or did the very thing that began to revive—the same that was wrapped in a shroud by Joseph ^C and buried, and laid in a new tomb—rise again? You yourself will not deny it. Whom, then, did the angels announce to the women as having risen, when they said: *Whom do you seek? Jesus the Nazarene? He has risen, He is not here: come, see the place?* As if to say: Come, see the place, and teach Origen that no relics of His lie there, but that He has risen whole. And so that you may understand that the whole has risen, He says, *He has risen, He is not here*, so that He might disperse your trifles and demonstrate that no part of Him had been discarded and left behind; but that it is precisely the same body that was pierced with nails, and wounded by the lance, and seized by the Pharisees, and bespattered with spittle. ^D

LXVIII. But what need is there to heap up more things against his wretched and insolent loquacity? Therefore, just as He Himself rose and raised His own body, so also will He raise us. For it is from this that the most holy Apostle confirmed our hope with these words: *How do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. But if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain.*

^A We are found to be false witnesses of God, because we have said: "He has raised Christ," and so forth. And later he adds, saying: "This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality." And he did not say mortal only, nor corruptible only, nor an immortal soul; but "this corruptible," with the addition of the word "this," and "this mortal," with the addition of the word "this." Therefore, the whole of the grain itself rose; and not a part of it rose, but the whole rose; and no other grain rose beside the one that existed, but the very one that had fallen into the tomb rose whole. Where, then, does your vain talk find strength? For the divine Scripture knows of two grains, one mentioned in the Gospel, and one in the Apostle. The former, in all clarity, reveals what is perfectly wrought in it, which is the archetype of the resurrection. For the Savior, by teaching this and doing it, at once wrought all things securely for us as a demonstration. ^B For he spoke concerning the grain, and raised the grain, that he might confirm for us in truth the faith of the hope of our resurrection.

Following upon this, the Apostle, borne by the Holy Spirit, while narrating the glory of the saints that will be after the resurrection and the fruition of good things, demonstrates it again through the grain of wheat, having proclaimed this against the unbelievers. But you will say to me: "How are the dead raised? And with what body do they come?" And he says to him who says such things: "Fool." For whoever doubts at all about the resurrection is a fool and senseless. Then he says: "Fool, what you sow is not made alive unless it dies. And ^C what you sow, you do not sow the body that is to be, but a bare grain, as it may happen, of wheat or of the other seeds; and it is not made alive unless it dies. And God gives it a body as He has willed, and to each of the seeds its own body." And you see that the body is not changed. For no one who has sown barley seeks wheat; nor does one sow nigella and find barley; but that which is sown is that which is raised. And even if something of it is left behind below in the earth, and the sprout rises from it—here, in this corruptible wheat, and not coming into judgment, that which is left behind is useless, but that which is raised from it is better. He wished to demonstrate the splendor on account of the unbelief of those who do not look forward to the hope of God. For in truth the grain of wheat is most fine. ^D Yet where, in such a tiny grain, are the roots and foundations, and the stalk, and the joints, and those many tubes, and the heads, and the husks, and the awns, and the multiplying grains?

LXIX

moisture? To strike the sea, and divide it into twelve paths for marching through the sea at His command; to turn the river into blood; to gather such a great multitude of frogs at a touch; to send the plague of lice upon the Egyptians; to mix hail with fire; to pour upon those same Egyptians a black and darkened night, shrouded in thickest gloom; to slay the firstborn of the Egyptians with death; to lead the people guided by the pillar of fire, whom He ruled like a shepherd; to bring down the bread of angels by prayer and supplication; to send up the quail, and to satisfy so many myriads of men at the command of God; to hear the voice of God, and to be deemed worthy, I say, out of so many myriads, to hear the voice of God, and to converse with God; to remain for forty days and forty nights without any desire for those things which we require by the necessity of nature for sustaining life; then that his flesh should be transformed into the brightness of the sun and a radiant splendor, which so dazzled the eyes of the people that the descendants of Israel could not behold his face with fixed eyes; that his hand, being of flesh, should be turned into snow; that he should command the earth to open its mouth for the reception of those ^B around Core, and Dathan, and Abiron, and Annan; to hear at the end: “Ascend into the mountain, and die there,” so that no man should know his burial? ^C Since the sacred Scriptures signify this: that it was not by men—by the angels, evidently—as the words themselves tacitly suggest to our understanding.

And all these things were done while he was still living in this world; but they were done in him, who was at once both animal and spiritual, perfectly formed. But we receive from thence a kind of pledge, as an example of that perfect future blossoming, which will come to pass when that saying is fulfilled: “It is sown in ignobility, it is raised in glory; it is sown in infirmity, it is raised in power.” For is that which is thus sown not infirm, and ignorant of where it is sown? Is that which ^D is cast into the tomb, and overwhelmed with a heap of dust, and torn, and cast out, and bereft of all sense, not full of ignobility? Conversely, is that which is roused to life, and remains forever, and possesses the kingdom of heaven with hope and confidence in the divine kindness, not glorious? Where the righteous shall shine as the sun; where they shall be equal to the angels; where they shall dance with the bridegroom; where the twelve apostles with Peter shall sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel; where the righteous shall receive those things which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor hath entered into the heart of man, which God hath prepared for them that love Him? Our resurrection, therefore, will be through the help and power of God, and that of the whole human race, of the righteous, that is, as well as of the unrighteous, of the unbelieving as well as of the faithful, of whom some rise to eternal life, and others to eternal judgment.