Chapter
XXX.—Valentinus’ Explanation of the Birth of Jesus; Twofold
Doctrine on the Nature of Jesus’ Body; Opinion of the Italians,
that Is, Heracleon and Ptolemæus; Opinion of the Orientals, that
Is, Axionicus and Bardesanes.
All the prophets, therefore, and the law, spoke by
means of the Demiurge,—a silly god,
707
he says, (and themselves) fools, who knew
nothing. On account of this, he says, the Saviour observes:
“All that came before me are thieves and robbers.”
708
And the apostle (uses these
words): “The mystery which was not made known to former
generations.”
709
For none
of the prophets, he says, said anything concerning the things of which
we speak; for (a prophet) could not but be ignorant of all (these)
things, inasmuch as they certainly had been uttered by the Demiurge
only. When, therefore, the creation received completion, and when
after (this) there ought to have been the revelation of the sons of
God—that is, of the Demiurge, which up to this had been
concealed, and in which obscurity the natural man was hid, and had a
veil upon the heart;—when (it was time), then, that the veil
should be taken away, and that these mysteries should be seen, Jesus
was born of Mary the virgin, according to the declaration (in
Scripture), “The Holy Ghost will come upon
thee”—Sophia is the Spirit—“and the power of
the Highest will overshadow thee”—the Highest is the
Demiurge,—“wherefore that which shall be born of thee shall
be called holy.”
710
For he has been generated not from the
highest alone, as those created in (the likeness of) Adam have been
created from the highest alone—that is, (from) Sophia and the
Demiurge. Jesus, however, the new man, (has been generated) from
the Holy Spirit—that is, Sophia and the Demiurge—in order
that the Demiurge may complete the conformation and constitution of his
body, and that the Holy Spirit may supply his essence, and that a
celestial Logos may proceed from the Ogdoad being born of
Mary.
Concerning this (Logos) they have a great question
amongst them—an occasion both of divisions and dissension.
And hence the doctrine of these has become divided: and one
doctrine, according to them, is termed Oriental, and the other
Italian. They from Italy, of whom is Heracleon and
Ptolemæus, say that the body of Jesus was (an) animal (one).
And on account of this, (they maintain) that at his baptism the Holy
Spirit as a dove came down—that is, the Logos of the mother
above, (I mean Sophia)—and became (a voice) to the animal (man),
and raised him from the dead. This, he says, is what has been
declared: “He who raised Christ from the dead will also
quicken your mortal and natural bodies.”
711
For loam has come under a curse;
“for,” says he, “dust thou art, and unto dust shalt
thou return.”
712
The
Orientals, on the other hand, of whom is Axionicus
713
and Bardesianes,
714
assert that the body of the Saviour was
spiritual; for there came upon Mary the Holy Spirit—that is,
Sophia and the power of the highest. This is the creative art,
(and was vouchsafed) in order that what was given to Mary by the Spirit
might be fashioned.
707
Epiphanius,
Hær
., xxxi. 22.
708
John x. 8
.
709
Col. i. 26
.
710
Luke i. 35
.
711
Rom. viii. 11, 12
.
712
Gen. iii. 19
.
713
Axionicus is mentioned by Tertullian only (see Tertullian,
Contr. Valent
., c. iv; [vol. iii. p. 505, this
series]).
714
Bardesianes (or Ardesianes, as Miller’s text has it) is evidently
the same with Bardesanes, mentioned by Eusebius and St. Jerome.