Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Chapter VII.—Created things are not the images of those Æons who are within the Pleroma.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter VII.—Created things are not
the images of those Æons who are within the Pleroma.
1. While the Demiurge was
thus ignorant of all things, they tell us that the Saviour conferred
honour upon the Pleroma by the creation [which he summoned into
existence] through means of his Mother, inasmuch as he produced
similitudes and images of those things which are above. But I have
already shown that it was impossible that anything should exist
beyond the Pleroma (in which external region they tell us that
images were made of those things which are within the Pleroma), or that
this world was formed by any other one than the Supreme God. But it is a
pleasant thing to overthrow them on every side, and to prove them vendors
of falsehood; let us say, in opposition to them, that if these things
were made by the Saviour to the honour of those which are above, after
their likeness, then it behoved them always to endure, that those things
which have been honoured should perpetually continue in honour. But if
they do in fact pass away, what is the use of this very brief period of
honour,—an honour which at one time had no existence, and which
shall again come to nothing? In that case I shall prove that the Saviour
is rather an aspirant after vainglory, than3015
| 3015 Harvey supposes that the translator here
read ἤ quam instead
of ᾗ quâ (gloria);
but Grabe, Massuet, and Stieren prefer to delete erit. |
one who honours those things which are above. For what honour can those
things which are temporal confer on such as are eternal and endure for
ever? or those which pass away on such as remain? or those which are
corruptible on such as are incorruptible?—since, even among men
who are themselves mortal, there is no value attached to that honour
which speedily passes away, but to that which endures as long as it
possibly can. But those things which, as soon as they are made, come to
an end, may justly be said rather to have been formed for the contempt of
such as are thought to be honoured by them; and that that which is
eternal is contumeliously treated when its image is corrupted and
dissolved. But what if their Mother had not wept, and laughed, and been
involved in despair? The Saviour would not then have possessed any means
of honouring the Fulness, inasmuch as her last state of confusion3016
| 3016 Reference is here made to the
supposed wretched state of Achamoth as lying in the region of shadow,
vacuity, and, in fact, non-existence, until compassionated by the Christ
above, who gave her form as respected substance. | did
not have substance of its own by which it might honour the Propator.
2. Alas for the honour of vainglory which at once
passes away, and no longer appears! There will be some3017
| 3017 We have literally translated the above
very obscure sentence. According to Massuet, the sense is: “There
will some time be, or perhaps even now there is, some Æon utterly
destitute of such honour, inasmuch as those things which the Saviour, for
the sake of honouring it, had formed after its image, have been
destroyed; and then those things which are above will remain without
honour,” etc. | Æon, in whose case such honour will not
be thought at all to have had an existence, and then the things which are
above will be unhonoured; or it will be necessary to produce once more
another Mother weeping, and in despair, in order to the honour of the
Pleroma. What a dissimilar, and at the same time blasphemous image! Do
you tell me that an image of the Only-begotten was produced by the
former3018
| 3018 The Saviour is
here referred to, as having formed all things through means of Achamoth
and the Demiurge. | of the world, whom3019
| 3019 Massuet deletes quem, and reads
nūn as a genitive. | again ye wish to be considered
the Nous (mind) of the Father of all, and [yet maintain] that this image
was ignorant of itself, ignorant of creation,—ignorant, too, of
the Mother,—ignorant of everything that exists, and of those
things which were made by it; and are you not ashamed while, in
opposition to yourselves, you ascribe ignorance even to the Only-begotten
Himself? For if these things [below] were made by the Saviour after the
similitude of those which are above, while He (the Demiurge) who was made
after such similitude was in so great ignorance, it necessarily follows
that around Him, and in accordance with Him, after whose likeness he that
is thus ignorant was formed, ignorance of the kind in question
spiritually exists.
For it is not possible, since both were
produced spiritually, and neither fashioned nor composed, that in some
the likeness was preserved, while in others the likeness of the image was
spoiled, that image which was here produced that it might be according to
the image of that production which is above. But if it is not similar,
the charge will then attach to the Saviour, who produced a dissimilar
image,—of being, so to speak, an incompetent workman. For it is
out of their power to affirm that the Saviour had not the faculty of
production, since they style Him All Things. If, then, the image
is dissimilar, he is a poor workman, and the blame lies, according to
their hypothesis, with the Saviour. If, on the other hand, it is similar,
then the same ignorance will be found to exist in the Nous (mind) of
their Propator, that is, in the Only-begotten. The Nous of the Father, in
that case, was ignorant of Himself; ignorant, too, of the Father;
ignorant, moreover, of those very things which were formed by Him. But if
He has knowledge, it necessarily follows also that he who was
formed after his likeness by the Saviour should know the things which are
like; and thus, according to their own principles, their monstrous
blasphemy is overthrown.
3. Apart from this, however, how can those things which
belong to creation, various, manifold, and innumerable as they are, be
the images of those thirty Æons which are within the Pleroma, whose
names, as these men fix them, I have set forth in the book which precedes
this? And not only will they be unable to adapt the [vast] variety of
creation at large to the [comparative] smallness of their Pleroma, but
they cannot do this even with respect to any one part of it, whether
[that possessed by] celestial or terrestrial beings, or those that live
in the waters. For they themselves testify that their Pleroma consists of
thirty Æons; but any one will undertake to show that, in a single
department of those [created beings] which have been mentioned, they
reckon that there are not thirty, but many thousands of species. How then
can those things, which constitute such a multiform creation, which are
opposed in nature to each other, and disagree among themselves, and
destroy the one the other, be the images and likenesses of the thirty
Æons of the Pleroma, if indeed, as they declare, these being possessed
of one nature, are of equal and similar properties, and exhibit no
differences [among themselves]? For it was incumbent, if these things are
images of those Æons,—inasmuch as they declare that some men are
wicked by nature, and some, on the other hand, naturally good,—to
point out such differences also among their Æons, and to maintain that
some of them were produced naturally good, while some were naturally
evil, so that the supposition of the likeness of those things might
harmonize with the Æons. Moreover, since there are in the world some
creatures that are gentle, and others that are fierce, some that are
innocuous, while others are hurtful and destroy the rest; some have their
abode on the earth, others in the water, others in the air, and others in
the heaven; in like manner, they are bound to show that the Æons possess
such properties, if indeed the one are the images of the others. And
besides; “the eternal fire which the Father has prepared for the
devil and his angels,”3020
—
they ought to show of which of those Æons that are above it is the
image; for it, too, is reckoned part of the creation.
4. If, however, they say that these things are the
images of the Enthymesis of that Æon who fell into passion, then, first
of all, they will act impiously against their Mother, by declaring her to
be the first cause of evil and corruptible images. And then, again, how
can those things which are manifold, and dissimilar, and contrary in
their nature, be the images of one and the same Being? And if they say
that the angels of the Pleroma are numerous, and that those things which
are many are the images of these—not in this way either will the
account they give be satisfactory. For, in the first place, they are then
bound to point out differences among the angels of the Pleroma, which are
mutually opposed to each other, even as the images existing below are of
a contrary nature among themselves. And then, again, since there are
many, yea, innumerable angels who surround the Creator, as all the
prophets acknowledge,—[saying, for instance,] “Ten thousand
times ten thousand stood beside Him, and many thousands of thousands
ministered unto Him,”3021
—then, according3022
| 3022 This clause is exceedingly
obscure. Harvey remarks upon it as follows: “The reasoning of
Irenæus seems to be this: According to the Gnostic theory, the Æons and
angels of the Pleroma were homogeneous. They were also the archetypes of
things created. But things created are heterogeneous: therefore either
these Æons are heterogeneous, which is contrary to theory; or things
created are homogeneous, which is contrary to fact.” | to
them, the angels of the Pleroma will have as images the angels of the
Creator, and the entire creation remains in the image of the Pleroma, but
so that the thirty Æons no longer correspond to the manifold variety of
the creation.
5. Still further, if these things [below] were made
after the similitude of those [above], after the likeness of which again
will those then be made? For if the Creator of the world did not form
these things directly from His own3023
| 3023 Literally, “from Himself.” |
conception, but, like an architect of no ability, or a boy receiving his
first lesson, copied them from archetypes furnished by others, then
whence did their Bythus obtain the forms of that creation which He at
first produced? It clearly follows
that He must have
received the model from some other one who is above Him, and that one, in
turn, from another. And none the less [for these suppositions], the talk
about images, as about gods, will extend to infinity, if we do not at
once fix our mind on one Artificer, and on one God, who of Himself formed
those things which have been created. Or is it really the case that, in
regard to mere men, one will allow that they have of themselves invented
what is useful for the purposes of life, but will not grant to that God
who formed the world, that of Himself He created the forms of those
things which have been made, and imparted to it its orderly
arrangement?
6. But, again, how can these things [below] be images
of those [above], since they are really contrary to them, and can in no
respect have sympathy with them? For those things which are contrary to
each other may indeed be destructive of those to which they are contrary,
but can by no means be their images—as, for instance, water and
fire; or, again, light and darkness, and other such things, can never be
the images of one another. In like manner, neither can those things which
are corruptible and earthly, and of a compound nature, and transitory, be
the images of those which, according to these men, are spiritual; unless
these very things themselves be allowed to be compound, limited in space,
and of a definite shape, and thus no longer spiritual, and diffused, and
spreading into vast extent, and incomprehensible. For they must of
necessity be possessed of a definite figure, and confined within certain
limits, that they may be true images; and then it is decided that they
are not spiritual. If, however, these men maintain that they are
spiritual, and diffused, and incomprehensible, how can those things which
are possessed of figure, and confined within certain limits, be the
images of such as are destitute of figure and incomprehensible?
7. If, again, they affirm that neither according to
configuration nor formation, but according to number and the order of
production, those things [above] are the images [of these below], then,
in the first place, these things [below] ought not to be spoken of as
images and likenesses of those Æons that are above. For how can the
things which have neither the fashion nor shape of those [above] be their
images? And, in the next place, they would adapt both the numbers and
productions of the Æons above, so as to render them identical with and
similar to those that belong to the creation [below]. But now, since they
refer to only thirty Æons, and declare that the vast multitude of things
which are embraced within the creation [below] are images of those that
are but thirty, we may justly condemn them as utterly destitute of
sense. E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
