Hippolytus - Refutation of All Heresies - Book VII
Translated by the Rev. J. H. Macmahon, M.a.
Text edited by Rev. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson and
first published by T&T Clark in Edinburgh in 1867. Additional
introductionary material and notes provided for the American
edition by A. Cleveland Coxe, 1886.
The following are the contents of the seventh book of the Refutation of all
What the opinion of Basilides is, and that, being struck with the doctrines
of Aristotle, he out of these framed his heresy. 
And what are the statements of Saturnilus,  who flourished much about
the time of Basilides.
And how Menander advanced the assertion that the world was made by angels.
What is the folly of Marcion, and that his tenet is not new, nor (taken) out
of the Holy Scriptures, but that he obtains it from Empedocles.
How Carpocrates acts sillily, in himself also alleging that existing things
were made by angels.
That Cerinthus, in no wise indebted to the Scriptures, formed his opinion
(not out of them), but from the tenets of the Egyptians. 
What are the opinions propounded by the Ebionaeans, and that they in
preference adhere to Jewish customs.
How Theodotus has been a victim of error, deriving contributions to his
system partly from the Ebionaeans, (partly from Cerinthus.) 
And what were the opinions of Cerdon,  who both enunciated the
doctrines of Empedocles, and who wickedly induced Marcion to step forward.
And how Lucian, when he had become a disciple of Marcion,  having
divested himself of all shame, blasphemed God from time to time.
And Apelles also, having become a disciple of this (heretic), was not in the
habit of advancing the same opinions with his preceptor; but being actuated
(in the formation of his system) from the tenets of natural philosophers,
assumed the substance of the universe as the fundamental principle of
Chapter I. Heresy Compared to (1) the Stormy Ocean, (2) the Rocks of the
Sirens; Moral from Ulysses and the Sirens.
The pupils of these men, when they perceive the doctrines of the heretics to
be like unto the ocean when tossed into waves by violence of the winds,
ought to sail past in quest of the tranquil haven. For a sea of this
description is both infested with wild beasts and difficult of navigation,
like, as we may say, the Sicilian (Sea), in which the legend reports were
Cyclops, and Charybdis, and Scylla, and the rock  of the Sirens. Now,
the poets of the Greeks allege that Ulysses sailed through (this channel),
adroitly using (to his own purpose) the terribleness of these strange
monsters.  For the savage cruelty (in the aspect) of these towards
those who were sailing through was remarkable. The Sirens, however, singing
sweetly and harmoniously, beguiled the voyagers, luring, by reason of their
melodious voice, those who heard it, to steer their vessels towards (the
promontory). The (poets) report that Ulysses, on ascertaining this, smeared
with wax the ears of his companions, and, lashing himself to the mast,
sailed, free of danger, past the Sirens, hearing their chant distinctly. And
my advice to my readers is to adopt a similar expedient, viz., either on
account of their infirmity to smear their ears with wax, and sail (straight
on) through the tenets of the heretics, not even listening to (doctrines)
that are easily capable of enticing them into pleasure, like the luscious
lay of the Sirens, or, by binding one's self to the Cross  of Christ,
(and) hearkening with fidelity (to His words), not to be distracted,
inasmuch as he has reposed his trust in Him to whom ere this he has been
firmly knit, and (I admonish that man) to continue stedfastly (in this
Chapter II. The System of Basilides Derived from Aristotle.
Since, therefore, in the six books preceding this, we have explained
previous (heretical opinions), it now seems proper not to be silent
respecting the (doctrines) of Basilides,  which are the tenets of
Aristotle the Stagyrite, not (those) of Christ. But even though on a former
occasion the opinions propounded by Aristotle have been elucidated, we shall
not even now scruple to set them down beforehand in a sort of synopsis, for
the purpose of enabling my readers, by means of a nearer comparison of the
two systems, to perceive with facility that the doctrines advanced by
Basilides are (in reality) the clever quibbles of Aristotle.
Chapter III. Sketch of Aristotle's Philosophy.
Aristotle, then, makes a threefold division of substance. For one portion of
it is a certain genus, and another a certain species, as that (philosopher)
expresses it, and a third a certain individual. What is individual, however,
(is so) not through any minuteness of body, but because by nature it cannot
admit of any division whatsoever. The genus, on the other hand, is a sort of
aggregate, made up of many and different germs. And from this genus, just as
(from) a certain heap, all the species of existent things derive their
distinctions.  And the genus constitutes a competent cause for (the
production of) all generated entities. In order, however, that the foregoing
statement may be clear, I shall prove (my position) through an example. And
by means of this it will be possible for us to retrace our steps over the
entire speculation of the Peripatetic (sage).
Chapter IV. Aristotle's General Idea.
We affirm the existence of animal absolutely, not some animal. And this
animal is neither ox, nor horse, nor man, nor god; nor is it significant of
any of these at all, but is animal absolutely. From this animal the species
of all particular animals derive their subsistence. And this animality,
itself the summum genus,  constitutes (the originating principle) for
all animals produced in those (particular) species, and (yet is) not (itself
any one) of the things generated. For man is an animal deriving the
principle (of existence) from that animality, and horse is an animal
deriving the principle of existence from that animality. The horse, and ox,
and dog, and each of the rest of the animals, derive the principle (of
existence) from the absolute animal, while animality itself is not any of
Chapter V. Nonentity as a Cause.
If, however, this animality is not any of these (species), the subsistence,
according to Aristotle, of the things that are generated, derived its
reality from non-existent entities. For animality, from whence these singly
have been derived, is not any one (of them); and though it is not any one of
them, it has yet become some one originating principle of existing things.
But who it is that has established this substance as an originating cause of
what is subsequently produced, we shall declare when we arrive at the proper
place for entertaining a discussion of this sort.
Chapter VI. Substance, According to Aristotle; The Predicates.
Since, however, as I have stated, substance is threefold, viz., genus,
species, (and) individual; and (since) we have set down animality as being
the genus, and man the species, as being already distinct from the majority
of animals, but notwithstanding still to be identified (with animals of his
own kind), inasmuch as not being yet moulded into a species of realized
substance, (therefore it is, that) when I impart form under a name to a man
derived from the genus, I style him Socrates or Diogenes, or some one of the
many denominations (in use). And since (in this way, I repeat,) I comprehend
under a name the man who constitutes a species that is generated from the
genus, I denominate a substance of this description individual. For genus
has been divided into species, and species into individual. But (as regards)
the individual, since it has been comprehended under a name, it is not
possible that, according to its own nature, it could be divided into
anything else, as we have divided each of the fore-mentioned (genus and
Aristotle primarily, and especially, and preeminently entitles
this substance, inasmuch as it cannot either be predicated of any Subject,
or exist in a Subject. He, however, predicates of the Subject, just as with
the genus, what I said constituted animality, (and which is) predicated by
means of a common name of all particular animals, such as ox, horse, and the
rest that are placed under (this genus). For it is true to say that man is
an animal, and horse an animal, and that ox is an animal, and each of the
rest. Now the meaning of the expression "predicated of a Subject" is this,
that inasmuch as it is one, it can be predicated in like manner of many
(particulars), even though these happen to be diversified in species. For
neither does horse nor ox differ from man so far forth as he is an animal,
for the definition of animal is said to suit all animals alike. For what is
an animal? If we define it, a general definition will comprehend all
animals. For animal is an animated Substance, endued with Sensation. Such
are ox, man, horse, and each of the rest (of the animal kingdom). But the
meaning of the expression "in a Subject" is this, that what is inherent in
anything, not as a part, it is impossible should exist separately from that
in which it is. But this constitutes each of the accidents (resident) in
Substance, and is what is termed Quality. Now, according to this, we say
that certain persons are of such a quality; for instance, white, grey,
black, just, unjust, temperate, and other (characteristics) similar to
these. But it is impossible for any one of these to subsist itself by
itself; but it must inhere in something else. If, however, neither animal
which I predicate of all individual animals, nor accidents which are
discoverable in all things of which they are nonessential qualities, can
subsist themselves by themselves, and (yet if) individuals are formed out of
these, (it follows, therefore, that) the triply divided Substance, which is
not made up out of other things, consists of nonentities. If, then, what is
primarily, and pre-eminently, and particularly denominated Substance
consists of these, it derives existence from nonentities, according to
Chapter VII. Aristotle's Cosmogony; His "Psychology; "His "Entelecheia; "His
Theology; His Ethics; Basilides Follows Aristotle.
But concerning Substance, the statements now made will suffice. But not only
is Substance denominated genus, species, (and) individual, but also matter,
and form, and privation. There is, however, (as regards the substance,) in
these no difference, even though the division be allowed to stand. Now,
inasmuch as Substance is of this description, the arrangement of the world
has taken place according to some such plan as the following. The world is
divided, according to Aristotle, into very numerous and diversified parts.
Now the portion of the world which extends from the earth to the moon is
devoid of foresight, guideless, and is under the sway  of that nature
alone which belongs to itself. But another (part of the world which lies)
beyond the moon, and extends to the surface of heaven, is arranged in the
midst of all order and foresight and governance. Now, the (celestial)
superficies constitutes a certain fifth substance, and is remote from all
those natural elements out of which the cosmical system derives consistence.
And this is a certain fifth Substance, according to Aristotle, as it were, a
certain super-mundane essence. And (this essence) has become (a logical
necessity) in his system, in order to accord with the (Peripatetic) division
of the world. And (the topic of this fifth nature) constitutes a distinct
investigation in philosophy. For there is extant a certain disquisition,
styled A Lecture on Physical (Phenomena), in which he has elaborately
treated  concerning the operations which are conducted by nature and
not providence, (in the quarter of space extending) from the earth as far as
the moon. And there is also extant by him a certain other peculiar treatise
on the principles of things (in the region) beyond the moon, and it bears
the following inscription: Metaphysics.  And another peculiar
dissertation has been (written) by him, entitled Concerning a Fifth
Substance, and in this work Aristotle unfolds his theological opinions.
There exists some such division of the universe as we have now attempted to
delineate in outline, and (corresponding with it is the division) of the
Aristotelian philosophy. His work, however, (styled) Concerning the Soul, is
obscure. For in the entire three books (where he treats of this subject) it
is not possible to say clearly what is Aristotle's opinion concerning the
soul. For, as regards the definition which he furnishes of soul, it is easy
(enough) to declare this; but what it is that is signified by the
definition  is difficult to discover. For soul, he says, is an
entelecheia of a natural organic body; (but to explain) what this is at all,
would require a very great number of arguments and a lengthened
investigation. As regards, however, the Deity, the Originator of all those
glorious objects in creation, (the nature of) this (First Cause) even to one
conducting his speculations by a more prolonged inquiry than that concerning
(the soul) is more difficult to know than the soul itself. The definition,
however, which Aristotle furnishes of the Deity is, I admit, not difficult
to ascertain, but it is impossible to comprehend the meaning of it. For, he
says, (the Deity) is a "conception of conception; "but this is altogether a
non-existent (entity). The world, however, is incorruptible (and) eternal,
according to Aristotle. For it has in itself nothing faulty, 
inasmuch as it is directed by Providence and Nature. And Aristotle has laid
down doctrines not only concerning Nature and a cosmical system, and
Providence, and God,  but he has written (more than this); for there
is extant by him likewise a certain treatise on ethical subjects, and these
he inscribes Books of Ethics.  But throughout these he aims at
rendering the habits of his hearers excellent from being worthless. When,
therefore, Basilides has been discovered, not in spirit alone, but also in
the actual expressions and names, transferring the tenets of Aristotle into
our evangelical and saving doctrine, what remains, but that, by restoring
what he has appropriated from others, we should prove to the disciples of
this (heretic) that Christ will in no wise profit them, inasmuch as they are
Chapter VIII. Basilides and Isidorus Allege Apostolic Sanction for Their
Systems; They Really Follow Aristotle.
Basilides, therefore, and Isidorus, the true son and disciple of Basilides,
say that Matthias  communicated to them secret discourses, which, I
being specially instructed, he heard from the Saviour. Let us, then, see how
clearly Basilides, simultaneously with Isidorus, and the entire band of
these (heretics), not only absolutely belies Matthias, but even the Saviour
Himself. (Time) was, says (Basilides), when there was nothing. Not even,
however, did that nothing constitute anything of existent things; but, to
express myself undisguisedly and candidly, and without any quibbling, it is
altogether nothing. But when, he says, I employ the expression "was,"I do
not say that it was; but (I speak in this way) in order to signify the
meaning of what I wish to elucidate. I affirm then, he says, that it was
"altogether nothing." For, he says, that is not absolutely ineffable which
is named (so), although undoubtedly we call this ineffable, but that which
is "non-ineffable." For that which is "non-ineffable" is not denominated
ineffable, but is, he says, above every name that is named. For, he says, by
no means for the world are these names sufficient, but so manifold are its
divisions that there is a deficiency (of names). And I do not take it upon
myself to discover, he says, proper denominations for all things.
Undoubtedly, however, one ought mentally, not by means of names, to
conceive, after an ineffable manner, the peculiarities (of things)
denominated. For an equivocal terminology, (when employed by teachers,) has
created for their pupils confusion and a source of error concerning objects.
(The Basilidians), in the first instance, laying hold on this borrowed and
furtively derived tenet from the Peripatetic (sage), play upon the folly of
those who herd together with them. For Aristotle, born many generations
before Basilides, first lays down a system in The Categories concerning
homonymous words. And these heretics bring this (system) to light as if it
were peculiarly their own, and as if it were some novel (doctrine), and some
secret disclosure from the discourses of Matthias. 
Chapter IX. Basilides Adopts the Aristotelian Doctrine of "Nonentity."
Since, therefore, "nothing" existed, (I mean) not matter, nor substance, nor
what is insubstantial, nor is absolute, nor composite,  (nor
conceivable, nor inconceivable, (nor what is sensible,) nor devoid of
senses, nor man, nor angel, nor a god, nor, in short, any of those objects
that have names, or are apprehended by sense, or that are cognised by
intellect, but (are) thus (cognised), even with greater minuteness, still,
when all things are absolutely removed, (since, I say, "nothing" existed,)
God, "non-existent," whom Aristotle styles "conception of conception," but
these (Basilidians) "non-existent,"-inconceivably, insensibly,
indeterminately, involuntarily, impassively, (and) unactuated by desire,
willed to create a world. Now I employ, he says, the expression "willed" for
the purpose of signifying (that he did so) involuntarily, and inconceivably,
and insensibly. And by the expression "world" I do not mean that which was
subsequently formed according to breadth and division, and which stood
apart; nay, (far from this,) for (I mean) the germ of a world. The germ,
however, of the world had all things in itself. Just as the grain of mustard
comprises all things simultaneously, holding them (collected) together
within the very smallest (compass), viz. roots, stem, branches, leaves, and
innumerable gains which are produced from the plant, (as) seeds again of
other plants, and frequently of others (still), that are produced (from
them). In this way,"non-existent" God made the world out of nonentities,
casting and depositing some one Seed that contained in itself a
conglomeration of the germs of the world. But in order that I may render
more clear what it is those (heretics) affirm, (I shall mention the
following illustration of theirs.) As an egg of some variegated and
particoloured bird, for instance the peacock, or some other (bird) still
more manifold and particoloured, being one in reality, contains in itself
numerous forms of manifold, and particoloured, and much compounded
substances; so, he says, the nonexistent seed of the world, which has been
deposited by the non-existent God, constitutes at the same time the germ of
a multitude of forms and a multitude of substances.
Chapter X. Origin of the World; Basilides Account of the "Sonship."
All things, therefore whatsoever it is possible to declare, and whatever,
being not as yet discovered, one must omit, were likely to receive
adaptation to the world which was about to be generated from the Seed. And
this (Seed), at the requisite seasons, increases in bulk in a peculiar
manner, according to accession, as through the instrumentality of a Deity so
great, and of this description. (But this Deity) the creature can neither
express nor grasp by perception. (Now, all these things) were inherent,
treasured in the Seed, as we afterwards observe in a new-born child the
growth of teeth, and paternal substance, and intellect, and everything
which, though previously having no existence, accrues unto a man, growing
little by little, from a youthful period of life. But since it would be
absurd to say that any projection of a non-existent God became anything
non-existent (for Basilides altogether sirens and dreads the Substances of
things generated in the way of projection for, (he asks,) of what sort of
projection is there a necessity, or of what sort of matter  must we
assume the previous existence, in order that God should construct a world,
as the spider his web; or (as) a mortal man, for the purpose of working it,
takes a (piece of) brass or of wood, or some other of the parts of
matter?), (projection, I say, being out of the question,) certainly, says
(Basilides), God spoke the word, and it was carried into effect. And this,
as these men assert, is that which has been stated by Moses: "Let there be
light, and there was light."  Whence he says, came the light? From
nothing. For it has not been written, he says, whence, but this only, (that
it came) from the voice of him who speaks the word. And he who speaks the
word, he says, was non-existent; nor was that existent which was being
produced.  The seed of the cosmical system was generated, he says,
from nonentities; (and I mean by the seed,) the word which was spoken, "Let
there be light." And this, he says, is that which has been stated in the
Gospels: "He was the true light, which lighteth every man that cometh into
the world."  He derives his originating principles from that Seed,
and obtains from the same source his illuminating power. This is that seed
which has in itself the entire conglomeration of germs. And Aristotle
affirms this to be genius, and it is distributed by him into infinite
species; just as from animal, which is non-existent, we sever ox, horse,
(and) man. When, therefore, the cosmical Seed becomes the basis (for a
subsequent development), those (heretics) assert, (to quote Basilides own
words:) "Whatsoever I affirm," he says, "to have been made after these, ask
no question as to whence. For (the Seed) had all seeds treasured and
reposing in itself, just as non-existent entities, and which were designed
to be produced by a non-existent Deity."
Let us see, therefore, what they say is first, or what second, or what
third, (in the development of) what is generated from the cosmical Seed.
There existed, he says, in the Seed itself, a Sonship, threefold, in every
respect of the same Substance with the non-existent God, (and) begotten from
nonentities, Of this Sonship (thus) involving a threefold division, one part
was refined, (another gross,) and another requiring purification. The
refined portion, therefore, in the first place, simultaneously with the
earliest deposition of the Seed by the non-existent one, immediately burst
forth  and went upwards and hurried above from below, employing a
sort of velocity described in poetry,
" As wing or thought," 
and attained, he says, unto him that is nonexistent. For every nature
desires that (nonexistent one), on account of a superabundance of beauty and
bloom. Each (nature desires this), however, after a different mode. The more
gross portion, however, (of the Sonship) continuing still in the Seed, (and)
being a certain imitative (principle), was not able to hurry upwards. For
(this portion) was much more deficient in the refinement that the Sonship
possessed, which through itself hurried upwards, (and so the more gross
portion) was left behind. Therefore the more gross Sonship equipped itself
with some such wing as Plato, the Preceptor of Aristotle, fastens on the
soul in (his) Phoedrus.  And Basilides styles such, not a wing, but
Holy Spirit; and Sonship invested in this (Spirit) confers benefits, and
receives them in turn. He confers benefits, because, as a wing of a bird,
when removed from the bird, would not of itself soar high up and aloft; nor,
again, would a bird, when disengaged from its pinion, at any time soar high
up and aloft; (so, in like manner,) the Sonship involved some such relation
in reference to the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit in reference to the Sonship.
For the Sonship, carried upwards by the Spirit as by a wing, bears aloft (in
turn) its pinion, that is, the Spirit. And it approaches the refined
Sonship, and the non-existent God,  even Him who fabricated the world
out of nonentities. He was not, (however,) able to have this (spirit) with
(the Sonship) itself; for it was not of the same substance (with God), nor
has it (any) nature (in common) with the Sonship. But as pure and dry air is
contrary to (their) nature, and destructive to fishes; so, in contrariety to
the nature of the Holy Spirit, was that place simultaneously of non-existent
Deity and Sonship, (a place) more ineffable than ineffable (entities), and
higher up than all names.
Sonship, therefore, left this (spirit) near that Blessed Place, which cannot
be conceived or represented by any expression. (He left the spirit) not
altogether deserted or separated from the Sonship; nay, (far from it,) for
it is just as when a most fragrant ointment is put into a vessel, that, even
though (the vessel) be emptied (of it) with ever so much care, nevertheless
some odour of the ointment still remains, and is left behind, even after
(the ointment) is separated from the vessel; and the vessel retains an odour
of ointment, though (it contain) not the ointment (itself). So the Holy
Spirit has continued without any share in the Sonship, and separated (from
it), and has in itself, similarly with ointment, its own power, a savour of
Sonship. And this is what has been declared: "As the ointment upon the head
which descended to the beard of Aaron."  This is the savour from the
Holy Spirit borne down from above, as far as formlessness, and the interval
(of space) in the vicinity of our world. And from this the Son began to
ascend, sustained as it were, says (Basilides), upon eagles wings, and upon
the back. For, he says, all (entities) hasten upwards from below, from
things inferior to those that are superior. For not one of those things that
are among things superior, is so silly as to descend beneath. The third
Sonship, however, that which requires purification, has continued, he says,
in the vast conglomeration of all germs conferring benefits and receiving
them. But in what manner it is that (the third Sonship) receives benefits
and confers them, we shall afterwards declare when we come to the proper
place for discussing this question.
Chapter XI. The "Great Archon" Of Basilides.
When, therefore, a first and second ascension of the Sonship took place, and
the Holy Spirit itself also remained after the mode mentioned, the firmament
was placed between the super-mundane (spaces) and the world. For existing
things were distributed by Basilides into two continuous and primary
divisions, and are, according to him, denominated partly in a certain
(respect) world, and partly in a certain (respect) super-mundane (spaces).
But the spirit, a line of demarcation between the world and super-mundane
(spaces), is that which is both holy, and has abiding in itself the savour
of Sonship. While, therefore, the firmament which is above the heaven is
coining into existence, there burst forth, and was begotten from the
cosmical Seed, and the conglomeration of all germs, the Great Archon (and)
Head of the world, (who constitutes) a certain (species of) beauty, and
magnitude, and indissoluble power.  For, says he, he is more
ineffable than ineffable entities, and more potent than potent ones, and
more wise than wise ones, and superior to all the beautiful ones whatever
you could mention. This (Archon), when begotten, raised Himself up and
soared aloft, and was carried up entire as far as the firmament. And there
He paused, supposing the firmament to be the termination of His ascension
and elevation, and considering that there existed nothing at all beyond
these. And than all the subjacent (entities) whatsoever there were among
them which remained mundane, He became more wise, more powerful, more
comely, more lustrous, (in fact,) pre-eminent for beauty above any entities
yon could mention with the exception of the Sonship alone, which is still
left in the (conglomeration of) all germs. For he was not aware that there
is (a Sonship) wiser and more powerful, and better than Himself. Therefore
imagining Himself to be Lord, and Governor, and a wise Master Builder, He
turns Himself to (the work of) the creation of every object in the cosmical
system. And first, he deemed it proper not to be alone, but made unto
Himself, and generated from adjacent (entities), a Son far superior to Him
self, and wiser. For all these things had the non-existent Deity previously
determined upon, when He cast down the (conglomeration of) all germs.
Beholding, therefore, the Son, He was seized with astonishment, and loved
(Him), and was struck with amazement. For some beauty of this description
appeared  to the Great Archon to belong to the Son, and the Archon
caused Him to sit on his right (hand). This is, according to these
(heretics), what is denominated the Ogdoad, where the Great Archon has his
throne. The entire celestial creation, then, that is, the Aether, He
Himself, the Great Wise Demiurge formed. The Son, however, begotten of this
(Archon), operates in Him, and offered Him suggestions, being endued with
far greater wisdom than the Demiurge Himself.
Chapter XII. Basilides Adopts the "Entelecheia" Of Aristotle.
This, then, constitutes the entelecheia of the natural organic body,
according to Aristotle, (viz.,) a soul operating in the body, without which
the body is able to accomplish nothing; (I mean nothing) that is greater,
and more illustrious, and more powerful, and more wise than the body.
 The account, therefore, which Aristotle has previously rendered
concerning the soul and the body, Basilides elucidates as applied to the
Great Archon and his Son. For the Archon has generated, according to
Basilides, a son; and the soul as an operation and completion, Aristotle
asserts to be an entelecheia of a natural organic hotly. As, therefore, the
entelecheia controls the body, so the Son, according to Basilides, controls
the God that is more ineffable than ineffable (entities). All things,
therefore, have been provided for, and managed by the majesty  of the
Great Archon; (I mean) whatever objects exist in the aethereal region of
space as far as the moon, for from that quarter onwards air is separated
from aether. When all objects in the aethereal regions, then, were arranged,
again from (the conglomeration of) all germs another Archon ascended,
greater, of course, than all subjacent (entities) with the exception,
however, of the Sonship that had been left behind, but far inferior to the
First Archon. And this (second Archon) is called by them Rhetus.  And
this Topos is styled Hebdomad, and this (Archon) is the manager and
fabricator of all subjacent (entities). And He has likewise made unto
Himself out (of the conglomeration of) all germs, a son who is more prudent
and wise than Himself, similarly to what has been stated to have taken place
in the case of the First Archon. That which exists in this quarter (of the
universe) constitutes, he says, the actual conglomeration and collection of
all seeds; and the things which are generated are produced according to
nature, as has been declared already by Him who calculates on things future,
when they ought  (to be), and what sort they ought (to be), and how
they ought (to be). And of these no one is Chief, or Guardian, or Creator.
For (a) sufficient (cause of existence) for them is that calculation which
the Non-Existent One formed when He exercised the function of creation.
Chapter XIII. Further Explanation of the "Sonship."
When, therefore, according to these (heretics), the entire world and
super-mundane entities were finished, and (when) nothing exists labouring
under deficiency, there still remains in the (conglomeration of) all germs
the third Sonship, which had been left behind in the Seed to confer benefits
and receive them. And it must needs be that the Sonship which had been left
behind ought likewise to be revealed and reinstated above. And His place
should be above the Conterminous Spirit, near the refined and imitative
Sonship and the Non-Existent One. But this would be in accordance with what
has been written, he says: "And the creation itself groaneth together, and
travaileth in pain together, waiting for the manifestation of the sons of
God."  Now, we who are spiritual are sons, he says, who have been
left here to arrange, and mould, and rectify, and complete the souls which,
according to nature, are so constituted as to continue in this quarter of
the universe. "Sin, then, reigned from Adam unto Moses,"  as it has
been written. For the Great Archon exercised dominion and possesses an
empire with limits extending as far as the firmament. And He imagines
Himself alone to be God, and that there exists nothing above Him, for (the
reason that) all things have been guarded by unrevealed Siope. This, he
says, is the mystery which has not been made known to former generations;
but in those days the Great Archon, the Ogdoad, was King and Lord, as it
seemed, of the universe. But (in reality) the Hebdomad was king and lord of
this quarter of the universe, and the Ogdoad is Arrhetus, whereas the
Hebdomad is Rhetus. This, he says, is the Archon of the Hebdomad, who has
spoken to Moses, and says: "I am the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob,
and I have not manifested unto them the name of God"  (for so they
wish that it had been written) that is, the God, Arrhetus, Archon of the
Ogdoad. All the prophets, therefore, who were before the Saviour uttered
their predictions, he says, from this source (of inspiration). Since,
therefore, it was requisite, he says, that we should be revealed as the
children of God, in expectation of whose manifestation, he says, the
creation habitually groans and travails in pain, the Gospel came into the
world, and passed through every Principality, and Power, and Dominion, and
every Name that is named.  And (the Gospel) came in reality, though
nothing descended from above; nor did the blessed Sonship retire from that
Inconceivable, and Blessed, (and) Non-Existent God. Nay, (far from it;) for
as Indian naphtha, when lighted merely  from a considerably long
distance, nevertheless attracts fire (towards it), so from below, from the
formlessness of the conglomeration (of all germs), the powers pass upwards
as far as the Sonship. For, according to the illustration of the Indian
naphtha, the Son of the Great Archon of the Ogdoad, as if he were some (sort
of) naphtha, apprehends and seizes conceptions from the Blessed Sonship,
whose place of habitation is situated after that of the Conterminous
(Spirit). For the power of the Sonship which is in the midst of the Holy
Spirit, (that is,) in, the midst of the (Conterminous) Spirit, shares the
flowing and rushing thoughts of the Sonship with the Son of the Great
Chapter XIV. Whence Came the Gospel; The Number of Heavens According to
Basilides; Explanation of Christ's Miraculous Conception.
The Gospel then came, says (Basilides), first from the Sonship through the
Son, that was seated beside the Archon, to the Archon, and the Archon
learned that He was not God of the universe, but was begotten. But
(ascertaining that) He has above Himself the deposited treasure of that
Ineffable and Unnameable (and) Non-existent One, and of the Sonship, He was
both converted and filled with terror, when He was brought to understand in
what ignorance He was (involved). This, he says, is what has been declared:
"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."  For, being orally
instructed by Christ, who was seated near, he began to acquire wisdom,
(inasmuch as he thereby) learns who is the Non-Existent One, what the
Sonship (is), what the Holy Spirit (is), what the apparatus of the universe
(is), and what is likely to be the consummation of things. This is the
wisdom spoken in a mystery, concerning which, says (Basilides), Scripture
uses the following expressions: "Not in words taught of human wisdom, but in
(those) taught of the Spirit."  The Archon, then, being orally
instructed, and taught, and being (thereby) filled with fear, proceeded to
make confession concerning the sin which He had committed in magnifying
Himself. This, he says, is what is declared: "I have recognised my sin, and
I know my transgression, (and) about this I shall confess for ever." 
When, then, the Great Archon had been orally instructed, and every creature
of the Ogdoad had been orally instructed and taught, and (after) the mystery
became known to the celestial (powers), it was also necessary that
afterwards the Gospel should come to the Hebdomad, in order likewise that
the Archon of the Hebdomad might be similarly instructed and indoctrinated
into the Gospel. The Son of the Great Archon (therefore) kindled in the Son
of the Archon of the Hebdomad the light which Himself possessed and had
kindled from above from the Sonship. And the Son of the Archon of the
Hebdomad had radiance imparted to Him, and He proclaimed the Gospel to the
Archon of the Hebdomad. And in like manner, according to the previous
account, He Himself was both terrified and induced to make confession. When,
therefore, all (beings) in the Hebdomad had been likewise enlightened, and
had the Gospel announced to them (for in these regions of the universe there
exist, according to these heretics, creatures infinite (in number), viz.,
Principalities and Powers and Rulers, in regard of which there is extant
among the (Basilidians)  a very prolix and verbose treatise, where
they allege that there are three hundred and sixty-five heavens, and that
the great Archon of these is Abrasax,  from the fact that his name
comprises the computed number 365, so that, of course, the calculation of
the title includes all (existing) things, and that for these reasons the
year consists of so many days); but when, he says, these (two events, viz.,
the illumination of the Hebdomad and the manifestation of the Gospel) had
thus taken place, it was necessary, likewise, that afterwards the
Formlessness existent in our quarter of creation should have radiance
imparted to it, and that the mystery should be revealed to the Sonship,
which had been left behind in Formlessness, just like an abortion.
Now this (mystery) was not made known to previous generations, as he says,
it has been written, "By revelation was made known unto me the mystery; "
 and, "I have heard inexpressible words which it is not possible for
man to declare."  The light, (therefore,) which came down from the
Ogdoad above to the Son of the Hebdomad, descended from the Hebdomad upon
Jesus the son of Mary, and he had radiance imparted to him by being
illuminated with the light that shone upon him. This, he says, is that which
has been declared: "The Holy Spirit will come upon thee,"  (meaning)
that which proceeded from the Sonship through the conterminous spirit upon
the Ogdoad and Hebdomad, as far as Mary; "and the power of the Highest will
overshadow thee," (meaning) the power of the anointing,  (which
streamed) from the (celestial) height above (through) the Demiurge, as far
as the creation, which is (as far as) the Son. And as far as that (Son) he
says the world consisted thus. And as far as this, the entire Sonship, which
is left behind for benefiting the souls in Formlessness, and for being the
recipient in turn of benefits, (this Sonship, I say,) when it is
transformed, followed Jesus, and hastened upwards, and came forth purified.
And it becomes most refined, so that it could, as the first (Sonship),
hasten upwards through its own instrumentality. For it possesses all the
power that, according to nature, is firmly connected with the light which
from above shone down (upon earth).
Chapter XV. God's Dealings with the Creature; Basilides Notion of (1) the
Inner Man, (2) the Gospel; His Interpretation of the Life and Sufferings of
When, therefore, he says, the entire Sonship shall have come, and shall be
above the conterminous spirit, then the creature will become the object of
mercy. For (the creature) groans until now,  and is tormented, and
waits for the manifestation of the sons of God, in order that all who are
men of the Sonship may ascend from thence. When this takes place, God, he
says, will bring upon the whole world enormous ignorance, that all things
may continue according to nature, and that nothing may inordinately desire
anything of the things that are contrary to nature. But (far from it); for
all the souls of this quarter of creation, as many as possess the nature of
remaining immortal in this (region) only, continue (in it), aware of nothing
superior or better (than their present state). And there will not prevail
any rumour or knowledge in regions below, concerning beings whose dwelling
is placed above, lest subjacent souls should be wrung with torture from
longing after impossibilities. (It would be) just as if a fish were to crave
to feed on the mountains along with sheep. (For) a wish of this description
would, he says, be their destruction. All things, therefore, that abide in
(this) quarter  are incorruptible, but corruptible if they are
disposed to wander and cross over from the things that are according to
nature. In this way the Archon of the Hebdomad will know nothing of
superjacent entities. For enormous ignorance will lay hold on this one
likewise, in order that sorrow, and grief, and groaning may depart from him;
for he will not desire aught of impossible things, nor will he be visited
with anguish. In like manner, however, the same ignorance will lay hold also
on the Great Archon of the Ogdoad, and similarly on all the creatures that
are subject unto him, in order that in no respect anything may desire aught
of those things that are contrary to nature, and may not (thus) be
overwhelmed with sorrow. And so there will be the restitution of all things
which, in conformity with nature, have from the beginning a foundation in
the seed of the universe, but will be restored at (their own) proper
periods. And that each thing, says (Basilides), has its own particular
times, the Saviour is a sufficient (witness  ) when He observes,
"Mine hour is not yet come."  And the Magi (afford similar testimony)
when they gaze wistfully upon the (Saviour s) star.  For (Jesus)
Himself was, he says, mentally preconceived at the time of the generation of
the stars, and of the complete return to their starting-point of the seasons
in the vast conglomeration (of all germs). This is, according to these
(Basilidians), he who has been conceived as the inner spiritual man in what
is natural (now this is the Sonship which left there the soul, not (that it
might be) mortal, but that it might abide here according to nature, just as
the first Sonship left above in its proper locality the Holy Spirit, (that
is, the spirit) which is conterminous), (this, I say, is he who has been
conceived as the inner spiritual man, and) has then been arrayed in his own
In order, however, that we may not omit any of the doctrines of this
(Basilides), I shall likewise explain whatever statements they put forward
respecting a gospel. For gospel with them, as has been elucidated, is of
super-mundane entities the knowledge which the Great Archon did not
understand. As, then, it was manifested unto him that there are likewise the
Holy Spirit that is, the conterminous (spirit) and the Sonship, and the
Non-Existent God, the cause of all these, he rejoiced at the communications
made to him, and was filled with exultation. According to them, this
constitutes the gospel. Jesus, however, was born, according to these
(heretics), as we have already declared. And when the generation which has
been previously explained took place, all the events in our Lord's life
occurred, according to them, in the same manner as they have been described
in the Gospels. And these things happened, he says, in order that Jesus
might become the first-fruits of a distinction of the different orders (of
created objects) that had been confused together.  For when the world
had been divided into an Ogdoad, which is the head of the entire world, now
the great Archon is head of the entire world, and into a Hebdomad, which is
the head of the Hebdomad, the Demiurge of subjacent entities, and into this
order of creatures (that prevails) amongst us, where exists Formlessness, it
was requisite that the various orders of created objects that had been
confounded together should be distinguished by a separating process
performed by Jesus. (Now this separation) that which was his corporeal part
suffered, and this was (the part) of Formlessness and reverted into
Formlessness. And that was resuscitated which was his psychical part, and
this was (part) of the Hebdomad, and reverted into the Hebdomad. And he
revived that (element in his nature) which was the peculiar property of the
elevated region where dwells the Great Archon, and (that element) remained
beside the Great Archon. And he carried upwards as far as (that which is)
above that which was (the peculiar property) of the conterminous spirit, and
he remained in the conterminous spirit. And through him there was purified
the third Sonship, which had been left for conferring benefits, and
receiving them. And (through Jesus) it ascended towards the blessed Sonship,
and passed through all these. For the entire purpose of these was the
blending together of, as it were, the conglomeration of all germs, and the
distinction of the various orders of created objects, and the restoration
into their proper component parts of things that had been blended together.
Jesus, therefore, became the first-fruits of the distinction of the various
orders of created objects, and his Passion took place for not any other
reason than the distinction which was thereby brought about in the various
orders of created objects that had been confounded together. For in this
manner (Basilides) says that the entire Sonship, which had been left in
Formlessness for the purpose of conferring benefits and receiving them, was
divided into its component elements, according to the manner in which also
the distinction of natures had taken place in Jesus. These, then, are the
legends which likewise Basilides details after his sojourn in Egypt; 
and being instructed by the (sages of this country) in so great a system of
wisdom, (the heretic) produced fruits of this description.
Chapter XVI. The System of Saturnilus.
But one Saturnilus,  who flourished about the same period with
Basilides,  but spent his time in Antioch, (a city) of Syria,
propounded opinions akin to whatever (tenets) Menander (advanced). He
asserts that there is one Father, unknown to all He who had made angels,
archangels, principalities, (and) powers; and that by certain angels, seven
(in number), the world was made, and all things that are in it. And
(Saturnilus affirms) that man was a work of angels. There had appeared above
from (the Being of) absolute sway, a brilliant  image; and when (the
angels) were not able to detain this, on account of its immediately, he
says, returning with rapidity upwards, they exhorted one another, saying,
"Let us make man in our likeness and image."  And when the figure was
formed, and was not, he says, able, owing to the impotence of the angels, to
lift up itself, but continued writhing as a worm, the Power above,
compassionating him on account of his having been born in its own image,
sent forth a scintillation of life, which raised man up, and caused him to
have vitality. (Saturnilus) asserts that this scintillation of life rapidly
returns after death to those things that are of the same order of existence;
and that the rest, from which they have been generated, are resolved into
those. And the Saviour  he supposed to be unbegotten and incorporeal,
and devoid of figure. (Saturnilus,) however, (maintained that Jesus) was
manifested as man in appearance only. And he says that the God of the Jews
is one of the angels, and, on account of the Father's wishing to deprive of
sovereignty all the Archons, that Christ came for the overthrow of the God
of the Jews, and for the salvation of those that believe upon Him; and that
these have in them the scintillation of life. For he asserted that two kinds
of men had been formed by the angels, one wicked, but the other good. And,
since demons from time to time assisted wicked (men, Saturnilus affirms)
that the Saviour came for the overthrow of worthless men and demons, but for
the salvation of good men. And he affirms that marriage and procreation are
from Satan. The majority, however, of those who belong to this (heretic s
school) abstain from animal food likewise, (and) by this affectation of
asceticism (make many their dupes). And (they maintain) that the prophecies
have been uttered, partly by the world-making angels, and partly by Satan,
who is also the very angel whom they suppose to act in antagonism to the
cosmical  (angels), and especially to the God of the Jews. These,
then, are in truth the tenets of Saturnilus.
Chapter XVII. Marcion; His Dualism; Derives His System from Empedocles;
Sketch of the Doctrine of Empedocles.
But Marcion,  a native of Pontus, far more frantic than these
(heretics), omitting the majority of the tenets of the greater number (of
speculators), (and) advancing into a doctrine still more unabashed, supposed
(the existence of) two originating causes of the universe, alleging one of
them to be a certain good (principle), but the other an evil one. And
himself imagining that he was introducing some novel (opinion), founded a
school full of folly, and attended by men of a sensual mode of life,
inasmuch as he himself was one of lustful propensities.  This
(heretic) having thought that the multitude would forget that he did not
happen to be a disciple of Christ, but of Empedocles,  who was far
anterior to himself, framed and formed the same opinions, namely, that there
are two causes of the universe, discord and friendship. For what does
Empedocles say respecting the plan of the world? Even though we have
previously spoken (on this subject), yet even now also, for the purpose, at
all events, of comparing the heresy of this plagiarist (with its source), we
shall not be silent.
This (philosopher) affirms that all the elements out of which the world
consists and derives its being, are six: two of them material, (viz.,) earth
and water; and two of them instruments by which material objects are
arranged and altered, (viz.,) fire and air; and two of them, by means of the
instruments, operating upon matter and fashioning it, viz., discord and
friendship. (Empedocles) expresses himself somehow thus:
"The four roots of all things hear thou first:
Brilliant Jove, and life-giving Juno and Aidoneus,
And Nestis, who with tears bedews the mortal font." 
Jupiter is fire, and life-giving Juno earth, which produces fruits for the
support of existence; and Aidoneus air, because although through him we
behold all things, yet himself alone we do not see. But Nestis is water, for
this is a sole vehicle of (food), and thus becomes a cause of sustenance to
all those that are being nourished; (but) this of itself is not able to
afford nutriment to those that are being nourished. For if it did possess
the power of affording nutriment, animal life, he says, could never be
destroyed by famine, inasmuch as water is always superabundant in the world.
For this reason he denominates Nestis water, because, (though indirectly)
being a cause of nutriment, it is not (of itself) competent to afford
nutriment to those things that are being nourished. These, therefore to
delineate them as by way of outline are the principles that comprise
(Empedocles ) entire theory of the world: (viz.,) water and earth, out of
which (proceed) generated entities; fire and spirit, (which are) instruments
and efficient (causes), but discord and friendship, which are (principles)
artistically fabricating (the universe). And friendship is a certain peace,
and unanimity, and love, whose entire effort is, that there should be one
finished and complete world. Discord, however, invariably separates that one
(world), and subdivides it, or makes many things out of one. Therefore
discord is of the entire creation a cause which he styles "oulomenon," that
is, destructive. For it is the concern of this (discord), that throughout
every age the creation itself should continue to preserve its existing
condition. And ruinous discord has been (thus) a fabricator and an efficient
cause of the production of all generated entities; whereas friendship (is
the cause) of the eduction, and alteration, and restoration of existing
things into one system. And in regard of these (causes), Empedocles asserts
that they are two immortal and unbegotten principles, and such as have not
as yet received an originating cause of existence. (Empedocles) somewhere or
other (expresses himself) in the following manner:
"For if both once it was, and will be; never, I think,
Will be the age eternal void of both of these." 
(But) what are these (two)? Discord and Friendship; for they did not begin
to come into being, but pre-existed and always will exist, because, from the
fact of their being unbegotten, they are not able to undergo corruption. But
fire, (and water,) and earth, and air, are (entities) that perish and
revive. For when these generated (bodies), by reason of Discord, cease to
exist, Friendship, laying hold on them, brings them forward, and attaches
and associates them herself with the universe. (And this takes place) in
order that the Universe may continue one, being always ordered by Friendship
in a manner one and the same, and with (uninterrupted) uniformity.
When, however, Friendship makes unity out of plurality, and associates with
unity separated entities, Discord, again, forcibly severs them from unity,
and makes them many, that is, fire, water, earth, air, (as well as) the
animals and plants produced from these, and whatever portions of the world
we observe. And in regard of the form of the world, what sort it is, (as)
arranged by Friendship, (Empedocles) expresses himself in the following
"For not from back two arms arise,
Not feet, not nimble knees, not genital groin,
But a globe it was, and equal to itself it is." 
An operation of this description Friendship maintains, and makes (one) most
beautiful form of the world out of plurality. Discord, however, the cause of
the arrangement of each of the parts (of the universe), forcibly severs and
makes many things out of that one (form). And this is what Empedocles
affirms respecting his own generation:
"Of these I also am from God a wandering exile." 
That is, (Empedocles) denominates as God the unity and unification of that
(one form) in which (the world) existed antecedent to the separation and
production (introduced) by Discord among the majority of those things (that
subsisted) in accordance with the disposition (effected) by Discord. For
Empedocles affirms Discord to be a furious, and perturbed, and unstable
Demiurge, (thus) denominating Discord the creator of the world. For this
constitutes the condemnation and necessity of souls which Discord forcibly
severs from unity, and (which it) fashions and operates upon, (according to
Empedocles,) who expresses himself after some such mode as, the
"Who perjury piles on sin,
While demons gain a life prolonged; " 
meaning by demons long-lived souls, because they are immortal, and live for
"For thrice ten thousand years banished from bliss; " 
denominating as blissful, those that have been collected by Friendship from
the majority of entities into the process of unification (arising out) of
the intelligible world. He asserts that those are exiles, and that
"In lapse of time all sorts of mortal men are born,
Changing the irksome ways of life" 
He asserts the irksome ways to be the alterations and transfigurations of
souls into (successive) bodies. This is what he says:
"Changing the irksome ways of life."
For souls "change," body after body being altered, and punished by Discord,
and not permitted to continue in the one (frame), but that the souls are
involved in all descriptions of punishment by Discord being changed from
body to body. He says:
"Aethereal force to ocean drives the souls,
And ocean spurts them forth on earth's expanse,
And earth on beams of blazing sun, who flings
(The souls) on aether's depths, and each from each
(A spirit) takes, and all with hatred burn." 
This is the punishment which the Demiurge inflicts, just as some brazier
moulding (a piece of) iron, and dipping it successively from fire into
water. For fire is the aether whence the Demiurge transfers the souls into
the sea; and land is the earth: whence he uses the words, from water into
earth, and from earth into air. This is what (Empedocles) says:
"And earth on beams
Of blazing sun, who flings (the souls)
On aether's depths, and each from each
A (spirit) takes, and all with hatred burn."
The souls, then, thus detested, and tormented, and punished in this world,
are, according to Empedocles, collected by Friendship as being a certain
good (power), and (one) that pities the groaning of these, and the
disorderly and wicked device of furious Discord. And (likewise Friendship
is) eager, and toils to lead forth little by little the souls from the
world, and to domesticate them with unity, in order that all things, being
conducted by herself, may attain unto unification. Therefore on account of
such an arrangement on the part of destructive Discord of this divided
world, Empedocles admonishes his disciples to abstain from all sorts of
animal food. For he asserts that the bodies of animals are such as feed on
the habitations of punished souls. And he teaches those who are hearers of
such doctrines (as his), to refrain from intercourse with women. (And he
issues this precept) in order that (his disciples) may not co-operate with
and assist those works which Discord fabricates, always dissolving and
forcibly severing the work of Friendship. Empedocles asserts that this is
the greatest law of the management of the universe, expressing himself
"There's something swayed by Fate, the ancient,
Endless law of gods, and sealed by potent oaths." 
He thus calls Fate the alteration from unity into plurality, according to
Discord, and from plurality into unity, according to Friendship. And, as I
stated, (Empedocles asserts) that there are four perishable gods, (viz.,)
fire, water, earth, (and) air. (He maintains,) however, that there are two
(gods) which are immortal, unbegotten, (and) continually hostile one to the
other, (namely) Discord and Friendship. And (he asserts) that Discord always
is guilty of injustice and covetousness, and forcible abduction of the
things of Friendship, and of appropriation of them to itself. (He alleges,)
however, that Friendship, inasmuch as it is always and invariably a certain
good (power), and intent on union, recalls and brings towards (itself), and
reduces to unity, the parts of the universe that have been forcibly severed,
and tormented, and punished in the creation by the Demiurge. Some such
system of philosophy as the foregoing is advanced for us by Empedocles
concerning the generation of the world, and its destruction, and its
constitution, as one consisting of what is good and bad. And he says that
there is likewise a certain third power which is cognised by intellect, and
that this can be understood from these, (viz., Discord and Friendship,)
expressing himself somehow thus:
"For if, neath hearts of oak, these truths you fix,
And view them kindly in meditations pure,
Each one of these, in lapse of time, will haunt you,
And many others, sprung of these, descend.
For into every habit these will grow, as Nature prompts;
But if for other things you sigh, which, countless, linger
Undisguised mid men, and blunt the edge of care,
As years roll on they ll leave you fleetly,
Since they yearn to reach their own beloved race;
For know that all possess perception and a share of mind." 
Chapter XVIII. Source of Marcionism; Empedocles Reasserted as the Suggester
of the Heresy.
When, therefore, Marcion or some one of his hounds barks against the
Demiurge, and adduces reasons from a comparison of what is good and bad, we
ought to say to them, that neither Paul the apostle nor Mark, he of the
maimed finger,  announced such (tenets). For none of these
(doctrines) has been written in the Gospel according to Mark. But (the real
author of the system) is Empedocles, son of Meto, a native of Agrigentum.
And (Marcion) despoiled this (philosopher), and imagined that up to the
present would pass undetected his transference, under the same expressions,
of the arrangement of his entire heresy from Sicily into the evangelical
narratives. For bear with me, O Marcion: as you have instituted a comparison
of what is good and evil, I also to-day will institute a comparison
following up your own tenets, as you suppose them to be. You affirm that the
Demiurge of the world is evil why not hide your countenance in shame, (as
thus) teaching to the Church the doctrines of Empedocles? You say that there
is a good Deity who destroys the works of the Demiurge: then do not you
plainly preach to your pupils, as the good Deity, the Friendship of
Empedocles. You forbid marriage, the procreation of children, (and) the
abstaining from meats which God has created for participation by the
faithful, and those that know the truth.  (Thinkest thou, then,) that
thou canst escape detection, (while thus) enjoining the purificatory rites
of Empedocles? For in point of fact you follow in every respect this
(philosopher of paganism), while you instruct your own disciples to refuse
meats, in order not to eat any body (that might be) a remnant of a soul
which has been punished by the Demiurge. You dissolve marriages that have
been cemented by the Deity. And here again you conform to the tenets of
Empedocles, in order that for you the work of Friendship may be perpetuated
as one (and) indivisible. For, according to Empedocles, matrimony separates
unity, and makes (out of it) plurality, as we have proved.
Chapter XIX. The Heresy of Prepon; Follows Empedocles; Marcion Rejects the
Generation of the Saviour.
The principal heresy of Marcion, and (the one of his) which is most free
from admixture (with other heresies), is that which has its system formed
out of the theory concerning the good and bad (God). Now this, it has been
manifested by us, belongs to Empedocles. But since at present, in our times,
a certain follower of Marcion, (namely) Prepon, an Assyrian,  has
endeavoured to introduce something more novel, and has given an account of
his heresy in a work inscribed to Bardesanes, an Armenian, neither of this
will I be silent. In alleging that what is just constitutes a third
principle, and that it is placed intermediate between what is good and bad,
Prepon of course is not able to avoid (the imputation of inculcating) the
opinion of Empedocles. For Empedocles asserts that the world is managed by
wicked Discord, and that the other (world) which (is managed) by Friendship,
is cognisable by intellect. And (he asserts) that these are the two
different principles of good and evil, and that intermediate between these
diverse principles is impartial reason, in accordance with which are united
the things that have been separated by Discord, (and which,) in accordance
with the influence of Friendship, are accommodated to unity. The impartial
reason itself, that which is an auxiliary to Friendship, Empedocles
denominates "Musa." And he himself likewise entreats her to assist him, and
expresses himself somehow thus:
"For if on fleeting mortals, deathless Muse,
Thy care it be that thoughts our mind engross,
Calliope, again befriend my present prayer,
As I disclose a pure account of happy gods." 
Marcion, adopting these sentiments, rejected altogether the generation of
our Saviour. He considered it to be absurd that tinder the (category of a)
creature fashioned by destructive Discord should have been the Logos that
was an auxiliary to Friendship that is, the Good Deity. (His doctrine,)
however, was that, independent of birth, (the Logos) Himself descended from
above in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, and that, as
being intermediate between the good and bad Deity, He proceeded to give
instruction in the synagogues. For if He  is a Mediator, He has been,
he says, liberated from the entire nature of the Evil Deity. Now, as he
affirms, the Demiurge is evil, and his works. For this reason, he affirms,
Jesus came down unbegotten, in order that He might be liberated from all
(admixture of) evil. And He has, he says, been liberated from the nature of
the Good One likewise, in order that He may be a Mediator, as Paul states,
 and as Himself acknowledges: "Why call ye me good? there is one
good,"  These, then, are the opinions of Marcion, by means of which
he made many his dupes, employing the conclusions of Empedocles. And he
transferred the philosophy invented by that (ancient speculator) into his
own system of thought, and (out of Empedocles) constructed his (own) impious
heresy. But I consider that this has been sufficiently refuted by us, and
that I have not omitted any opinion of those who purloin their opinions from
the Greeks, and act despitefully towards the disciples of Christ, as if they
had become teachers to them of these (tenets). But since it seems that we
have sufficiently explained the doctrines of this (heretic), let us see what
Chapter XX. The Heresy of Carpocrates; Wicked Doctrines Concerning Jesus
Christ; Practise Magical Arts; Adopt a Metempsychosis.
Carpocrates  affirms that the world and the things in it were made by
angels, far inferior to the unbegotten Father; and that Jesus was generated
of Joseph, and that, having been born similar to (other) men, He was more
just than the rest (of the human race). And (Carpocrates asserts) that the
soul (of Jesus), inasmuch as it was made vigorous and undefiled, remembered
the things seen by it in its converse with the unbegotten God. And
(Carpocrates maintains) that on this account there was sent down upon
(Jesus) by that (God) a power, in order that through it He might be enabled
to escape the world-making (angels). And (he says) that this power, having
passed through all, and having obtained liberty in all, again ascended
 to God (Himself). And (he alleges) that in the same condition with
(the soul of Jesus are all the souls) that embrace similar objects of desire
with the (power just alluded to). And they assert that the soul of Jesus,
(though,) according to law, it was disciplined in Jewish customs, (in
reality) despised them. And (he says) that on this account (Jesus) received
powers whereby, He rendered null and void the passions incidental to men for
their punishment. And (he argues), therefore, that the (soul), which,
similarly with that soul of Christ, is able to despise the world-making
Archons, receives in like man-her power for the performance of similar acts.
Wherefore, also, (according to Carpocrates, there are persons who) have
attained unto such a degree of pride as to affirm some of themselves to be
equal to Jesus Himself, whereas others among them to be even still more
powerful. But (they also contend) that some enjoy an excellence above the
disciples of that (Redeemer), for instance Peter and Paul, and the rest of
the Apostles, and that these are in no respect inferior to Jesus. And
(Carpocrates asserts) that the souls of these have originated from that
supernal power, and that consequently they, as equally despising the
world-making (angels), have been deemed worthy of the same power, and (of
the privilege) to ascend to the same (place). If, however, any one would
despise earthly concerns more than did that (Saviour, Carpocrates says) that
such a one would be able to become superior to (Jesus, The followers of this
heretic) practise their magical arts and incantations, and spells and
voluptuous feasts. And (they are in the habit of invoking the aid of)
subordinate demons and dream-senders, and (of resorting to) the rest of the
tricks (of sorcery), alleging that they possess power for now acquiring sway
over the Archons and makers of this world, nay, even over all the works that
are in it.
(Now these heretics) have themselves been sent forth by Satan, for the
purpose of slandering before the Gentiles the divine name of the Church.
(And the devil's object is,) that men hearing, now after one fashion and now
after another, the doctrines of those (heretics), and thinking that all of
us are people of the same stamp, may turn away their ears from the preaching
of the truth, or that they also, looking, (without abjuring,) upon all the
tenets of those (heretics), may speak hurtfully of us. (The followers of
Carpocrates) allege that the souls are transferred from body to body, so far
as that they may fill up (the measure of) all their sins. When, however, not
one (of these sins) is left, (the Carpocratians affirm that the soul) is
then emancipated, and departs unto that God above of the world-making
angels, and that in this way all souls will be saved. If, however, some
(souls), during the presence of the soul in the body for one life, may by
anticipation become involved in the full measure of transgressions, they,
(according to these heretics,) no longer undergo metempsychosis. (Souls of
this sort,) however, on paying off at once all trespasses, will, (the
Carpocratians say,) be emancipated from dwelling any more in a body.
Certain, likewise, of these (heretics) brand  their own disciples in
the back parts of the lobe of the right ear. And they make counterfeit
images of Christ, alleging that these were in existence at the time (during
which our Lord was on earth, and that they were fashioned) by Pilate.
Chapter XXI. The System of Cerinthus Concerning Christ.
But a certain Cerinthus,  himself being disciplined in the teaching
of the Egyptians, asserted that the world was not made by the primal Deity,
but by some virtue which was an offshoot from that Power which is above all
things, and which (yet) is ignorant of the God that is above all. And he
supposed that Jesus was not generated from a virgin, but that he was born
son of Joseph and Mary, just in a manner similar with the rest of men, and
that (Jesus) was more just and more wise (than all the human race). And
(Cerinthus alleges) that, after the baptism (of our Lord), Christ in form of
a dove came down upon him, from that absolute sovereignty which is above all
things. And then, (according to this heretic,) Jesus proceeded to preach the
unknown Father,  and in attestation (of his mission) to work
miracles. It was, however, (the opinion of Cerinthus,) that ultimately
Christ departed from Jesus, and that Jesus suffered and rose again; whereas
that Christ, being spiritual,  remained beyond the possibility of
Chapter XXII. Doctrine of the Ebionaeans.
The Ebionaeans,  however, acknowledge that the world was made by Him
Who is in reality God, but they propound legends concerning the Christ
similarly with Cerinthus and Carpocrates. They live conformably to the
customs of the Jews, alleging that they are justified. according to the law,
and saying that Jesus was justified by fulfilling the law. And therefore it
was, (according to the Ebionaeans,) that (the Saviour) was named (the)
Christ of God and Jesus,  since not one of the rest (of mankind) had
observed completely the law. For if even any other had fulfilled the
commandments (contained) in the law, he would have been that Christ. And the
(Ebionaeans allege) that they themselves also, when in like manner they
fulfil (the law), are able to become Christs; for they assert that our Lord
Himself was a man in a like sense with all (the rest of the human family).
Chapter XXIII. The Heresy of Theodotus.
But there was a certain Theodotus,  a native of Byzantium, who
introduced a novel heresy. He announces tenets concerning the originating
cause of the universe, which are partly in keeping with the doctrines of the
true Church, in so far as he acknowledges that all things were created by
God. Forcibly appropriating, however, (his notions of) Christ from the
school of the Gnostics, and of Cerinthus and Ebion, he alleges that (our
Lord) appeared in some such manner as I shall now describe. (According to
this, Theodotus maintains) that Jesus was a (mere) man, born of a virgin,
according to the counsel of the Father, and that after he had lived
promiscuously with all men, and had become pre-eminently religious, he
subsequently at his baptism in Jordan received Christ, who came from above
and descended (upon him) in form of a dove. And this was the reason,
(according to Theodotus,) why (miraculous) powers did not operate within him
prior to the manifestation in him of that Spirit which descended, (and)
which proclaims him to be the Christ. But (among the followers of Theodotus)
some are disposed (to think) that never was this man made God, (even) at the
descent of the Spirit; whereas others (maintain that he was made God) after
the resurrection from the dead.
Chapter XXIV. The Melchisedecians; The Nicolaitans.
While, however, different questions have arisen among them, a certain
(heretic), who himself also was styled Theodotus, and who was by trade a
banker,  attempted to establish (the doctrine), that a certain
Melchisedec constitutes the greatest power, and that this one is greater
than Christ. And they allege that Christ happens to be according to the
likeness (of this Melchisedec). And they themselves, similarly with those
who have been previously spoken of as adherents of Theodotus, assert that
Jesus is a (mere) man, and that, in conformity with the same account
(already given), Christ descended upon him.
There are, however, among the Gnostics diversities of opinion; but we have
decided that it would not be worth while to enumerate the silly doctrines of
these (heretics), inasmuch as they are (too) numerous and devoid of reason,
and full of blasphemy. Now, even those (of the heretics) who are of a more
serious turn in regard of  the Divinity, and have derived their
systems of speculation from the Greeks, must stand convicted  (of
these charges). But Nicolaus  has been a cause of the wide-spread
combination of these wicked men. He, as one of the seven (that were chosen)
for the diaconate,  was appointed by the Apostles. (But Nicolaus)
departed from correct doctrine, and was in the habit of inculcating
indifferency of both life and food.  And when the disciples (of
Nicolaus) continued to offer insult to the Holy Spirit, John reproved them
in the Apocalypse as fornicators and eaters of things offered unto idols.
Chapter XXV. The Heresy of Cerdon.
But one Cerdon  himself also, taking occasion in like manner from
these (heretics) and Simon, affirms that the God preached by Moses and the
prophets was not Father of Jesus Christ. For (he contends) that this
(Father) had been known, whereas that the Father of Christ  was
unknown, and that the former was just, but the latter good. And Marcion
corroborated the tenet of this (heretic) in the work which he attempted to
write, and which he styled Antitheses.  And he was in the habit, (in
this book,) of uttering whatever slanders suggested themselves to his mind
against the Creator of the universe. In a similar manner likewise (acted)
Lucian,  the disciple of this (heretic).
Chapter XXVI. The Doctrines of Apelles; Philumene, His Prophetess.
But Apelles,  sprung from these, thus expresses himself, (saying)
that there is a certain good Deity, as also Marcion supposed, and that he
who created all things is just. Now he, (according to Apelles,) was the
Demiurge of generated entities. And (this heretic also main-rains) that
there is a third (Deity), the one who was in the habit of speaking to Moses,
and that this (god) was of a fiery nature, and that there was another fourth
god, a cause of evils. But these he denominates angels. He utters, however,
slanders against law and prophets, by alleging that the things that have
been written are (of) human (origin), and are false. And (Apelles) selects
from the Gospels or (from the writings of) the Apostle (Paul) whatever
pleases himself, But he devotes himself to the discourses of a certain
Philumene as to the revelations  of a prophetess. He affirms,
however, that Christ descended from the power above; that is, from the good
(Deity), and that he is the son of that good (Deity). And (he asserts that
Jesus) was not born of a virgin, and that when he did appear he was not
devoid of flesh. (He maintains,) however, that (Christ) formed his booty by
taking portions of it from the substance of the universe: that is, hot and
cold, and moist and dry. And (he says that Christ), on receiving in this
body cosmical powers, lived for the time he did in (this) world. But (he
held that Jesus) was subsequently crucified by the Jews, and expired, and
that, being raised Up after three days, he appeared to his disciples. And
(the Saviour) showed them, (so Apelles taught,) the prints of the nails and
(the wound) in his side, desirous of persuading them that he was in truth no
phantom, but was present in the flesh. After, says (Apelles), he had shown
them his flesh, (the Saviour) restored it to earth, from which substance it
was (derived. And this he did because) he coveted nothing that belonged to
another. (Though indeed Jesus) might use for the time being (what belonged
to another), he yet in due course rendered to each (of the elements) what
peculiarly belonged to them. And so it was, that after he had once more
loosed the chains of his body, he gave back heat to what is hot, cold to
what is cold, moisture to what is moist, (and) dryness to what is dry. And
in this condition (our Lord) departed to the good Father, leaving the seed
of life in the world for those who through his disciples should believe in
It appears to us that these (tenets) have been sufficiently explained.
Since, however, we have determined to leave unrefuted not one of those
opinions that have been advanced by any (of the heretics), let us see what
(system) also has been invented by the Docetae.
 [Here our author's theory concerning the origin of heresy in heathen
philosophy begins to be elaborated.]
 Satronilus (Miller).
 Or, "in no respect formed his system from the Scriptures, but from the
tenets propounded by the Egyptians."
 Cruice would prefer, "from the Gnostics," on account of Cerinthus
being coupled with the Gnoctics and Ebionaeans by Hippolytus, when he
afterwards indicates the source from which Theodotus derived his heretical
notions of Christ.
 Miller has "Sacerdon."
 The word monosoccurs in Miller's text, but ought obviously to be
expunged. It has probably, as Cruice conjectures, crept into the ms..from
the termination of genomenos. Duncker suggests omoiōs.
 This rendering would ascribe Pantheism to Apelles. The parsage might
also be construed, "supposed there to exist an essence (that formed the
basis) of the universe."
 A hiatus here has given rise to conjecture. Cruice suggests
choros(band) instead of oros.
 Or, "practices of the monsters," or "inhospitable beasts." Abbe Cruice
suggests paroxeōn, and Roeper emplastōn.
 Literally, the (accursed) tree.
 What Hippolytus now states in regard of the opinions of Basilides,
is quite new (compare Irenaeus, i. 24; Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromr.,
iii.and vii.; Tertullian,Praescript., xlvi.; Epiphanius, Haer., xxiv.;
Theodoret, i. 4; Eusebius, Ecclesiast, Hist., iv.7; and Philastrius, c.
xxxii.). Abbe Cruice refers us to Basilidis philosophi Gnostici
Sententiae,by Jacobi (Berlin, 1852), md to Das Basilidianische System, etc.,
by Ulhorn (Gottinggen, 1855).
 Or, "dispositions."
 Compare Porphyry's Isagoge, c. ii., and Aristotle's Categ., c.
 Aristotle's Categ., c. v.
 Or, "is suffcient."
 Or, "the question is discussed."
 [This word, not yet technical, as with us, is thus noted as
curious. Of its force see Professor Caird, Encyc. Britannic., sub
 See Aristotle, De Anim., ii. r.
 Literally, "out of tune."
 These works must be among Aristotle's lost writings (see
Fabricius Bibl. Graec., t. iii. pp. 232, 404). We have no work of
Aristotle's expressly treating "of God." However, the Stagyrite's theology,
such as it is, is unfolded in his Metaphysics. See Macmahon's analysis
prefixed to his translation of Aristotle's Metaphysics, Bohn's Classical
 Aristotle composed three treatises on ethical subjects: (r ) Ethics
to Nicomachus; (2) Great Morals; (3) Morals to Eudemus.
 Miller erroneously reads "Matthew."
 (See Bunsen, i. v. 86. A fabulous reference may convey a truth.
This implies that Matthias was supposed to have preached and left results of
 This emendation is made by Abbe Cruice. The ms. has
"incomposite," an obviously untenable reading.
 Or, "of what sort of material substance," etc.
 Gen. i, 3.
 Or, "being declared."
 John i. 9. [See translator's important note (I), p. y, supra.,]
 Literally, "throbbed."
 Odyssey, vii. 36.
 See Plato, vol. i. p. 75 et seq., ed. Bekker. Miller do; "an
 [Foretaste of Cent.IV.] Miller's text has, instead of tou ouk ontos
(non-existent), oikountos (who dwells above).
 Ps. cxxxiii. 2.
 Or, "unspeakable power."
 Or, "was produced unto."
 Miller's text has"-the soul," which Duncker and Cruice properly
correct into "body."
 Megaleiuthtos, a correction from megalhs.
 A correction from "Arrhetus."
 This passage is very obscure, and is variously rendered by the
commentators. The above translation follows Schneidewin's version, which
yields a tolerably clear meaning.
 Rom. viii. 19, 22
 Rom. v. 14.
 Ex. vi. 2, 3
 Eph. i. 21.
 Or, "seen merely."
 Prov. i. 7.
 1 Cor. ii. 13.
 Ps. xxxii. 5, 3
 kat autous. Ulhorn fills up the ellipsis thus: "And in reference to
these localities of the Arghons," etc.
 This is a more correct form than that occasionally given, viz.,
Abraxas. See Beausobre, Hist. Manich., lib. ii. p. 51.
 Eph. iii. 3-5.
 2 Cor. xii. 4.
 Luke i. 35.
 Miller's text has "judgment," which yields no meaning. Roeper
 Rom. viii. 19-22.
 Or, "their own peculiar locality" (Bunsen).
 This word is added by Bunsen.
 John ii. 4.
 Matt. 11. 1, 2
 See Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom., ii. p. 375, ed. Sylburg. [Comp,
cap. viii. vol. ii. p. 355, this series.]
 Bernays and Bunsen read ton Peripaton, which Abbe Cruice and
Duncker consider erroneous, referring us to Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., iv.
 See [vol. i. p. 348, this series, where it is Saturninus];
Irenaeus, i. 24; [vol. iii., this series, p. 649]; Tertullian, Praescript.
xlvi.; Epiphanius, Haer., xxiii.; Theodoret, Haer. Fab., i. 3; St.
Augustine, Haer., iii. Eusebius styles this heretic Saturninus.
 Epiphanius makes Basilides and Saturnilus belong to the same
 Faeinhs: Millet reads Fwnhs.
 Gen. i. 26.
 Miller reads "the Father."
 Or, "world-making."
 See [vol. i. p.352. this series]; Irenaeus i. 27; [vol. iii., this
series especially p. 257], Tertullian, Adv. Marc., and Praescript., xxx.;
Epiphanius, Haer., xlii.: /Theodoret, Haer. Fab., i. 24; Eusebius., Hist.
Ecclesiast., v.13, 16; and St.Augustine, Haer., xxii.
 Or, "quarelsome," or, "frantic."
 Hippolytus discussion respecting the heresy of Marcion is, chiefly
interesting from the light which it throws on the philosophy of Empedocles.
 These are lines 55-57 in Karsten's edition of a collection of the.
 These are lines 110, 111, in Stein's edition of Empedocles.
 Lines 360-362 (ed.Karst.).
 Line 7 (Karsten), 381 (Stein).
 Line 4 (Karsten), 372, 373 (Stein).
 Line 5 (Karsten), 374 (Stein).
 Line 6 (Karsten), 375, 376 (Stein).
 Lines 16-19 (Karsten),377-380(Stein).
 Lines 1, 2 (Karsten), 369, 370(Stein).
 The text of these verses,as given by Hippolytus, is obviously
corrupt, and there(ore obscure. Schneidewin has furnished an emended copy of
them (Philol., vi. 166), which the translator has mostly adopted. (See
Stein's edition of the Empedoclean Verses, line 222 et seq.)
 o kolobodaktulos. Bunsen [more suo, vol. i., p. 89] considers this
a corrupt reading, and suggests kalwn logwnv didaskalos, i.e., "a teacher of
good words," i.e., an evangelist, which word, as just used, he does not
irish to repeat. The Abbe Cruice denies the necessity for any such
emendation, and refers us to an article in the Journal of Classical and
Sacred Philology(Cambridge, March, 1855), the writer of which maintains, on
the authority of St. Jerome, that St. Mark bad amputated his thumb, in order
that he might be considered disqualified for the priesthood.
 1 Tim. iv. 3.
 What Hippolytus communicates concerning Prepon is quite new. The
only writer who mentions him is Theodoret (Haer. Fab., i. 25). in his
article on Apelles.
 Schneidewin gives a restored version of these lines. They are found
(at 1ines 338-341)in Stein's edition of the Empedoclean Verses.
 Tertullian combats these heretical notions in his De Carne
Christi[vol. viii. p. 521, two series].
 Gal. iii. 19.
 Matt. xix. 17; Mark x. 18; Luke xviii. 19.
 See [vol. i. p. 350] Irenaes, i. 25; [vol. iii. p. 203] Tertullian,
De Anima, c. xxiii.-xxv., and Praescript., c. xlviii.; Eusebius. Hist.
Ecclesiast., iv. 7, Epiphanius, Haer., xxvii. see.2; Theodoret, Haer.
Fab.,i. 5; and St.Augustine, Haer., c. vii. The entire of this article is
taken from Irenaes, and equally coincides with the account given of
Carpocrates by Epiphanius.
 Or, "came."
 Literally, "cauterize."
 Epiphanius alludes in the same manner to these images.
 See [vol. i. pp. 351, 415] Irenaeus, i. 26, iii. 2, 3; [vol. iii.
p. 631] Tertullian, Praescript.,c. xlviii.; Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast.,
iii. 28, vii. 25; Epiphanius, Haer., xxviii.; Theodoret, Haer.Fab., ii. 3;
St. Augustine, Haer.,c. viii.; and Sr. Jerome, Ep., ixxxix. We have here, as
in the preceding articles, Irenaeus in the Greek, as Hippolytus text
corresponds with the Latin version of this portion of Irenaeus work.
 Acts xvii. 23.
 Or, "paternal."
 See [vol. i. p. 352] Irenaes, i. 26; [vol. iii. p. 651] Tertullian,
Praescript., c. xlviii.; [vol. iv. p. 429, this series] Origen, Contr. Cels.
ii. r; Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., iii, 27; Epiphanius, Haer., xxx,; and
Theodoret, Haer. Fab., ii. 2. Hippolytus is indebted in this article partly
to Irenaes, and partly to original sources.
 Or, "that the Christ o( God was named Jesus" (Bunsen).
 See [vol. iii. p. 654, "two Theodoti "] Tertullian, Praescript., c.
liii.: Eusebuis, Hist. Ecclesiast, v. 27; Epiphanius, Haer.,liv.; and
Theodoret, Haer. Fab., ii. 5. Clemens Alexandrinus seems to have been
greatly indebted to Theodotus, whose system he has explained and commented
 Concerning the younger Theodotus, see [vol. iii. p. 654]
Tertutllian. Praescript., c. liii.; Epiphanius, Haer., lv.; and Theodoret,
Haer. Fab., ii. 6.
 Or, "in reference to" (Bunsen).
 Or, "have been adduced" (Miller).
 See [ut supra] Irenaeus, i. 26; [ut supra] Tertullian,
Praescript., c. xlv.; Epiphanius, Haer., c. xxv.; Eusebius, Hist.
Ecclesiast., iii. 29; Theodoret, Haer. Fab., i. 15; and St. Augustine,
Haer., c.v. [But see Clement, vol. ii. p. 373 this series.]
 [He understands that the seven (Acts vi. 5) were deacons. Bunsen,
 Or."knowledge." Bunsen suggests brōseōs, as translated above.
 Rev. ii. 6.
 Irenaeus, i. 27; Eusebius (who here gives Irenaeus Greek), Hist.
Ecclesiast., iv. 2; Epiphanius, c. xli.; Theodoret, Haer. Fab., i. 24; and
Philastrius, i. xliv.
 Hippolytus follows Irenaeus but introduces some alterations.
 Antitheseis. This is the emendation proposed by tbe Abbe Cruice.
The textual reading is antiparatheseis(comparisons).
 See [ut supra, p.,353], Tertullian, Praescript., c. li., and
Epiphanius, Haer., c. xliii.
 See (vol. iii. p, 257 ) Tertullian, Praescript., c. xxx.;
Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., v, 13; Epiphanius, Haer., c. xliv.; Theodoret,
Haer. Fab., i. 25: and St. Augustine, Haer., c. xxiv.
 Phanerōsesi. Miller's text reads Phanerōs, the error of which is
obvious from Tertullian's Praescript., c. xxx. Cruice considers tne word to
signify the title of a work written by Apelles.
Also, see links to 3500 other Manuscripts:
E-mail to: BELIEVE
The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at:
BELIEVE Religious Information Source - By Alphabet