Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Chapter V.—This world was not formed by any other beings within the territory which is contained by the Father.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter V.—This world was not formed
by any other beings within the territory which is contained by the Father.
1. The
remarks, therefore, which I made a little while ago3006
are
suitable in answer to those who assert that this world was formed outside
of the Pleroma, or under a “good God;” and such persons, with
the Father they speak of, will be quite cut off from that which is
outside the Pleroma, in which, at the same time, it is necessary that
they should finally rest.3007
| 3007
The Latin text here is, “et concludentur tales cum patre suo ab eo
qui est extra Pleroma, in quo etiam et desinere eos necesse est.”
None of the editors notice the difficulty or obscurity of the clause, but
it appears to us absolutely untranslateable. We have rendered it as if
the reading were “ab eo quod,” though, if the strict
grammatical construction be followed, the translation must be,
“from Him who.” But then to what does “in
quo,” which follows, refer? It may be ascribed either to the
immediate antecedent Pleroma, or to Him who is described as
being beyond it. | In answer to those, again, who maintain that
this world was formed by certain other beings within that territory which
is contained by the Father, all those points which have now3008
| 3008 Chap. ii., iii., iv.
| been noticed will present themselves [as exhibiting their]
absurdities and incoherencies; and they will be compelled either to
acknowledge all those things which are within the Father, lucid, full,
and energetic, or to accuse the light of the Father as if He could not
illuminate all things; or, as a portion of their Pleroma [is so
described], the whole of it must be confessed to be void, chaotic, and
full of darkness. And they accuse all other created things as if these
were merely temporal, or [at the best], if eternal,3009
| 3009 This is an extremely difficult passage. We
follow the reading æternochoica adopted by Massuet, but Harvey
reads æterna choica, and renders, “They charge all other
substance (i.e., spiritual) with the imperfections of the material
creation, as though Æon substance were equally ephemeral and
choic.” | yet material. But3010
| 3010 The common reading is “aut;”
we adopt Harvey’s conjectural emendation of “at.”
| these (the Æons) ought to be regarded as beyond the reach of
such accusations, since they are within the Pleroma, or the charges in
question will equally fall against the entire Pleroma; and thus the
Christ of whom they speak is discovered to be the author of ignorance.
For, according to their statements, when He had given a form so far as
substance was concerned to the Mother they conceive of, He cast her
outside of the Pleroma; that is, He cut her off from knowledge. He,
therefore, who separated her from knowledge, did in reality produce
ignorance in her. How then could the very same person bestow the gift of
knowledge on the rest of the Æons, those who were anterior to Him [in
production], and yet be the author of ignorance to His Mother? For He
placed her beyond the pale of knowledge, when He cast her outside of the
Pleroma.
2. Moreover, if they explain being within and without
the Pleroma as implying knowledge and ignorance respectively, as certain
of them do (since he who has knowledge is within that which knows), then
they must of necessity grant that the Saviour Himself (whom they
designate All Things) was in a state of ignorance. For they
maintain that, on His coming forth outside of the Pleroma, He imparted
form to their Mother [Achamoth]. If, then, they assert that whatever is
outside [the Pleroma] is ignorant of all things, and if the Saviour went
forth to impart form to their Mother, then He was situated beyond the
pale of the knowledge of all things; that is, He was in ignorance. How
then could He communicate knowledge to her, when He Himself was beyond
the pale of knowledge? For we, too, they declare to be outside the
Pleroma, inasmuch as we are outside of the knowledge which they possess.
And once more: If the Saviour really went forth beyond the Pleroma to
seek after the sheep which was lost, but the Pleroma is [co-extensive
with] knowledge, then He placed Himself beyond the pale of knowledge,
that is, in ignorance. For it is necessary either that they grant that
what is outside the Pleroma is so in a local sense, in which case all the
remarks formerly made will rise up against them; or if they speak of that
which is within in regard to knowledge, and of that which is without in
respect to ignorance, then their Saviour, and Christ long before Him,
must have been formed in ignorance, inasmuch as they went forth beyond
the Pleroma, that is, beyond the pale of knowledge, in order to impart
form to their Mother.
3. These arguments may, in like manner, be adapted to
meet the case of all those who, in any way, maintain that the world was
formed either by angels or by any other one than the true God. For the
charges which they bring against the Demiurge, and those things which
were made material and temporal, will in truth fall back on the Father;
if indeed the3011
| 3011 The above
clause is very obscure; Massuet reads it interrogatively. |
very things which
were formed in the bosom of the Pleroma
began by and by in fact to be dissolved, in accordance with the
permission and good-will of the Father. The [immediate] Creator, then, is
not the [real] Author of this work, thinking, as He did, that He formed
it very good, but He who allows and approves of the productions of
defect, and the works of error having a place among his own possessions,
and that temporal things should be mixed up with eternal, corruptible
with incorruptible, and those which partake of error with those which
belong to truth. If, however, these things were formed without the
permission or approbation of the Father of all, then that Being must be
more powerful, stronger, and more kingly, who made these things within a
territory which properly belongs to Him (the Father), and did so without
His permission. If again, as some say, their Father permitted these
things without approving of them, then He gave the permission on account
of some necessity, being either able to prevent [such procedure], or not
able. But if indeed He could not [hinder it], then He is weak and
powerless; while, if He could, He is a seducer, a hypocrite, and a slave
of necessity, inasmuch as He does not consent [to such a course], and yet
allows it as if He did consent. And allowing error to arise at the first,
and to go on increasing, He endeavours in later times to destroy it, when
already many have miserably perished on account of the [original]
defect.
4. It is not seemly, however, to say of Him who is God
over all, since He is free and independent, that He was a slave to
necessity, or that anything takes place with His permission, yet against
His desire; otherwise they will make necessity greater and more kingly
than God, since that which has the most power is superior3012
| 3012 The text has
“antiquius,” literally “more ancient,” but it may
here be rendered as above. | to all [others]. And He ought at
the very beginning to have cut off the causes of [the fancied] necessity,
and not to have allowed Himself to be shut up to yielding to that
necessity, by permitting anything besides that which became Him. For it
would have been much better, more consistent, and more God-like, to cut
off at the beginning the principle of this kind of necessity, than
afterwards, as if moved by repentance, to endeavour to extirpate the
results of necessity when they had reached such a development. And if the
Father of all be a slave to necessity, and must yield to fate, while He
unwillingly tolerates the things which are done, but is at the same time
powerless to do anything in opposition to necessity and fate (like the
Homeric Jupiter, who says of necessity, “I have willingly given
thee, yet with unwilling mind”), then, according to this reasoning,
the Bythus of whom they speak will be found to be the slave of necessity
and fate.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
