Книга третья

I. Gnostics on Sexual Life and Marriage. Valentin, Basilid and Isidore about marriage (1.1) The followers of Valentine, who teach about divine emanation and "syzygy", approve of marriage. The Basilidians say the following: “When the apostles asked the Lord whether it would not be better not to marry at all, he answered them that not everyone is able to fulfill this covenant, since some are eunuchs from birth, while others are by necessity” 478 . (2) And they [the followers of Basilides] explain this saying as follows: “Some [men] are similar in nature to women and follow their habits. It's better not to marry someone like that. (3) They are eunuchs from birth." “Eunuchs of necessity are those theorists and ascetics (οι θεατρικοί ασκηταί) who, in order to be worthy of glory, have tamed their desires. Eunuchs, of necessity, are also those who, for whatever reason, have undergone castration. 479 They become eunuchs out of necessity, and not as a result of a rational decision. (4) Those who became eunuchs for the sake of the eternal kingdom made a rational choice, thereby seeking to avoid the difficulties of family life and the problems associated with self-restraint.” 480 (2.1) “It is better to marry than to burn” and “to cast your soul into fire” (1 Cor. 7:9), “to resist desires day and night, in fear of breaking self-control. The soul that spends all its strength in opposition is cut off from hope.” (2) “Therefore, if your wife is a bitch, back off (άπέχου 481) so as not to lose the Divine blessing,” says Isidore in “Ethics”. And after putting out the fire and getting rid of the sperm, pray with a sense of accomplishment. 482 (3) And perhaps, it goes on, marriage will turn out to be a blessing for you and will allow you to continue to do the right thing and not stumble. (4) If, due to youth, poverty or earthly inclinations (κατωφερής), you refuse to fulfill the covenant and get married, (do not be afraid) your brother will not turn away from you. “I entered the church,” as it is said, “and I have nothing to fear.” (5) If he turns away, tell him: “Brother, give me your hand, help me not to sin!” And then you will receive help, advice and sympathy (νοητήν καΐ οΛσθητήν), and if you want to achieve good, then you will achieve it.” (3.1) “Sometimes our lips say: “We do not want to sin,” but our intentions are completely different. Such a person does not do what he wants only because he is afraid of the punishment awaiting him for what he has done. Some things are necessary and natural, some are only natural 483. Clothing is necessary and natural, lovemaking is natural, but not necessary.” (3) I quote here this long quotation only to refute the opinion of those followers of Basilides who live badly, believing that they can sin and everything is allowed, since they will still be saved by virtue of their nature. They think that sin will not affect them because they are chosen, but their predecessors did not allow anyone to do this! (4) So they have no reason to cover themselves with the clothes of Christ, but behave more depravedly than the pagans, dishonoring his name with their deeds. “Such people are false apostles, deceitful workers,” and further, “but their end will be according to their works” (2 Cor. 11:13-15). (4.1) Self-restraint is contempt of the flesh and following God. 484 And self-restraint concerns not only sexual desire, but also everything that the soul excessively desires, being unable to limit itself only to what is necessary. (2) Self-restraint concerns speech, property, their use, and in general every desire. It not only teaches us the art of prudence, but also provides it to us as a special power and a divine gift. (3) It should be said that we think about all this. We consider those blessed who abstain from sex if it is God's gift to them, and we respect those who marry only once. We believe that we should empathize with our neighbors and “share the burden” with those who think they are standing strong, but in reality are ready to fall 485 . And it was about the second marriage that the apostle said: “If you are on fire, get married” (1 Cor. 7:9). II. Fragment from Epiphanes' book On Justice (5.1) The followers of Carpocrates and Epiphanes taught the community of wives, thereby disgracing the name of Christ. (2) This Epiphanes, whose books I have, was the son of Carpocrates. His mother's name was Alexandra. On his father's side he comes from Alexandria, on his mother's side from Kephaleia. He lived only seventeen years, and in Sami, in Cephaleia, he was revered as a god. There was a stone church dedicated to him, an altar, a sacred grove (τεμένη) and a musey. The inhabitants of Kephaleia gathered in this place on the new moon, made sacrifices to Epiphanes and glorified his birthday with libations, prayers and chants. (3) His father, in addition to his basic education, taught him Platonism and taught him the knowledge (gnosis) of the Monad 486, from whence the heresy of the Carpocratians stems. (6.1) In his book “On Justice” he says this: “The justice of God is community and equality ΐσότητος). Just as the sky covers the whole earth evenly and all the stars at night are equally visible, so God, like the sun, which is the source of day and the father of light, 487 illuminates everyone he sees in equal measure. But he sees everyone the same, without distinguishing between rich and poor, commoner and ruler, fool and wise, woman and man, free and slave. (2) He does not exclude dumb animals either, shedding (light) equally on all creatures, no matter whether evil or good, and thus establishes justice, since no one can have more light than others, or steal the light from his neighbor so that he has twice the “light.” (3) Just as the sun promotes the growth of food for all living things, so general justice does not deprive anyone. Everyone participates equally in its fair division. An individual bull gets the same as their entire clan, a single pig gets everything that is due to pigs, and a single sheep gets everything that is due to their entire clan, and so on. (4) So, justice is the community [of everything]. The seeds of all plants, according to their genera, are evenly scattered over the ground and are common food for all herbivores. All this does not obey any law, is given to everyone equally and spins in a folding dance (χορηγία συμφώνων), under the control of the one who produced it all. (7.1) The law of nature is not written (ουδέ τα της γενέσεως νόμον 488), otherwise it would have already been written 489. But no, they inseminate and give birth to whoever they wish, since [the sense of] equality is inherent in them by justice itself. The Creator of all and the Father, guided by the principle of justice, gave everyone an “eye” to look without distinguishing between female and male or rational and unreasonable. He has made no distinctions, but looks upon all equally and alike, taking care that all have an equal share. (2) The law, he says further, being unable to stop human folly, itself promotes lawlessness. Private property (ἢ ἰδιότης), supported by law, destroys the divine law of equality at its very foundation.” Obviously, he misunderstood the words of the apostle: “Through the law I know sin” (Rom. 7:7). (3) He believes that the distinction between “mine” and “yours” was due to the law, so that the fruits of the earth, things and wives ceased to be common. “He created the vineyards for common use, not prohibiting either sparrows or thieves from using them. The same applies to grain and other fruits. It was this distortion of the principle of the commonality of everything and the establishment of private property that led to the idea of ​​theft of fruits and animals” 490. (8.1) And if God created everything common to all people, then this also applies to women and men: and they have the right to associate with whomever they wish, as all animals do, guided by the innate principle of equality and justice. (2) But those who are brought up in such customs deny the community that unites all living things, saying: “A man should marry one woman and live only with her.” But everyone should share everything they have with everyone so that everyone can use it. All animals do this.” (3) After these words, which I have quoted literally, he continues in the same spirit and says the following: “The strong and ineradicable sexual instinct, which is inherent in every man by nature and is necessary for the prolongation of the race, cannot be destroyed by either law or custom, since it is the covenant (δόγμα) of God.” (4) How can he be counted among us, denying the law and the gospel so openly? After all, the first says: “Do not commit adultery,” and the last: “He who looks with lust has already committed adultery.” (5) “Thou shalt not covet,” says the one God in the law, expressing himself through the law, the prophets and the Gospel. It is he who says: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife” (Ex. 20:17). The “neighbor” for a Jew is not a Jew; rather, they are spiritual brothers. This means that “neighbor” refers to representatives of other nations. But how can someone who shares the same spirit not be a neighbor? Abraham was the father not only of the Jews, but also of other nations. (9:1) And since adultery and all the shamelessness associated with it were punishable by death, it is clear that this also applies to the pagans, so that everyone who follows the law can hear directly from the Lord himself: “I tell you, you shall not covet!” The addition of the personal pronoun "I" further strengthens this prohibition. (2) Carpocrates and Epiphanes are fighters against God. Further in his notorious book (I mean “On Justice”) Epiphanes says the following: (3) “The lawgiver must be joking when he says: “Thou shalt not covet,” adding to this the even more unreasonable words “the property of your neighbor.” How can the one who himself gave the living the desire to procreate, forbid this to people, allowing all other creatures? The saying “your neighbor’s wife” looks even funnier in this sense, since it calls for turning into private property what belongs to everyone.” (10.1) This is what our noble Carpocrats teach! They say that they and others like them - men and women together - gather at feasts, which I would not call Christian gatherings (άγάπην). And after saturation, Cyprida comes to the well-fed (έν πλησμονή τοι Κύπρις) 491,– as they say. Then they knock over the lamps, turn off the light so that it does not illuminate their depraved justice (πορνικήν δίκαιοσύνην) and copulate, whoever wants with whomever they want. Having group sex during night meetings, during the day they demand that every woman they desire obey the law, not a divine one, but one established by Carpocrates. The same law, as you might guess, was established by Carpocrates for dogs, pigs and goats. (2) I suspect that he misunderstood what Plato said in the Republic that wives should be common. What this actually means is that before marriage all women should be available to anyone who desires them, just as a theater is open to all spectators, but after marriage a woman belongs to one man and is not common property. 492 (11.1) Xant in his book “On the Magi” says that “the magicians allowed sexual relations with their mothers, daughters and sisters, allowing such copulation by mutual agreement, not by force or secretly, when one man takes the wife of another.” I think that Jude is talking specifically about this sect and others like it when he writes in his Epistle: “So it will happen to these dreamers,” who do not see the truth with open eyes, and further to the words: “...their mouths utter inflated words” 493 . III. Marcion Gnostic and some philosophers that birth is evil (12.1) But both Plato himself and the Pythagoreans, like Marcion after them (although the latter was far from asserting that all wives should be common) believed that birth is evil. The followers of Marcion consider nature to be evil on the grounds that matter is evil because it came from the unrighteous Demiurge. (2) For this reason, not wanting to fill the cosmos created by the Demiurge, they abstain from marriage. They resist their own Creator and strive for another God, called good, and not for the one who, as they say, is a different type of god. For this reason, they do not want to leave anything behind on this earth and abstain not at all out of their own will, but rather out of hatred of the Creator and out of reluctance to use His creations. (3) However, refusing divine bounties and gifts, they are inconsistent in their impious theomachy. After all, not wanting to multiply, they still eat the food He created and breathe His air. They themselves are His creations, finally. Therefore, even if, as they claim, they received another Gospel revealing gnosis, they should honor the Master of this world at least because they received this revelation here on this earth. (13.1) But this will be discussed in more detail later, in connection with the doctrine of first principles. The same philosophers whom we have mentioned, and from whom the followers of Marcion borrowed their impious doctrine that birth is an evil, boasting that it was their invention, did not in fact teach that it is evil by nature, but only for the soul that is capable of discerning the truth. (2) They teach that the soul has a divine origin and is cast into this world as punishment, therefore the incarnate soul needs, according to their views, purification. (3) And this teaching does not belong to the followers of Marcion at all, but to those who teach that souls descend into bodies, change their shell and are reincarnated. But we will also talk about this later, when we talk about the soul. 494 (14.1) Heraclitus undoubtedly considers birth an evil, saying so: “Being born, they strive to live and achieve their share (rather, peace), and even leave children behind them so that their share will also be fulfilled.” 495 (2) Empedocles clearly agrees with him, saying: I cried and sobbed when I saw an unknown country. From the living she created [hatred] the dead, changing their form. Oh woe! A pitiful and unfortunate race of mortals! Out of what strife and groans were you born! 496 (3) The Sibyl says the same: Mortal and corporeal people, you are nothing! 497 Man is the most fleeting of all creatures on earth. 498 (15.1) Theognis considers birth to be evil, thus saying: It would be better for those living on earth not to be born, not seeing the sun's light. Born I would rather go through the gates of Hades. 499 (2) The tragedian Euripides echoes him: We must come together and mourn the birth of a person and all the troubles that await him. On the contrary, when a person is dead and free from labor, we should see him off with joy. 500 (3) He says something similar in another place: Who knows, maybe life is death, (16.1) It seems that Solon in Herodotus says the same thing: “O Croesus, every person is just a game of chance.” 502 The myth of both Cleobida and Biton also denies life and glorifies death. 503 (2) “The human race is like leaves,” says Homer. 504 (3) And Plato in Cratylus ascribes to Orpheus the doctrine that the soul is placed in the body as a punishment. Here are his words: “Some believe that [the body] is a tomb (σήμα) in which the soul now resides. (4) Through it she expresses (σημαίνει) what she is able to express, which is why it is rightly called a tombstone (σήμα). This term was apparently established by the followers of Orpheus, who taught that the soul thus serves the punishment for what it has done.” 505 (17.1) The following judgment of Philolaus also deserves mention. This Pythagorean says the following: “The ancient theologians and seers testify that the soul is imprisoned in the body for some sins and buried in it as in a tomb.” 506 (2) But Pindar, speaking of the Eleusinian mysteries, adds: Blessed is the one who saw this, because he saw the end of life, He also knows the beginning given by God. 507 (3) Plato also writes about this, without any doubt, in the Phaedo: “Those to whom we owe the establishment of the Mysteries only,” etc. to the words “they will settle among the gods.” 508 (4) What do you say about his next words: “As long as we have a body and our soul is united with this evil, we are unable to adequately comprehend the object of our desire”? 509 Doesn't he hint quite clearly that birth is the greatest of evils? (5) This is evidenced by what is said further: “All those who really strive for philosophy, although they usually forget about it, practice nothing less than the science of dying and dying.” 510 (18.1) And further: “while staying here, the soul of the philosopher shows extreme disdain for the body, strives to leave it and be left alone with itself.” 511 (2) What has been said echoes the words of the Divine Apostle: “Poor man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? (Rom. 7:24), unless he expresses himself metaphorically by calling the body of death the common sense of those who have turned to evil. (3) Even Plato, long before Marcion, in the first book of the Republic, called for abstinence from sexual intercourse as a reason for birth. (4) Having spoken of mature age, he adds: “I assure you, after bodily desires have faded within me, I find greater pleasure in conversation.” (5) The following is said about lovemaking: “What are you talking about, dear friend! I would take great pleasure in getting rid of them as mad and cruel despots.” 512 (19.1) And one more place from the Phaedo, which says that birth is evil: “Secret knowledge teaches that a person arrives here as if in prison.” 513 (2) And again: “Those who have lived their lives holyly are freed from everything earthly and get rid of it as from shackles, reaching the pure heavenly palaces.” 514 (3) But even taking this into account, he considers the structure of the world to be good: “You should not free yourself from this prison and run away.” 515 (4) In short, he does not give any reason to Marcion to believe that matter is evil, and speaks of this world quite respectfully: “Everything good comes from the Creator himself (παρά του συνθέντος), everything bad and unrighteous in heaven originates from a previous state. It was from him that the world and all living things inherited these qualities.” 516 (20.1) This is further clarified: “The reason for this was the bodily elements inherent in it from ancient times by nature, since before coming to the present cosmos it was involved in great disorder.” 517 (2) Just as strongly in the “Laws,” he laments the current state of humanity: “The gods took pity on the human race, born for hard work, and established various holidays as a time of rest from worries.” 518 (3) In the Post-Law, he explains the reasons for such a sad state of affairs: “Birth from the very beginning is difficult for every living creature, starting from the formation of the embryo, gestation, birth, ending with growth and upbringing. All this is accompanied by countless efforts, and everyone will agree with this” 519. (21.1) But doesn’t Heraclitus call birth death, in full agreement with Pythagoras and Socrates in Gorgias, saying: “In reality we see only death, in sleep we see only dreams.” 520 (2) But enough about this. When we come to consider the doctrines of first principles, we will show the contradictions between these philosophical riddles and the opinions of Marcion. But even now, it seems to me, it is clear that Marcion borrowed all these “strange” (ξένων) 521 theories from Plato, although he did not want to admit it and was unable to understand it. (22.1) Let's continue our discussion about self-control. We talked about the fact that the Hellenes spoke disapprovingly of childbirth, looking askance at the inconveniences associated with it, which gave Marcion’s followers a reason to shamelessly distort this, blaspheming the Creator. (2) It is said in the tragedy: It is better for a mortal not to be born at all. In sorrowful torments I give birth to children, but my offspring will be born stupid. Wailing in vain! I see the bastards I'm losing the best. But even if they survive my poor heart is always filled with fear. What's the point? Where to find strength Can one soul endure all this? 522 (3) And further, in the same spirit: I used to think, and I still think: Seeing the torment to which we condemn them, there is no need for people to have children. 523 (4) And in the following lines he definitely considers the root cause to be the cause of all evil: Born for misfortunes and troubles, became a man and accepted life, full of misfortunes, from the one who gave mortals all this air that supports life, mortal, do as you must. 524 (23.1) He presents something similar here: no one is even born without pain. 525 About how many misadventures await mortals, their types are countless. There is no end to them. 526 Of all that man has inherited, there is nothing that brings complete happiness. 527 (24.1) It was for this reason that the Pythagoreans are said to have abstained from sexual intercourse. In my opinion, they allowed sexual intercourse in order to give birth to children, and sought to limit sexual pleasure after it took place. (2) This is why they prohibited the consumption of beans, and not because they lead to bloating, indigestion, bad sleep, or look like a human head: Eating beans means eating the heads of your parents. 528 Not at all. The ban was imposed because it was believed that beans lead to infertility in women. (3) Theophrastus, in any case, wrote in Causes of Growth that bean pods scattered around the roots of young trees cause the shoots to dry out, and birds that live in houses also become sterile if they feed on beans for a long time. 529 IV. On the Justification of Permissiveness by Some Gnostics (25.1) We spoke about Marcion, who comes from Pontus, who, out of a desire to resist the Creator, refuses to use what He created. (2) It turns out that the Creator Himself is to blame for having to resort to abstinence, if this can be considered abstinence at all. Like that giant, this involuntary ascetic struggles with God, believing that he can resist the One who created this world and all creation. (3) By adapting the words that the Lord said to Philip: “Let the corruptible (τους νεκρούς) bury their ashes (τους εαυτών νεκρούς), but follow me” 530, they should not forget that the body itself Philip was also molded like all creation, but this does not mean that it was dust. (4) How could he have a body that was not dust? After all, after the resurrection of the Lord from the tomb and the mortification of his passions, he joined the life of Christ. 531 (5) Earlier we spoke about the lawless community of wives among the Carpocrats. But while mentioning Nikolai earlier, we forgot to mention one point. (6) They say he had a beautiful wife. Soon after the Ascension of the Lord, when the apostles accused him of jealousy, he brought her to them and said that anyone who wanted could take possession of her. They say that such behavior was fully consistent with the principle: “One should abuse the flesh (παραχρήσασθαι τη σαρκι δει).” 532 And the members of this sect followed his words and, acting simply and uncritically, engaged in complete debauchery. (26.1) However, I know evidence that Nicholas himself did not have sexual relations with anyone other than his wife, and his daughters lived to old age, remaining virgins, and his sons free from debauchery. (2) In our case, this behavior of his is explained by the desire to demonstrate to the apostles, among whom he was accused of jealousy, that passion for his wife does not control him. He sought in this way to teach a lesson about how one should “abuse the flesh,” not wanting, I believe, like the Savior, to “serve two masters,” 533 passion and God. (3) It is said that Matthew also taught this by struggling with and abusing the body, never allowing pleasure or unlimited desire to take control of himself, thereby giving the soul the opportunity to grow through faith and gnosis. (27.1) Those who consider Aphrodite Pandemic to be mystical group sex are insulting the name itself. (2) After all, whether bad or good, an action still remains an action. In the same way, the desire for community is a good thing if it concerns money, food or clothing, but they use this concept impiously and apply it to all kinds of sexual entertainment. (3) They say, for example, that one of them, having once seen a beautiful girl, approached her and said: “You know what is written: “Give yourself to everyone who asks.” She, not wanting to understand his impudent hint, answered with dignity: “If you want to talk about marriage, contact my mother.” (4) O ungodly deeds! These communists, heralds of sexual freedom and brothers in debauchery, distort the words of the Savior. They are a disgrace not only for philosophy, but for the entire way of human life, perverting the truth, or rather, belittling it as low as possible. (5) Hierophants of bodily desires and group sex, do they really want to achieve the kingdom of heaven in this way?! (28.1) Communism of this kind only leads to a brothel, pigs and goats will be their friends there, and whores will rule there, indiscriminately accepting everyone who seeks the fulfillment of their desires. (2) “But you did not know Christ correctly (for you heard him and were taught in him, for the truth is in Christ). Put away the old man of old, which is decaying in lustful passions. Be renewed by the power of your spiritual mind and put on the new man, created according to God in righteousness and true holiness,” thereby becoming like God. (4) “Be like God by becoming his beloved children, and live in love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself for us as a sacrifice and fragrant incense. (5) Fornication, uncleanness and covetousness should not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints, nor should foul language and empty talk.” (6) Trying to teach purity of speech, the apostle further says: “Know this, that no one is a fornicator...”, etc. right down to the words “...but do not reprove.” 534 (29.1) Their doctrine (δόγμα), by the way, follows from a certain apocrypha, and I further cite the corresponding passage - that mother’s womb that conceived all their absurd (doctrines). I don’t know whether they themselves wrote all this (note, in that case, their godless slander), or, having heard somewhere a well-conceived doctrine, they distorted it. 535 (2) The text is as follows: “Everything was one. But since the One decided that he should not remain alone, he “released” the Breath from himself (έξήλθεν bai αυτού έπιπνοια). He then united with his Breath and produced the Beloved. From him came his own Breath, and they produced Powers unseen and unheard of,” and so on until the words “each in its own name.” (3) If they want to say to all this that sexual intercourse is of a spiritual nature, as the followers of Valentine teach, then their opinion is to some extent acceptable. However, only out of a desire to discredit salvation, one could attribute participation in bodily copulation to the Holy Spirit of prophecy. (30.1) Similar ideas are expressed by representatives of the school of Prodicus, who unreasonably call themselves Gnostics and natural children of the first God. With their high origin and freedom, they justify the right to live as they wish. They want to live in pleasures, not submitting to anyone, since they consider themselves lords of the Sabbath and born children of the King, standing above all living things. For the king, as they say, the law is not written. (2) But firstly, they are not able to do as they please, because their aspirations and desires are limited by numerous obstacles. And secondly, even if they act in accordance with their desires, they do it rather not like kings, but like slaves worthy of scourging, living in fear that their secret depravity will be revealed, and they will be judged and punished. (3) Is freedom really reduced only to intemperance and foul language? “Whoever commits sin is a slave of sin,” (...) says the apostle. 536 (31.1) How can a person, mired in all sorts of passions, be considered living according to God’s law, if the Lord himself commanded: “I tell you, do not covet?” (2) Is it permissible to deliberately pursue sin, to make adultery a principle, to spend one's fortune on pleasures, and to destroy the marriages of others, if even those who accidentally commit sin are to be pitied? (3) Even if they find themselves in a world alien to them and do not remain faithful to this other world, they should not sin against the truth. (4) Should a foreigner insult or treat citizens unjustly? Shouldn't he rather behave as a guest should and live in accordance with the customs of the country, without offending the citizens in any way? (5) Acting no better than the pagans who disregard the laws, all these criminals, immoral types, money-grubbers and adulterers, how can they still consider themselves Gnostics, the only ones who know God? (6) Only by leading a righteous life in foreign countries can they demonstrate their royal dignity. (32:1) Having thus chosen a lawless life, they deserved hatred from both the human law (νομοθέταις) and the Divine. It is not for nothing that the one who shot the libertine is called blessed by God in the Book of Numbers (Num. 25:8). (2) “If we say,” John writes in his epistle, “that we are one with Him,” that is, with God, “but walk in darkness, we lie and do not act in accordance with the truth. If we walk in the light, since He is light, then we are one with Him and the Blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.” 537 (33, 1) How, then, can those who do this be better than worldly people if they act like the worst of the worldly? Similar, I think, is the nature of their deeds. (2) If they claim to have advantages by birth, they should also demonstrate superiority of character in order to escape prison. (3) The Lord truly says: “Unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matthew 5:20). (4) The book of Daniel shows abstinence from food (Dan. 1:10). In short, David speaks of obedience in the psalm: “How should a young man straighten his way?” The answer is immediate: “Keeping your word with all your heart” (Ps. 119:9–10). (5) Jeremiah says: “Thus says the Lord: Do not enter into the way of the heathen” (Jer. 10:2). (34, 1) Next. Some insignificant wicked people (μιαροί και ούτιδανοί) claim that the human race was created by different forces: everything from above to the navel is a divine creation, the rest was created by lower forces. For this reason, a person strives for sexual intercourse. 538 However, the fact that the upper part of the body also requires food and exhibits lust escaped them. All this contradicts the words of Christ addressed to the Pharisees, where he says that the same God created both the external and the internal man (Luke 11:40). Moreover, desire does not come from the body, although it manifests itself through it. (3) There is another group that can be called Opponents (Άντιτάκτας). According to their teaching, God, the creator of everything, is our father by nature, and everything that is created by him is good. However, one of those who came after him sowed tares, which sprang up in the form of evil. By surrounding us with evil, he turns us against the Father. (4) For this reason we rebel against him in defense of the Father, resisting the will of this second. Therefore, for example, since it was this second one who said: “You shall not commit adultery,” we should commit adultery in order to destroy his commandment. (35:1) We answer to these and others like them that it is not for nothing that we were taught to distinguish false prophets, who by their actions only imitate the truth. But your deeds are witnesses against you. How can you still claim that you are following the truth? (2) Either evil does not exist at all, in which case the one whom you accuse of opposing God does not deserve condemnation and did not create anything evil (that is, there was no fruit or tree); or, if evil really exists, they should be told what they think about the commandments of righteousness, self-control, moderation, patience, and the like. Are they good or evil? (3) If the covenant that prohibits doing something shameful is not itself good, then evil testifies against itself, destroying itself, which is impossible. If the covenant is good, then by opposing it, they admit that they are resisting good by acting unrighteously. (36:1) After all, the Savior himself, the only one worthy of obedience in their opinion, himself stood on the path of hatred and enmity, saying: “When going to court with your opponent, try to reach an amicable agreement.” 539 (2) They must, therefore, either persist in the struggle with their opponent, neglecting the covenant of Christ, or reach an agreement and abandon the litigation. (3) Isn’t it obvious to you, my friends (I’m addressing them as if they were here with me right now), that by fighting against the good commandments you are resisting your own salvation? It is not the precious covenant that you overthrow, but yourselves. (4) “Your good works will shine,” says the Lord (Matthew 5:16). You are demonstrating your promiscuity. (5) If you have already decided to destroy the commandments of the lawgiver, then why do you direct your efforts only against “Thou shalt not commit adultery” and “Thou shalt not corrupt the youth” 540 and similar commandments aimed at strengthening self-control? Why don’t you strive to destroy winter - after all, he created it too - and create summer in the midst of the cold? Why don’t you strive to make the land navigable and the sea passable, as the barbarian Xerxes wanted, according to historians 541? (37, 1) Why do you not contradict all the commandments without exception? It is said, for example: “Be fruitful and multiply.” In your consistent opposition, you should therefore completely renounce intercourse. It is said: “I give you everything for food and enjoyment.” 542 Shouldn't you, on the contrary, abstain from all pleasure? (2) In addition, it is said: “An eye for an eye.” Therefore, if you do this literally, you should not respond to any action with opposition at all. He commanded that a fine of four times be collected from the thief. Should you, on the contrary, pay the thief? (3) Likewise, in opposing the commandment “Love the Lord,” you should show every kind of dislike towards the Creator of all things. And in response to what was said: “You shall not make carved or molded images,” you should worship idols. (4) How is it possible, recognizing opposition to the Creator as wicked, to be like and even superior to harlots and adulterers in one’s behavior? (5) Don’t you see that by your actions you are encouraging someone who, in your opinion, is weak, since it is his will that you carry out, and not the good God? And on the other hand, you yourself demonstrate the weakness of the one you call your father. (38:1) These same people extract extracts from various prophetic writings, composing and arranging them very perversely, taking literally what should be understood allegorically. (2) As they claim, the Scripture says: “They tempted God, but remained safe” (Mal. 3:15). Adding “shameless God,” they perceive this as a covenant, by fulfilling which they will achieve salvation, resisting the Demiurge. (3) But this passage in Scripture does not speak of a “shameless God”! And even if so, it means that this is not at all what seemed to them in their foolishness. After all, the devil is called “shameless”, it makes no difference whether you call it the enemy of humanity, the executioner of sinners, or the apostate. (4) In any case, the people spoken of in this passage resisted punishment for their sins. And they resisted and grumbled in this passage because other peoples did not bear punishment for their sins, but they received retribution for the slightest sin. After all, Jeremiah also says: “Why is the path of sinners so easy?” (Jer. 12:1). Malachi's statement, "They tempted God, but remained safe," is obviously also about this. (5) Generally speaking, the prophets in their prophetic utterances do not simply record what they heard from God, but also narrate the murmurs of the people and answer the objections raised, as if they were writing an account of events from a human point of view. Our statement is just such an example. (39:1) Is it not about this kind of people that the apostle speaks in the Epistle to the Romans: “And shall we not do evil that good may come out, as some slander and say that we teach so? Righteous is the judgment against such” (Rom. 3:8). (2.) These men read the Scripture, adjusting it to the tone of their voice, that it may serve their pleasure. They deliberately place emphasis and change punctuation so that the meaning of the text changes in accordance with their desires. (3) “You provoke the wrath of God with your words,” says Malachi, “and wonder: “How have we angered him?” Yes, by saying that everyone who does evil is good in the eyes of the Lord, and as if he favors such people, or by asking, “Where is the God of justice?” ( Mal. 2:17 ). V. About the two extremes to which heretics fall (40, 1) Without going further into this subject and leaving aside the most scandalous details, and also out of a desire to avoid a detailed analysis of all of them separately and not wanting to drag out our narrative beyond measure, we will answer them all together, dividing the heresies into two groups. (2) Namely, some of them preach a way of life where there is no difference between the righteous and the unrighteous, while some, in excessive asceticism and out of a desire for ungodly opposition, take too high a note. (3) Let's start with the first ones. Since a person has the right to choose any way of life, it is quite obvious that he can choose asceticism. Moreover, if no way of life can harm the elect, then this is all the more true for [a way of life] that is righteous and prudent. (4) And since the “Lord of the Sabbath” is given the right not to pay even for an ungodly life, then a person leading an orderly social life is even less accountable. (5) “Everything is permissible for me,” says the apostle, “but not everything is profitable” (1 Cor. 6:12). It is clear that permissiveness is impossible without self-discipline. (41, 1) He who exercises his right to choose righteously deserves respect to the same extent as the one who gave us this right to choose, allowing us to live as we wish. By not allowing us to deviate from the righteous path and fall into inevitable slavery, he deserves even more respect. (2) The possibility of choosing between promiscuity and self-discipline is not scary in itself. But they are valued differently. The one who strives for pleasure indulges his bodily desires, while the one who has chosen asceticism, on the contrary, frees his soul from passions, and the soul as a result achieves control over bodily desires. (3) Indeed, we are “called to freedom,” as long as “freedom is not a pretext for pleasing the flesh,” as the apostle says (Gal. 5:13). (4) If, as they advise, we agree to indulge our passions and begin to be indifferent to a shameless life, then we should either submit in everything to our desires and thus fall into all kinds of depravity and unrighteousness in full accordance with the desire of our teachers, (5) or, in an effort to avoid an unrighteous life, we should curb some of our desires and not indulge the lowest of our passions - animal and sexual - which force our body to serve themselves to please. (6) Lust grows and comes to life if we serve it, and on the contrary, it goes out if we restrain it. (42, 1) Is it possible for a person overcome by bodily passions to become like the Lord or to achieve Divine knowledge? Pleasure comes from passion, while passion arises from dissatisfaction, being a desire for something missing. 543 (2) Those who have chosen this way of life, as it seems to me: ... they will only add grief to humiliation, - as the famous expression says 544, bringing upon oneself trouble now and in the future. (3) If everything were allowed and there was no danger of losing their last hope due to unrighteous deeds, perhaps then this would justify their bad lives. (4) However, in the commandments we constantly encounter examples of righteous living. And we must follow them exactly, avoiding erroneous interpretations and fearing to miss any, even the smallest, details. Let us follow where the Word leads us, but if we stumble, we should know that in this case we cannot avoid “immortal evil.” 545 (5) Let us follow the path of Divine Scripture, the path of the faithful, and, as far as possible, let us become like the Lord. And we should not live indifferently to good and evil, but, having purified ourselves as much as possible from the desire for pleasure and passions, let us take care of our soul, directing all efforts exclusively to divine objects. (6) For if the mind is pure and free from all evil, it is somehow capable of receiving divine power and the image of God is installed in it. “Everyone who has this hope in the Lord is purified,” as it is said, “because he is clean” (1 John 3:3). (43, 1) Those who are in the power of their passions are not able to achieve Divine gnosis. And if they have not achieved gnosis, then they have no hope. Those who have reached this point seem to be guilty of ignorance of God, and this ignorance manifests itself in the style of their lives. (2) It is absolutely impossible for a person who has knowledge not to feel shame because he is unable to cope with his bodily passions. Their statement that the highest good is pleasure is in no way consistent with the [well-known] position that beauty is good (τό καλόν αγαθόν). Beauty of this kind is possible only in the Lord, goodness is only possible in God, therefore only he is the only worthy object of love. (3) “In him you are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of sin of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ.” (4) “So if you have been resurrected together with Christ, then seek and think on things above, and not on earthly things. For you are dead and your life is hidden with Christ in God.” All this is poorly consistent with the sexual promiscuity to which they call. (5) “Mortify your members on the earth—fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil lust.” They must get rid of “anger, rage, malice, foul language,” and “having put off the old man with his deeds, put on the new man, who is renewed in knowledge in the image of him who created him.” 546 (44, 1) A person’s lifestyle clearly shows whether he follows the commandments or not, since only in the first case is his behavior meaningful. (2) A tree is known by its fruit rather than by its flowers or leaves. Likewise, true knowledge (gnosis) is revealed in the fruits of actions, not in the flowers of words. (3) For we call gnosis not bare words, but the science (knowledge) of the divine nature, the light that penetrates the soul through the observance of the commandments, which allows us to achieve complete clarity in the knowledge of everything that is in development and, preparing for the awareness of our nature and “knowing ourselves,” teaches how to appear before the face of God. For knowledge is to the mind as the eyes are to the body. 547 (4) The slavish pursuit of pleasure is no more freedom than bitter is sweet. We call true freedom only the freedom that the Lord gave us, saving us from desires, passions and other sensual desires. “Everyone who says, “I know the Lord,” but does not follow his commandments is a liar. There is no truth in his words,” says John (1 John 2:4). VI. About Gnostics who practice excessive asceticism (45, 1) But what shall we answer to those who use religious phraseology to justify their evil practice of abstinence from all created things, who speak out against the holy creator, the one and only God, and who say that we should abstain from marriage and childbearing, so as not to breed such unfortunates as food for death? Let us first remember the words of the Apostle John: (2) “Many Antichrists have now appeared, and from this we know that the last time has come. They came from us, but they were not ours. If they had been ours, they would have remained with us” (1 John 2:18–19). (3) Next, let us refute them, showing that they misinterpret the words of Scripture. When Salome asked the Lord, “How long will death have power?” - he answered her: “As long as women give birth to children.” 548 These words do not imply that life is evil or that creation is ruinous. Here we are talking only about the natural order of things, because death always follows birth. (46, 1) The law exists to turn us away from excesses and a disorderly lifestyle. His goal is to lead us from an unrighteous life to a righteous one, to teach us responsibility through the experience of marriage, raising children and social life. (2) The Lord came “not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.” And the very possibility of fulfilling the law presupposes that it was not defective. The prophecies came after the law and were fulfilled thanks to its presence, since the rules for the right life were revealed to righteous people by the power of reason even before the written law. (3) Most people do not know the art of self-discipline. They live the life of the flesh and not the spirit, but a body without a spirit is only dust and decay. (4) The Lord condemns even depraved thoughts. So why can’t we maintain self-discipline in marriage without trying to tear apart what “God put together”? This is exactly what the destroyers of family ties call for, casting a shadow on the name of a Christian. (5) They say that copulation is dirty, forgetting that they themselves arose as a result of copulation. Aren't they themselves dirty in this case? On the contrary, I think that a holy man has holy seed. (47:1) For not only our spirit becomes holy, but also our character, life and body. How else can we understand the words of the Apostle Paul that the wife is sanctified by the husband, and the husband by the wife? (1 Cor. 7:14). (2) Was it not in this sense that the Lord answered the one who asked Him about divorce and whether Moses allowed his wife to go away? “Because of your hardness of heart, he said so. Have you not heard what God said to the first man: “You must become one flesh.” Anyone who divorces his wife for any reason other than adultery commits adultery himself.” (3) But after the resurrection, it is further said, “they no longer marry or are given in marriage.” 549 The following is said about food and the stomach: “Food is for the belly and the belly is for food, but God will destroy both” (1 Cor. 6:13). Thus he condemned those who think that they should live in the likeness of goats and bulls, who devour and gouge to no avail. (48:1) But if they have indeed already reached the state after the resurrection, as is stated, and for this reason do not marry, then why do they not also refuse to eat and drink? After all, the apostle said that food and belly will disappear after the resurrection. (2) If they have already been resurrected, then why do they still experience thirst, hunger and physical suffering, that is, all the things from which those who have achieved the fullness of the resurrection through Christ should be free? What's the problem? After all, even some of the idolaters fast and abstain from sex. (3) It is said that “the kingdom of God does not consist of eating and drinking” (Rom. 14:17). Even magicians can abstain from wine, meat and sex by an effort of will, although they worship angels and demons. Just as moderation is a form of humility and does not involve mockery of the flesh, so asceticism is a spiritual virtue of a private nature, and not for show. (49:1) There are those among them who believe that marriage is debauchery. They claim that he is the work of the devil, but they themselves must become like the Lord in everything, who did not marry and did not have any property. They take pride in the fact that they seem to have achieved a deeper understanding of the meaning of the Gospel that is not available to others. (2) “God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble,” they were told as a warning. 550 (3) Moreover, they apparently do not understand why the Lord did not marry. Firstly, He already had a bride - His Church, and secondly, He was not an ordinary person and therefore did not need a partner for sexual intercourse. Finally, He had no need to produce children. After all, He Himself is the Only Begotten Son of God and has existed from eternity. (4) And it is He who says: “Man should not separate what is united by God.” And again: “But as it was in the days of Noah, when people married, gave in marriage, built houses, laid out gardens, so it was in the days of Lot, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.” 551 (5) That this is not said about the pagans is clear from the following: “When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?” (Luke 8:18). (6) And further: “Woe to them that are pregnant and to those who nurse at the breast in those days.” 552 This last statement should, however, be understood allegorically. That is why he did not precisely define the times “which the Father has appointed in his power” (Acts 1:7), so that everything in the world would follow the order of origin. (50:1) What do we say about these words: “Not everyone can comprehend this word, but only the one to whom it is given. There are eunuchs from birth, there are eunuchs who became such because of people, and there are eunuchs who castrated themselves for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven. Whoever can contain it, let him contain it” (Matthew 19:12). (2) They probably did not understand that it was precisely after His words about divorce, when the disciples asked Him that “if this is the duty of a husband to his wife, then isn’t it better not to marry at all?” - He answered them that “not everyone can comprehend this word, but only the one to whom it is given.” (3) So the questioners wanted to know whether there was any benefit in remarrying after one wife had been expelled due to infidelity. (4) It is known that many athletes abstained from sexual intercourse in order to maintain physical strength. Astilus of Croton, for example, or Krizon from Himera did this. And kifaret Amibeus married a second time, but did not touch his wife. 553 Aristotle of Cyrene was the only one who did not succumb to the charms of Laida. 554 (51, 1) They say that he promised the hetaera to take her with him if she would help him in the fight against his enemies. When she really helped, he fulfilled his oath in an unexpected way: he ordered as accurate an image of her as possible and placed it in Cyrene. A detailed account of this can be found in Ister of Kirensky’s book “On Remarkable Types.” 555 From this we can conclude that not all abstinence deserves respect, but only that which is done for the sake of love for God. (2) Concerning those who oppose marriage, the blessed Paul says: “In the last times some will depart from the faith, listening to seducing spirits and teachings of demons, forbidding eating and marrying.” 556 (3) He says: “Do not allow anyone to deceive you with self-willed humility and exhaustion of the flesh.” And in another place: “Are you united with your wife? Don't look for a divorce. Are you left without a wife? Don't look for a wife." And again: “Every man should have a wife to avoid the trap of Satan.” 557 (52, 1) Didn’t the ancients accept with gratitude everything created in this world? Haven't you gotten married and had children without losing self-control? The ravens brought bread and meat to Elijah, and the prophet Samuel brought a ham and gave it to Saul for food. 558 (2) They in every possible way emphasize the superiority of their way of life, but their deeds do not even come close to comparing with those merits. (3) “If anyone eats, do not despise him who does not eat; and if he who does not eat, do not condemn him who does eat; for God has accepted him” (Rom. 14:3). (4) And the Lord Himself says this about Himself: “Behold, John came, neither eating nor drinking, and they said of him that he was possessed by a demon. The Son of Man came, eating and drinking, and they say that a man has come who loves to eat and drink, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.” The apostles also deserve criticism in this case, because Peter and Philip produced children, and Philip even gave his daughter in marriage. 559 (53, 1) Paul in one of his letters clearly addresses his wife (τήν αύτοΰ... σύζυγον), whom he did not take with him only for the sake of ease of travel. 560 (2) In one of his letters he says: “Can’t we have a woman as a companion as a sister, like the other apostles?” (1 Cor. 9:5). (3) The apostles devoted all their time to ministry, but took women with them, more as sisters than wives, so that they would help them preach to women, penetrating without hindrance to places where access to men was closed. (4) The order made by the noble Paul regarding the ministry of women in the second letter to Timothy is also known. 561 This same author said that “the kingdom of God is not food and drink,” or abstinence from wine and meat, “but righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (Rom. 14:17). (5) Which of them walks in sheep's clothing, girded with a leather belt, like Elijah, or in one bandage and barefoot, like Isaiah? Or wearing only a lion's apron, like Jeremiah? Which of them would be able to follow John's Gnostic lifestyle? Even while living this way, the blessed prophets still gave praise to the Creator. (54, 1) We have given enough examples of overthrowing the “righteousness” of the Carpocrats and their friends in outrages. After the words “give to the one who asks,” Scripture goes on to say: “Do not reject the one who asks to borrow.” This is the kind of intimacy that Scripture speaks of, not the kind of intimacy that is depraved. (2) How can it happen that there is one who asks, one who receives, and one who borrows, but there is no one who possesses, who gives, or who lends money? (3) Isn’t that what the Lord says: “I was hungry and you gave Me food, I was thirsty and you gave Me something to drink, I was a stranger and you let Me into your house, I was naked and you clothed Me.” And further: “Because you did it to one of the weak, you did it to Me.” (4) And in the Old Testament it is also said: “Everyone who gives to the poor lends to God” and “do not miss the opportunity to do good to the needy.” 562 (55, 1) And further it says: “Let mercy and truth not forsake you” and “the lazy hand makes the poor, but the hand of the diligent makes rich.” And again: “Look, here is a man accepted who never gives his money on interest” and “with his wealth a man redeems his soul.” 563 The cosmos consists of opposites, hot and cold, dry and wet, as well as givers and receivers. (2) By saying: “If you want to become perfect, sell your goods and give the money to the poor,” he shows the person who supposedly “kept all the commandments from a young age” that he did not fulfill one of them, namely, the commandment “to love your neighbor as yourself.” 564 The Lord wanted him to achieve perfection by learning to share with his neighbor out of love. (56:1) So, he did not prohibit acquiring wealth in an honest way, condemning only unjust and unjust enrichment. “Wealth is exhausted by vanity,” “some sow generously, and more is added to him, while others are thrifty beyond measure, yet become poor.” Of such it is said: “He was generous, he gave to the poor: his righteousness endures forever.” 565 (2) “He who sows generously and gathers even more” is one who does not skimp, giving away his earthly possessions, receiving an eternal reward in heaven. The other, the greedy one, “gathers up treasures for himself on earth, where moth and rust destroy them.” It is said about such people that they “put their accumulated money in a purse with a hole.” 566 (3) The Lord tells a parable in the Gospel about the land of such a person. When one year the land brought a rich harvest, he decided to build large granaries and said to himself: “I have a lot of goods for many years: eat, drink, be merry.” “You fool,” the Lord said to him, “this night your soul will be taken from you. Who will get what you have prepared?” (Luke 12:16–20). (57, 1) Self-control (ἐγκράτεια), according to the views of Hellenic philosophers, is rather overcoming desire than serving it, taking into account practical benefits. We believe that abstinence should consist of the ability to achieve control over desires. The problem is not to learn not to experience desires or to keep them under control all the time, but to be able to control them through willpower. (2) But such control over oneself can only be achieved by God’s grace, which is why it is said: “Ask and it will be given to you.” (3) Mercy of this kind was granted, for example, to Moses, who, although his body was protected by clothing, experienced neither hunger nor thirst for forty days (Ex. 24:18). (4) It is better to be a healthy person than a sick person who constantly talks about health. It is better to have light than to dream about it. It is better to have the ability of genuine self-control than the semblance of self-control taught by philosophers. (5) Where there is light, there is no place for darkness. But in the case when passion is deeply rooted in consciousness, even in solitude, when sensual desire has subsided, the mental desire to connect with the absent object of desire still remains. (58, 1) Continuing our discussion about marriage, food and similar things, let us formulate a general principle: in no case should we yield to the call of passion in our actions, but desires should be coordinated with what is necessary. We are children of will, not passion. (2) Having married for the sake of having children, the husband must be able to control his desires. He should not covet even his wife, having brotherly love for her and doing what is necessary to produce children with due respect and discipline. We must learn, without taking into account physical desires, “to conduct ourselves as in the day, decently, that is, in Christ and in the full light of the way of the Lord, not indulging in drunkenness, debauchery, quarrels, or envy” (Rom. 13:14-13). (59, 1) Having mentioned one of the types of control over our desires, namely, the curbing of sexual passion, it is impossible not to remember also everything else that our soul strives for, indulging its desires, and instead of limiting itself to the necessary, it wastes itself in the pursuit of luxury. (2) Complete control over oneself also presupposes indifference to money, comforts, property, disdain for shows, the ability to curb one’s speech and evil thoughts. We know that even some angels lost control of their sexual desires, causing them to fall to earth (Gen. 6:2). (3) Valentine says this [about Jesus] in his letter to Agathope: “In everything He showed control over Himself. Revealing the divinity of His nature, Jesus ate and drank in a unique way 567 without throwing up the food. The power of His self-control was so great that food was not destroyed within Him, since He Himself is not subject to corruption.” (4) Let us indulge in the practice of self-restraint out of love for the Lord and for His glory, consecrating His sacred church. This is the good of “becoming a eunuch”, getting rid of all sensual passions, “for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven” and “cleansing your thoughts from the fruits of death for the sake of serving the living God.” 568 (60:1) Those who reject family ties and food out of ungrateful hatred of everything corporeal are unrighteous and wicked, but also unreasonable, however, like the majority of those living in this world. (2) Brahmins, for example, abstain from meat and wine, allowing themselves, like us, a little food every day or every other day, as Alexander Polyhistor writes about this in his History of India. 569 However, they are not afraid of death and do not value life, because they believe in reincarnation. (3) […] 570 They worship Hercules and Pan. The so-called “holy people” of the Indus walk naked all their lives, tirelessly seeking true knowledge and mastery in predicting the future. They also worship certain pyramids, under which, as they believe, lie the bones of a certain god. 571 (4) “Holy people,” also called gymnosophists, do not have wives, considering this unnatural and illegal. They maintain ritual purity, as do the “holy women.” They also say that they observe the movements of heavenly bodies and predict the future based on various signs. VIII. Correct interpretation of some passages from Scripture “Sin has no power over you” (Rom. 6:14) (61, 1) Teachers of moral relativism incorrectly interpret several passages of Scripture, thus justifying their lust. This is especially true of the famous saying: “Sin has no power over you, for you are not subject to the law, but to grace” (Rom. 6:14). I can recall other similar places, but I consider it best to omit them, since I’m not equipping a pirate ship! However, it is not difficult to refute them. (2) After all, with the very next phrase the noble apostle personally incriminates them: “What then? Will we sin because we are not under the law, but under grace? No way!" Thus, with one inspired and prophetic line, all their cunning arguments justifying lust are destroyed. (62, 1) They probably do not know that “we all have to appear before the judgment of Christ, where everyone will receive according to what he did while living in the body, good or bad,” that is, everyone will receive retribution for all the deeds done through the body. (2) “He who is born again in Christ” is already without sin. “The past is gone”, we have washed away the old life. “Look, a new thing has arisen,” chastity instead of debauchery, temperance instead of licentiousness, righteousness instead of lawlessness. “For what fellowship has righteousness with iniquity? What does light have in common with darkness? What agreement is there between Christ and Belial? Or what is the complicity of the faithful with the infidel? What is the relationship between the church of God and idols? “Having these promises, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” 572 IX. “I have come to destroy the work of a woman” (Gospel of the Egyptians) (63, 1) Those who blaspheme the Divine creation, hiding behind a pious mask of self-restraint, quote the words of Solome, which were already mentioned earlier. They seem to come from the Gospel of the Egyptians. (2) There the following words are attributed to the Savior: “I came to destroy the labors of a woman.” “Woman” means desire, and her deeds mean birth and death. What are they trying to say with all this? Is it being argued that the order of the world must be destroyed? Hardly. The world remains the same as it was before. (3) But the Lord could not lie. This means that in fact he came to destroy the works of passion: the thirst for profit, the lustful pursuit of women and boys, voluptuous gluttony, extravagance and the like. Their birth signifies the death of the soul when we “die in trespasses” (Eph. 2:5). And this happens because of “female” irresponsibility. (4) Origin and destruction will inevitably accompany each other in the world until the time comes for the destruction of everything and the restoration of the elect (ἀποκατόιστασις έκλοψή), when the beings now mixed with the material world will return to their original state. (64, 1) Therefore, Solome’s words are actually about final destruction. “How long will people continue to die?” she asks. It should be borne in mind that Scripture speaks of people in two senses - bodily and spiritual. The second will be saved, the first will not. Sin is called the death of the soul. For this reason, the Lord answers allegorically: “As long as women give birth,” that is, as long as passion retains its strength. (2) “Therefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death spread to all men, because all sinned. And death reigned from Adam to Moses,” says the apostle (Rom. 5:12, 14). Thus, naturally and by virtue of the Divine dispensation, death follows birth, and the soul unites with the body in order to soon leave it. (3) The purpose of birth is learning and knowledge, and the purpose of death is subsequent restoration. A woman is the cause of death because she gives birth, but for the same reason she is the source of life. (65, 1) That which gave the beginning to all is therefore called “Life” (Gen. 3:20), for, being the originator of all who are born and sin, she is the foremother of both the unrighteous and the righteous in equal measure. After all, each of us manifests ourselves in one way or another. (2) I doubt that in the following words the apostle shows contempt for life in the flesh: “With all boldness, now as always, Christ will be magnified in my body, whether by life or death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. If life in the flesh brings fruit to my work, then I don’t know what to choose. I am attracted by both: I have a desire to be resolved and to be with Christ, because this is incomparably better. But it is more necessary for you to remain in the flesh” (Phil. 1:20–24). (3) By saying this, he clearly shows, as it seems to me, that the love of God causes the desire to leave the body, while remaining in the corporeal shell is necessary for the sake of those who need salvation. (66, 1) They, of course, omit the continuation of the conversation with Solomeya, thereby proving that they are interested in everything except the truth and faithful adherence to the Gospel canon. (2) She further says: “Then it is better for me not to bear children,” believing that childbearing is not a woman’s responsibility. The Lord answers her: “Eat every plant except the one that is bitter.” (3) This means that every woman, of her own free will, and not necessarily and by virtue of a covenant, chooses marriage or abstinence. This is also explained by the statement that procreation is a contribution to the cause of creation. (67, 1) There is no sin in consciously choosing to live in marriage if bearing and raising children does not seem too difficult. (For for many to remain childless is a great grief.) At the same time, if a woman does not consider having children a distraction in her path to God, and she is not attracted to a single life, she has a good right to desire marriage, since there is nothing wrong with moderate desires, and every woman has the right to decide for herself whether she should have children or not. (2) From this it is clear that some condemn marriage and abstain from it not at all for the sake of holy gnosis, but out of hatred of everything human and having wasted Christian love. Others, on the contrary, marry to satisfy their lust, hiding behind the authority of the law, turning, as the prophet says, “into the likeness of animals” (Ps. 49:12, 20). X. Interpretation of Matt. 18:20 (68:1) Who are those two or three who are gathered in the name of Christ with the Lord among them? (Matthew 28:20). Doesn't this indicate a husband, wife and their child? The wife is united with her husband by God himself. (2) But if a person wants to remain alone, and avoids having children because it distracts him from business, then, as the apostle says, “would it not be better for him to remain single, like me” (1 Cor. 7:8). (3) Their understanding of the role of the Lord is as follows: in relation to many they speak of the Creator, thanks to whom everything came into being, in relation to one they speak of the Savior of the elect, the Son of another - good - God. (4) But this is not true, for God through His Son is equally with those who marry and bear children and with those who rationally practice self-control. And it's the same God. (5) This statement can be understood in another way. The triad can mean passion, desire and mind 573 or body, soul and spirit. (69, 1) It is also possible that the triad of which we speak indicates, firstly, the called, secondly, the chosen, and thirdly, the race of beings who are awarded the highest honor. The power of God, indivisibly distributed within them, supervises all other beings. (2) Therefore, everyone who makes proper use of the natural powers of his soul strives for what is due to him and hates everything harmful, as it is said about this: “Bless those who bless you and hate those who hate you” (Gen. 12:3). (3) Having risen above passions and desires and imbued with love for all creation, for the sake of God the Creator of all, a person begins to live a gnostic life, easily controlling all his desires, like the Savior, combining knowledge, faith and love into a single and indivisible whole. (4) His judgments become true and truly spiritual, and his thoughts are completely cleansed of the admixture of passions and desires. He is finally recreated by a skilled architect “in the image” of the Lord and becomes a perfect man, worthily called the brother of the Lord, at the same time his friend and son. It is in this sense that two or three are spoken of gathered together in one Gnostic. (70, 1) The agreement of many with the triad in which the Lord dwells can also mean one church, one human being, one race. (2) The Lord gave the law to one generation - the Jews. When He prophesied and sent Jeremiah to Babylon, and then called the Gentiles through prophecy, He gathered two nations together (Eph. 2:15). The third is undoubtedly the one new man formed from the two, in whom He walks and lives 574, that is, the Church. (3) Thus, the law, the prophets and the Gospel together in the name of Christ constitute a single entity - gnosis. (4) Those who resist marriage out of harm or, on the contrary, lustfully abuse their bodies, will not be included in the number of the saved with whom the Lord dwells. XI. Examples of Correct Interpretation of Scripture (71, 1) The examples given above are sufficient. Let us now consider those passages of Scripture where heretical sophisms are refuted and standards of conduct are established that should be followed in accordance with a reasonable decision. (2) An intelligent person will be able to evaluate the meaning of the relevant passages in order to apply them against heretics at the appropriate time and to refute those who try to counteract the commandments with their dogmas. (3) I have already quoted the well-known statement of the law: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.” This prohibition precedes the words of the Lord himself in the New Testament: “You have heard it said in the Law: “You shall not commit adultery.” I tell you: “Do not lust” 575. (4) The law encourages sexual intercourse between spouses within reasonable limits for the purpose of producing children. For this reason, unmarried men are prohibited by law from immediately taking possession of female captives captured in war. If a man desires such a woman, he must first allow her to cut her hair and go into mourning for thirty days, and only after this period, if his passion has still not passed, can he marry her for the sake of having children (Deut. 21:11-13). Within the allotted time, the first sexual impulse must give way to rational affection. (72:1) For the same reason, you will hardly find any mention of sexual intimacy with a pregnant woman in Scripture. Only after the birth and feeding of the child did the woman again come into contact with her husband. (2) You will find there that the father of Moses did just this, becoming the father of Moses only three years after the birth of Aaron (Ex. 7:7). (3) Even the family of Levi adhered to this natural law given by God, despite the fact that this family was much smaller in number than others who came to the promised land; (4) and it is not easy to increase the number of members of the clan if men communicate exclusively with their legal wives and each time they not only wait for some time after the woman has given birth to a child, but also after the end of the period of breastfeeding. (73, 1) We also see that Moses gradually accustomed the Jews to the practice of abstinence, forbidding them to indulge in sexual pleasures three days before they heard the words of God (Ex. 19:15). (2) “We will become the church of God,” said the prophet, “for I will live and walk among them, and will become their God, and they my people,” if we keep the commandments, individually and collectively as a Church. (3) “Therefore come ye out from among them, and separate yourselves, as the Lord hath said, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you. And I will be a Father to you, and you will be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.” 576 (4) Not from those who recognize marriage, as they claim, but from the pagans who are still living depraved lives, as well as from various unclean and godless heretics, which were previously mentioned, he calls for separation in very prophetic terms. (74:1) Paul also speaks out against such and like them, saying: “Having therefore, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” “For my zeal is the zeal of God, because I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you to Christ as an immaculate virgin.” 577 (2) The Church has received its Bridegroom and cannot marry another, but we have the right to marry whomever we wish, observing the law. I mean: getting married for the first time. (3) “But I am afraid that, just as the serpent deceived Eve with his cunning, so your minds may be corrupted, straying from the simplicity that is in Christ,” the apostle warns very thoroughly and morally. 578 (75, 1) And Peter, an amazing man, says this: “Beloved, I ask you, as strangers and strangers, to flee from the lusts of the flesh that have risen up in the soul, so that your life may be an example to the pagans. (2) This is the will of God, that by doing good we should stop the mouths of the ignorance of foolish people. Live freely, not as those who use freedom to cover up evil, but as servants of God.” 579 (3) Likewise in Romans: “We died to sin. How can we live in it? Our old man was crucified with Him, so that the body of sin might be abolished,” and so on until the words: “Do not yield up your members to sin as instruments of unrighteousness” (Rom. 6:2–13). (76, 1) But before moving further, let us note one more point. The Apostle preaches the same God in the law, in the prophetic writings, and in the Gospel. It is no coincidence that in his Epistle to the Romans he calls the words “thou shalt not covet” a law, which are actually found in the Gospel. 580 He speaks thus, knowing that from one and the same Father come the law, the prophetic writings, and the Gospel itself. (2) That is why it is written: “Is it really sin from the law? No way. But I knew sin no other way than through the law. For I would not understand desire if the law did not say: “Thou shalt not desire.” (3) Heterodoxes, who oppose the Creator, believe that Paul also contradicts him with them in the following expressions: “For I know that no good thing dwells in me, that is, in my flesh” 581 . But they forget what was said before and immediately after these words. After all, he says: “Sin lives in me,” which gives grounds to further assert that “nothing good lives in my flesh.” (77, 1) Then the following is said: “If I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but the sin that lives in me,” which, as he writes, “reacts” to the divine “law and the law of my mind and makes me captive to the law of sin that is in my members. Poor man I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? (2) Further (not getting tired for a minute from good labors!), he says without doubt: “The spiritual law has freed me from the law of sin and death,” for through His Son “God condemned sin in the flesh, so that the righteousness of the law would be fulfilled in us, who do not live according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.” (3) Explaining this, he exclaims: “The body is dead because of sin.” This means that the body, which is not a church for the soul, becomes its tomb. When it is dedicated to God, he continues, “The Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, and He will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.” (78, 1) Condemning lovers of pleasure, he further says (Rom. 8:5-15): “The carnal mind is death, for those who live in the flesh think about the things of the flesh, and the carnal mind is enmity against God, since it is not subject to the law of God.” The following words, that “those who live in the flesh cannot please God,” should be understood not as some believe, but as explained earlier. (2) Therefore, leaving these people, he turns to those who belong to the Church: “But you do not live according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit, if only the Spirit of God dwells in you. If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the spirit is alive because of righteousness. (3) So, brethren. We are not debtors to the flesh to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die, but if by the Spirit you mortify the bodies of the flesh, you will live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.” (4) And further, in opposition to the so-called “nobility” and “freedom”, which heterodoxians boast no less than permissiveness, he adds: “Because you did not receive the spirit of slavery in order to live in fear again, but you received the spirit of adoption, by which we cry: Abba, Father!” (5) That is, we have received the Spirit, through whom we come to know the One to whom we pray, the true Father, one for all, who, as befits a father, educates us and teaches us to get rid of fear. XII. Examples of Correct Interpretation of Scripture (continued) (79, 1) “Do not turn away from one another, except by consent, for a time to pray” (1 Cor. 7:5) - this is also an example of instruction in curbing your desires. “By consent” this should be done so as not to destroy the marriage union, but “temporarily” in order to protect the husband, who is temporarily in need of abstinence, from sin, since otherwise he could, by deceiving his wife, subsequently descend into debauchery. (2) For the same reason the apostle says that anyone who considers it indecent for his adult daughter to remain a virgin should give her in marriage (1 Cor. 7:36). (3) Everyone has the right to either remain single or get married for the sake of having children, in any case avoiding moral decline. (4) If a person strives for such a life, he will achieve even greater dignity in the eyes of God due to his righteousness and intelligence. If he deviates from what was established on the path to glory […] 582 he will lose hope. (5) Singleness and family life differ in their mission and form of service to the Lord. I mean taking care of my wife and children. The value of family life lies in the fact that it gives a man the opportunity to learn in practice how to manage a common household. (6) Therefore the apostle advises that bishops should be chosen from among those who have already mastered the art of governing their own households before they undertake to govern the Church. (7) Thus each one can do exactly the work to which he is called, while remaining free in Christ and without losing the opportunity to receive the reward he deserves. 583 (80, 1) About the law he speaks allegorically like this: “A married woman is bound to her husband by law while he lives,” and so on. And in another place: “A wife is bound by the law as long as her husband lives. If her husband died, she is free to marry whomever she wants, only in the Lord. But she will be happier if she remains like this.” 584 (2) The first of these sayings he wanted to say: “You will die to the law” - not to marriage - “that you may belong to another who has risen from the dead” (Rom. 7:4), as a bride and the Church. After all, the Church, like a bride, must be pure equally from internal thoughts that contradict the truth, and from external temptations, for example, attachment to heretical sects that incline her to betray her only husband, who is God Almighty; so that “as the serpent tempted Eve,” whose name is “Life,” we would not succumb to the temptation of heretical seducers and not break the commandments. (3) The second passage talks about monogamy. One should not think, as some teach, that the bonds that bind husband and wife are like the attachment of the body to death. Through the above words, the apostle refutes the views of some atheists who claim that marriage is an invention of the devil, thus defaming the Creator. (81, 1) The Syrian Tatian, if I remember correctly, held similar daring views. 585 In his essay “On Purification for the Sake of Christ,” he literally writes the following: “Agreement leads to prayer. Copulation puts an end to communication. Meetings of this kind are shameful. (2) They gather together for the sake of Satan and because of intemperance, and everyone who strives for this, as he shows, “serves two masters,” God, if he remains in harmony, and the devil, if he strives for uncontrollable discord and depravity.” (3) Thus he interprets the words of the apostle, constructing sophisms from true statements, turning them around in such a way as to obtain false conclusions from true premises. (4) We also recognize that intemperance and debauchery are passions inspired by the devil, but the consent achieved through a prudent marriage occupies a middle position. Self-control leads to prayer, sanctified marriage leads to the birth of children. (5) Begetting children at the right time is called knowledge in Scripture. After all, it is said: “And Adam knew his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to a son, and called his name Seth, because, she said, God gave me another seed instead of Abel” (Gen. 4:25). (6) Do you see now who is blasphemed by those who speak with contempt of the prudent seed and call birth the work of the devil? I will also note that in Scripture in this place it is not spoken of a “certain” god, but of the Almighty Himself, as the definite article clearly indicates. (82, 1) The addition of the apostle “so that we do not return to the same thing again for the sake of Satan” is intended to prevent attempts to enter into depraved relations with others. The "temporary agreement" is intended to curb natural desires, but not to destroy them completely, so he calls for the restoration of family ties, and not promiscuous debauchery, which is the work of the devil, in order to prevent the very possibility of intemperance, depravity and falling into the hands of the devil. (2) Tatian also distinguishes between the “old” and the “new” man, but not in the same way as we do. We agree with him, distinguishing between the “old” man of the Law and the “new” man of the Gospel, but we do not at all call on this basis to reject the Law as the creation of another god. (3) The same man and the same God has renewed all that was old, and he no longer encourages polygamy (as was formerly the case when there was need of increasing population), but introduces monogamy, for the sake of the birth of children, and also for the management of the household, for which purpose a wife is given to the husband. (4) If a man is unable to restrain himself and is “burned” with passion, the apostle, “out of compassion,” allows him to marry again (1 Cor. 7:9.36), and this is not a sin from the point of view of the Covenant (since it is not prohibited by law), but such a person is undoubtedly unable to fulfill the requirements of the Gospel to perfection. (5) He will, on the contrary, earn heavenly glory if he remains celibate and remains unfailingly faithful to that union that was destroyed by death, faithfully awaiting what is prepared for him, and “unceasingly” serving the Lord (1 Cor. 7:35). (6) In the past, obligatory washing after copulation was prescribed, but even now Divine Providence still works through the Lord in the same way and invariably. And if the Lord says nothing about washing after sexual intercourse, it is because he cleansed those who believe in him with a single act of baptism, replacing the numerous washings prescribed by Moses with this one. (83, 1) In addition, the washing after fertilization prescribed in the ancient law is in fact a prophecy of resurrection, as rebirth by analogy with physical birth, and not at all an indication of the impurity of the conception procedure. After all, without the act of emission of semen, man would not have arisen. (2) Indeed, pregnancy is not determined by the frequency of copulation, but by the fact of the perception of the seed by the uterus. As you know, it is after this has happened that the embryo begins to develop naturally. (3) On what basis do they assert that marriage in the past was just an invention of the law, and that the union about which the Lord speaks is something else, if we now worship, as then, the same God? (4) “Man should not separate what God has joined together.” Right. No less than the son should do what the father commanded. This means that if we agree that the Lawgiver and the Evangelist are one and the same being, then we must admit that it cannot in any way fight against itself. The law is alive to the extent that it is understood spiritually and in the light of true knowledge. (5) We “died to the law through the body of Christ, that we might belong to another who was raised from the dead,” which was prophesied in the law, “that he might bear fruit to God.” (84, 1) “Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and righteous, and good” (Rom. 7:4–12). We died to the law, that is, to sin made manifest through the law; sin, which is not created by the law, but is manifested, since it shows what we ought to do and what not, and secret sin is revealed so that it becomes visible as it is. (2) If legal marriage is sinful, I don’t understand how they can continue to claim that they know God, while continuing to consider one of his commandments to be sinful? If the law is holy, then the marriage established by it must be holy. The apostle addresses this sacrament to Christ and the Church. (3) “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:4) does not speak of carnal birth, but of subsequent formation. Therefore, it is said that “children are holy”, as the fruits of love, when the words of the Lord lead the soul to God as a bride. (4) And of course, debauchery differs from legal marriage no less than the devil is separated from God. “You died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you might belong to another who was raised from the dead.” In these words it is implied that you have become more privy to instruction, as you listen to the truth in the law, by which the same Lord calls you from afar. (85:1) The “spirit” truly and clearly says about such people that “in the last times many will depart from the faith, listening to seducing spirits and demonic teachers, through the hypocrisy of liars, seared in their consciences, forbidding marriage and eating what God created to be eaten with thanksgiving by the faithful and those who know the truth. Every creation of God is good and nothing is reprehensible if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.” 586 (2) Therefore, there is no prohibition on marriage, nor on the consumption of meat and wine. And although it is said that “it is better not to eat meat, not to drink wine” if this can offend other people, and it is better to “remain as I am” 587, this only means that the one who accepts “with gratitude”, as well as the one who does not accept (also “with gratitude”), must be able to control himself and follow the word in his life. (86, 1) We see that the apostolic letters everywhere speak of self-control, give many instructions concerning marriage, the birth of children and housekeeping, nowhere do they condemn marriage, provided that it is prudent; on the contrary, maintaining continuity between the law and the Gospel, they equally encourage both the one who decides to marry with God’s help and the one who prefers celibacy, in accordance with the Lord’s will; as long as everyone follows their calling, making their choice responsibly and finally. (2) “The land of Jacob became famous more than all other lands,” says the prophet, glorifying the instrument of the spirit. 588 (3) Some belittle birth, calling it the source of decay and death, and distorting the actual state of affairs, assert that the Savior meant procreation, saying that we should not lay up treasures on earth, where they rust and are eaten by moths. In support of their fabrications, they shamelessly quote the following words of the prophet: “You will grow old like a garment, and moth will consume you” (Is. 50:9). (4) We do not contradict Scripture in any way when we affirm that our bodies are mortal and by nature changeable. The prophet predicted death for his listeners, most likely because he considered them sinners. The Lord is not talking about childbearing at all, but calls for sharing property, condemning those who accumulate wealth without wanting to help those in need. (87:1) Therefore he says: “Do not worry about food that perishes, but about food that endures eternal life.” They also quote the following line: “The children of this age neither marry nor are given in marriage” (Luke 20:35). (2) What is really being spoken of here is the resurrection from the dead, and anyone who will carefully read this answer will understand that the Lord in no way condemns marriage here, but “cures” some from the expectation of bodily pleasures after the resurrection. (3) “Children of this age” does not in itself mean that there are children of some “other age.” This means that this is the same as the statement “those born at this time,” that is, “children” simply because they were born and give birth themselves, because there are no such people who would arise apart from birth. Birth is then balanced by death so that those who are thus cut off from life no longer exist. (4) “You have only one Heavenly Father,” who, as the Demiurge, is the Creator of everything. “Therefore call no one father on earth” (Matthew 23:9). This means that the reason for your existence should not be considered the one who “sowed the seed”, because he is only a co-worker or even a servant of the One who gave you life. (88, 1) It was in this sense that he wanted us to turn back and, having become “like children” (Matthew 18:3), recognized our true father, being born again through washing, receiving our being from a new seed. (2) “The unmarried man cares about the things of the Lord, but the married man cares about how to please his wife,” as it is said. How so? Does this mean that it is impossible to both please your wife in a way acceptable to God and show respect to God? Can't a husband have sexual intercourse with his wife and still be pleasing to God? (3) Just as “an unmarried woman cares for the things of the Lord, so that she may be holy in both body and spirit,” 589 so a married woman cares for her husband’s things and the things of the Lord in the eyes of the Lord, remaining holy in both body and spirit. Both of them are holy in the eyes of the Lord, one as a wife, the other as a maiden. (4) The Apostle quite rightly, although somewhat raising his tone, condemns those who strive for a second marriage, directly declaring that “every other sin is outside the body, but the fornicator sins against his own body” (1 Cor. 6:18). (89:1) Those who dare to call marital union debauchery turn their blasphemy against the law and the Lord. Greed is called debauchery because it is the opposite of moderation; idolatry is debauchery because it is a betrayal of one God with many gods; in the same way, those who, instead of one legal wife, have relations with many, indulge in debauchery. The Apostle, as we have already noted 590, uses the terms debauchery and adultery in three senses. (2) “You were sold for your sins” and “you were corrupted in a foreign land,” says the prophet, meaning exactly this. 591 He refers to sexual intercourse with strangers as molestation, not sexual intercourse between spouses for the sake of having children. (3) “Therefore, I wish that young women marry, bear children and manage the household, and not give the enemy any reason for slander. For some have already turned aside after Satan.” 592 (90, 1) The Apostle approves of the behavior of those men who have entered into marriage once, be they elders, deacons or laymen, as long as their behavior does not give rise to condemnation. Such a person will be “saved through the birth of children.” 593 (2) The Savior calls the Jews “an evil and adulterous generation” (Matthew 12:39), because they do not keep the law as the law desires and, following the customs of their ancestors and social requirements, betray the Lord, forgetting that he is their master and the guardian of their virginity. 594 (3) He probably wanted to say by this that they became slaves of alien desires, as a result of which they were enslaved by sin and “sold to strangers,” because there were no official public women among the Jews, and prostitution was prohibited by law. 595 (4) The man who said that he was married and therefore could not come to the dinner offered by the Lord (Luke 14:20) is an example of apostasy from the Divine commandments for the sake of bodily pleasure. After such words, neither those who lived righteously before the coming of Christ, nor those who married after his coming, even if they are apostles, will be able to be saved. (5) Putting forward as an argument the well-known words of the prophet: “My eye has grown old from all my enemies” (Ps. 6:8), they must not forget that by enemies here sins are meant. But debauchery is a sin, not marriage, otherwise birth itself and its Creator will also have to be declared a sin. XIII. Criticism of the views of Julius Cassian (91, 1) This is precisely what the propagandist of Docetism, Julius Cassian, teaches. 596 In his book On Temperance, or On Eunuchs, he literally says the following: “From the mere fact that the female genital organs are constructed differently from the male, and women have a vagina, and men are capable of ejaculating semen, it does not at all follow that God approves of copulation. 597 (2) If the will of God, whom we deeply honor, were really such, then He would not call the eunuchs blessed, and the prophet would not say that they are “not a barren tree,” 598 comparing pruning trees with castrating oneself in order to get rid of thoughts.” (92, 1) Continuing to develop these ungodly ideas, he further adds: “Is it not reasonable to bring an accusation against the Creator if He first created us incorrectly, and then begins to get rid of His errors by removing sexual characteristics, superfluous parts and genitals?” His ideas are very close to the views of Tatian. It was not for nothing that he left Valentin’s school. (2) That’s why Cassian says: “When Solome asked when she would find out the answers to her questions, the Lord answered her that this would happen “when you trample underfoot the chaff of shame, when two become one, man will merge with woman, and there will be neither men nor women.” 599 (93, 1) Firstly, this passage is not taken from our traditional four Gospels, but from the Gospel of the Egyptians. Secondly, he probably did not grasp the allegorical statement expressed here that passion (θυμός) is a male impulse of the soul, and desire (ἐπιθυμία) is female, and when they are excessive, they are replaced by remorse and shame. (2) And if a man yields to neither passion nor desire, which are in reality the results of bad character and bad education, darkening and hiding the mind, and throws off the veil which they produce, he certainly feels repentance, and repentance produces shame. And when he finally unites soul and spirit in obedience to the word, then, as Paul says, “there are neither male nor female among you” (Gal. 3:28). (3) In contrast to the external appearance, which is different for men and women, the soul is transformed into something single and sexless. But our noble opponent apparently adheres to a more Platonic view, according to which the soul, being originally of Divine origin, weighed down by female desire, falls into our world of birth and death 600 . XIV. Criticism of the views of Julius Cassian (continued) (94, 1) Moreover, he distorts the ideas of Paul, arguing that the latter considers the birth to be the result of deception. This is exactly how he interprets the following statement: “But I am afraid, lest, just as the serpent deceived Eve with his cunning, so your minds should be corrupted by straying from the simplicity that is in Christ.” 601 (2) As everyone acknowledges, the Lord came into this world for the sake of the lost (Matthew 18:11). However, it is not as if they “got astray”, descending from above to be born on earth (since every creation in turn is created and created by the Almighty, Who would never allow souls to fall from a better place to a worse one). (3) On the contrary, the Savior came for the sake of those who were lost in their thoughts, that is, for the sake of all of us. After all, our thoughts are corrupted by a passion for pleasure and disregard for the commandments. Perhaps the first person was too hasty, taking advantage of the right to marry ahead of schedule, and thereby sinned, for, as it is said, “everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her,” without waiting for the right time to manifest his desire. (95, 1) The same Lord then pronounced his sentence on the hasty desire that precedes legal marriage. Therefore, when the apostle says: “Put on the new man, created in the image of God” (Eph. 4:24), he is addressing us, created by the will of the Almighty just as we were created. Speaking about “old” and “new,” he does not mean birth and rebirth, but a way of life that is contrary and consistent [with the commandments]. (2) Cassian believes that our bodies are called “tunics of leather” 602. A little later, when we move on to explain the basic questions concerning the origin of the human race, we will show that he and others like him are mistaken in asserting this. He further says: “Those who are committed to earthly values ​​are themselves born and give birth. Our fatherland is in heaven, from there we await a savior.” We also acknowledge that we are “strangers and strangers on the earth” (Heb. 11:13); however, regardless of whether we are married or not, have property or are poor, whether we give birth to children, knowing that they will die, we are ready to leave all our property and live without a wife, if necessary, being indifferent to the affairs of the created world, accepting everything with gratitude and generosity. XV. A Few More Passages of Scripture on Marriage and Temperance and Their Interpretation (96:1) Saying that it would be better for a man to remain unmarried, but in order to avoid debauchery everyone should take a wife, the apostle explains this by saying that in this way the snare of Satan can be avoided. (2) The words “due to lack of self-control” 603 refer rather not to those who already marry quite consciously and for the sake of having children, but to those who seek satisfaction of their passion in marriage and strive for excess. He does not want the enemy to create such a whirlpool that would suck in those prone to licentiousness. (3) The devil is undoubtedly irritated by those who lead a righteous life, so he opposes them and seeks to subjugate them, putting obstacles in their path and making it difficult in every possible way. (97:1) This fully explains the words of the apostle that it is better to marry than to burn. He wants the husband to pay due attention to his wife and vice versa, so that they do not refuse to help each other in the matter of having children, in accordance with the Divine dispensation. (2) They also quote the following words: “Whoever does not hate his father and mother and wife and children cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26). (3) However, it does not follow from this that it is necessary to hate your family, because there is a commandment that you should “honor your father and mother, so that you may prosper” (Ex. 20:12). This means that we should avoid irrational impulses and pagan lifestyles. The home is the basis of family life, and society consists of such homes. Therefore, of those who live a family life, Paul says that they “meet the needs of this world” (1 Cor. 7:9). (4) The Lord says: “A married man should not seek a divorce, and an unmarried man should not seek a wife.” 604 In other words, if a person has consciously decided to remain unmarried, he must strictly adhere to the path he once chose. (98, 1) The One Lord gives the corresponding promise to both. He says this through the prophet Isaiah: “Let not the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree. For the Lord says this about the eunuchs: whoever keeps my Sabbaths, and chooses what is pleasing to me, and holds fast to my covenant, to them I will give a better place than to sons and daughters” (Isaiah 56:3-5). (2) To be a eunuch or to keep the Sabbath is not in itself righteousness unless it is supported by keeping the commandments. (3) He addresses the married thus: those whom I have chosen “let them not labor in vain, bringing forth children on the mountain, for they shall be seed blessed of the Lord” (Isa. 65:23). (4) He who consciously brings forth children, cares for them and raises them in accordance with the will of the Lord, giving them true instructions, also receives his due as the chosen seed. (5) Those who insist that children will be born “on the mountain” do not understand that the text of Scripture testifies against them. Those chosen by God do not follow such dogmas, and do not give birth to children “on the mountain,” leaving this fruitless task to heretics. (99, 1) So, the word “eunuch” is used not only to refer to those who are physically castrated or unmarried, but also to designate those who are sterile in relation to the truth. Initially, he really is a “barren tree,” but by following the words of the Lord and keeping the Sabbath, leaving aside sins and fulfilling the commandments, he achieves more with his righteous lifestyle than following the commandments only in words, without the proper experience. (2) “Children, I won’t be with you for long,” says the Mentor. “My little children, for whom I am again in birth pangs, until Christ is formed in you,” says Paul in Galatians. (3) And again, in the Epistle to the Corinthians: “For although you have thousands of teachers in Christ, yet you have not many fathers: I have begotten you in Christ through the gospel.” 605 (4) That is why it is said that “not one of the eunuchs will enter the assembly of God”, sterile and sterile in behavior and speech, however, “those who have castrated themselves”, having gotten rid of all sins, “for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven”, observing fasting 606, abstaining from everything earthly, will be blessed. (100, 1) “Cursed is the day on which I was born, let it not be blessed,” exclaims Jeremiah. This is not an abstract statement that birth is cursed; the prophet is indignant because of the sinfulness and disobedience of the people. (2) Therefore he says further: “Why did I come out of the womb, so that I might see toils and sorrows, and so that my days might perish in disgrace?” (Jer. 20:14–18). At this time, anyone who preached the truth had every reason to fear persecution and reprisals. (3) “Why did not my mother’s womb become my tomb, so that I would never see the judgment of Jacob or the troubles of the house of Israel?” - says the prophet Ezra. 607 (4) “Who will be born clean from an unclean? Not one, even if he lives no more than one day,” says Job (Job 14:4–5). (5) How can a newly born child commit adultery? or how is it possible for a child who has not yet had time to accomplish anything to already be responsible for Adam’s sin? How can they answer these questions? (6) It remains for them, as it seems to me, to conclude from this that birth is evil not only because of the body, but also because of the soul, for the sake of which the body exists. (7) “I was conceived in iniquity, and in sin my mother gave birth to me,” says David prophetically about Eve as his mother, since “Eve is the mother of all who live” (Ps. 50:7; Gen. 3:20). But from the fact that he happened to be born in sin, it does not follow that his birth is sinful, and even more so it does not follow that he himself is a sinner. (101:1) Is not everyone who has turned from sin and converted to faith, leaving behind sinful thoughts, like one who has come forth from his mother into life, as one of the twelve prophets confirms: “Shall I give him my firstborn for my transgression, and the fruit of my womb for the sin of my soul?” (Mic. 6:7). (2) All this in no way contradicts the covenant to be fruitful and multiply; and he calls “impious” only the first impulses arising after birth, arising from ignorance of God. (3) Some conclude on this basis that birth is evil, but nothing prevents them from asserting on the same basis that it is good, since through it we come to the knowledge of God. “Be sober as you should, and do not sin; for some of you do not know God" (1 Cor. 15:34), it is clear that they are sinners. “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against spirits,” powerful and tempting, “the rulers of the darkness of this world” (Eph. 6:12); this requires patience. 608 (4) “I humble and enslave my body,” says Paul, “since “every athlete limits himself in everything” (restraint in everything does not mean abstinence from absolutely everything, but abstinence from that from which it is decided to abstain). “They do this to receive a perishable crown, but we – an incorruptible one” (1 Cor. 9:25–27), if, of course, we win. After all, if there is no competition, there is no victory. (5) Therefore, some believe that a widow is superior to a virgin in self-restraint, since she deliberately abstains from pleasures of which she knows the taste. (102:1) Having declared birth to be evil, they would also have to call both the Lord and the Virgin who gave birth to Him evil. (2) By saying this, they blaspheme both the will of God and the mystery of creation. (3) From here stems the docetism of Cassian, and [the views of] Marcion, and the Valentinian doctrine of the mental body. “People turn into animals” in their desire to copulate, they say. Indeed, if a man, bursting with lust, rushes at any woman, he really differs little from a wild animal. “These are fattened horses, each neighing at the other’s wife” (Jer. 5:8). (4) If we accept that the serpent borrowed the technique of sexual communication from animals, and he managed to convince Adam to copulate with Eve in this way, since such activities were not characteristic of the firstborn before, then this is nothing more than another attempt to condemn the creation, since people in this case turn out to be weaker by nature than animals and, being created by the first, must follow the example of the latter. (103, 1) If, driven by the natural instinct to reproduce, like dumb animals, seduced and misled, they experienced sexual desire earlier than they should have, then God’s judgment on those who violated His will is fair. Regardless of this, birth itself should still be considered holy, because through it the cosmos came into being, along with all entities, creatures, angels, powers, souls, commandments, laws, the Gospel and the knowledge of God. (2) “All flesh is grass, and every human opinion is like the flower of the field. The grass dries up, the flower fades, but the word of God endures forever” (Isaiah 40:6–8), anointing the soul and uniting it with the spirit. (3) Will our church dispensation be able to achieve its goal without the mediation of the body? The Head of the Church Himself came in the flesh, although “without form or greatness” (Is. 53:2), in order to teach us to contemplate the formless and incorporeal Divine principles. (4) “The tree of life grows from good desires,” says the prophet, teaching us that every desire in the living Lord is good and pure. (104, 1) The marriage of a man and a woman, which scripture calls “knowledge” 609, they consider a sin, pointing to the fact that eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and breaking the commandments is also called “knowledge”. (2) If this is true, then true knowledge, gnosis, is also fruit from the tree of life. Consequently, the fruit from this tree can be eaten by those who have consciously decided to marry. (3) We have already noted that the marriage union can be used for both good and evil, and it is the tree of knowledge if we do not break the commandments. (4) Moreover, did not the Savior cure not only the soul, but also the body from suffering? If the body were the enemy of the soul, then treating it would be like strengthening the enemy’s position in one’s rear. (5) “But I tell you this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, and corruption does not inherit incorruptible” (1 Cor. 15:50). Sin, being corruptible, has nothing to do with the incorruptible, that is, with righteousness. “Are you so foolish,” he asks, “that having begun in the spirit, you are now ending in the flesh?” (Gal. 3:3). XVIII. Conclusion. On the need to avoid extremism (105, 1) Some, then, as we have already shown, strive to extend the limits of righteousness and saving order of life beyond what is necessary, blasphemously carrying self-control to complete atheism, when they should have chosen celibacy, healthy and pious, with gratitude to God for the mercies bestowed, without contempt for anything created, and without condemning those living in marriage. The world was created, as well as celibacy. Therefore, both of them should be grateful for the opportunity given to them to fulfill their destiny, if, of course, they fully understand their destiny. (2) Others, on the contrary, having thrown off the bridle, are indeed like “misogynist horses,” neighing at their neighbor’s wife (Jer. 5:8). Incapable of self-control, they incite others only to acts of sensuality, giving a base meaning to the following words of Scripture: “Share your fate with us; Let us all have a common purse, and let us have one bag” (Prov. 1:14). (106, 1) Warning against them, the same prophet gives us wise advice: “Do not go on a journey with them; keep your foot from their ways; It is not in vain that the birds set their nets in vain. Those who participate in bloody deeds store up evil on their own heads” (Prov. 1:15–18). In other words, devoted to their vices and teaching their neighbors the same, they, according to the prophet 610, are like “warriors beating with their tails (οῦρἀ),” or, as the Greeks would say, with their penises (κέρκος). 611 (2) The prophecy must allude to voluptuous libertines, “warring with their tails,” children of darkness and children of wrath (Eph. 2:3), bloody murderers and rapists of their neighbors. (3) “Purge out the old leaven, so that you may have a new lump,” cries the apostle (1 Cor. 5:7). And again, in anger at their kind, he teaches us “not to associate with anyone who, while calling himself a brother, remains a fornicator, or a covetous, or an idolater, or a slanderer, or a drunkard, or a predator; You can’t even eat with someone like that” (Gal. 5:11). (4) “By the law I died to the law,” he says, “in order to live to God. I have been crucified with Christ and it is no longer I who live” as I lived according to my desires, “but Christ lives in me” with a blameless and blessed life through my obedience to the commandments. Therefore, “then I lived according to the flesh,” that is, following a carnal way of life, but now “I live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God” (Gal. 2:19–20). (107, 1) “Do not enter the path of the pagans and do not enter the city of the Samaritans,” says the Lord (Matthew 10:5), turning us away from the wrong way of life, for “the end of wicked men is evil, and such are the ways of all who commit iniquity” (Proverbs 1:18–19). (2) “Woe to that man,” says the Lord, “and it would have been better for him not to have been born than to seduce even one of my chosen ones; It would be better if they hung a millstone around his neck and drowned him in the sea, than to seduce him and one of my chosen ones,” 612 for “the name of God is blasphemed because of them.” 613 (3) Therefore, the apostle says beautifully: “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with the corrupt” (1 Cor. 5:9), and further to the words “the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body” (1 Cor. 6:13). (4) To show that marriage is not equivalent to debauchery, he adds: “Or do you not know that he who has sex with a harlot becomes one body with her?” (1 Cor. 6:16). Who would call a virgin a harlot before marriage? (5) “Do not deviate from one another,” says the apostle, “except by agreement for a time” (1 Cor. 7:5). The expression “do not shy away” indicates the birth of children as an obligation for those entering into marriage. This is precisely what the preceding words indicate: that the husband should pay due attention to his wife and vice versa (1 Cor. 7:3). (108, 1) Having achieved the goal of the marriage union, the wife becomes an assistant to her husband in supervising the household and maintaining the Christian faith, (2) as the apostle clearly testifies to this: “To those who have entered into marriage, not I, but the Lord, commands: the wife should not divorce her husband. (If she gets divorced, she must remain single or reconcile with her husband). In the same way, a husband should not leave his wife. To the rest I say, and not the Lord: if any brother…” and then read until the words “but now you are holy” (1 Cor. 7:10–14). (2) What can those who revile the law and marriage object to this, as if only the law prescribed marriage, and the New Testament contradicted it in this? What will the wicked who avoid sex and childbearing say in response to this law? After all, the Church should be ruled by “a bishop who rules the house well” and a union “with one wife” 614 forms a house blessed by the Lord. (109, 1) In this sense it is said that “to the pure all things are pure; but for the defiled and unbelieving there is nothing pure, but both their mind and conscience are defiled” 615. (2) Regarding the disorderly gratification of the flesh, he speaks like this: “Do not be deceived: neither the debauched, nor the idolaters, nor the adulterers, nor the wicked, nor the homosexuals, nor the covetous, nor the thieves, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.” And we were like that, but we were “washed” (1 Cor. 6:9–11). Remaining as such, they drown in depravity, plunging into fornication instead of prudence, talking about pleasures and pleasing passions, teaching licentiousness instead of self-control, relying only on their shameful parts. People like them excommunicate themselves from the Kingdom of God. They are not destined to become faithful disciples 616. Through what they falsely call gnosis 617 they secured their way into outer darkness. 618 (3) “Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good report, if there is any excellence or if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. What you have learned, what you have received and heard and seen in me, do it; and the God of peace will be with you” (Phil. 4:8–9). (110:1) Peter in his epistle says the same thing: “So that you may have faith and trust in God, having purified your souls by obedience to the truth,” 619 “as obedient children, do not be conformed to the former lusts that were in your ignorance, but according to the example of the holy one who called you, and be holy in all your actions, for it is written: Be holy, because I am holy.” 620 (3) However, the criticism of the propagandists of what is falsely called gnosis, important as it is, has led us much further than it should have, and has drawn out our narrative too long, so here we end the third book of the Stromata, Gnostic notes for memory, devoted to true philosophy. Wed. Matt. 19:11. But Clement, apparently, uses some other source. Some researchers believe that this phrase is a late gloss. Clement then quotes the Ethics of Isidore, for the text see the section on Basilides and Isidore. The passage is quite complex, and the text is obviously corrupted in places. At this point I follow the reading suggested by Hilgenfeld and adopted by Chadwick. Reading the manuscript αντέχου, i.e. "fight", while Epiphanius, who quotes Clement, writes ανέχου "surrender". Thus, exactly what Isidore advises to do with a grumpy wife remains unclear! Isidore apparently advises to do the same as the Ineffable God from the myth (see the testimony of Epiphanius about the teaching of the followers of Valentinus, Panarion, 31, 5, 5). If your wife pesters you, satisfy her and “calm down.” This part was added by the publisher as necessary in its meaning. Excerpt from some Stoic source. Wed. SVF III, 11. Obviously, we are talking about the Gnostic Monad, which at first was alone, then gave birth to the Idea, from the union with which the world arose (Irenaeus, Adv. haer. I 25). There is evidence that some religious celebrations dedicated to the god Harpocrates (whose prototype was the Egyptian god Horus) were actually held in Cephaleia. The similarity of the name of this god to the name of Carpocrates could have inspired Clement to make this comparison. Epiphanes means "incarnate deity", which also serves as an allusion. However, this identification of Epiphanes, the son of Carpocrates, with a certain god is probably a mistake. Literally: “God is the Sun, the source of the day and the Father, etc.” actually shows that we are talking about a solar cult. This metaphor continues to develop further in the text. Those. "the law according to which one should reproduce." Μετεγράφη γαρ άν can also mean recorded (canonized) a tradition or changed. This theory of the origin of private property attracted not only early Christians and Gnostics. At the dawn of the French Revolution, J.-J. Rousseau begins the second part of his essay “On the Origin of Inequality” with these words: “The first who, having fenced a piece of land, thought of declaring: “This is mine!” and found people simple-minded enough to believe that he was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, murders, misfortunes and horrors would the human race be saved by someone who, having pulled out stakes or filled up a ditch, would have shouted to his fellow men: “Don’t believe him! Beware of this deceiver! You will perish if you forget that the fruits of the earth belong to everyone, and the land itself is no one’s!” Apparently, our Gnostics saw their mission precisely in this. Wed. Rep. V 457 d. This interpretation is completely misleading. Plato allows "communism" only for the ruling class, where everyone has equal status and enter into relationships only during special holidays, distributing partners by lot. However, representatives of this class must especially strictly abstain from sexual excesses. However, Clement is not unique in his interpretation; something similar can be found in Epictetus (II 4, 8–10). Heracleitos, fr. 99 (Marcovich), 20 DK. Fragments from Empedocles' poem “Purifications” (fr. 118, 125, 14 DK). Oracles Sibyll., fr. 1, 1. Euripides, Cresphontes, fr. 449. Euripides, Polyidos, fr. 638. Inaccurate quotation from Herodotus (I 31). Herodotus, I 31. In this famous story, Solon calls Cleobidas and Biton the happiest of people, because in response to a mother’s prayer to grant her sons the highest good available to people, the goddess sent them death in a dream. Plato, Clatylus, 400 b-c. The quote is not entirely accurate. Philolaus, fr. 14 DK, cf. Plato, Gorgius, 493 a. Pindar., fr. 137 a Schroeder. Those to whom we owe the establishment of the Mysteries understood in ancient times the hint that the uninitiated would wallow in the mud in Hades. The initiate will dwell among the gods (Phaedo, 69 c). Wed. Phaedo, 114 b-c (text slightly modified by Clement). Politicus, 273 b-c (slightly modified). Politicus, 273 b. (This passage in Plato immediately precedes the previous one.) Heracleitos, fr. 49 (Marcovich), 21 DK; cf. Plato, Gorgias, 492 e. An allusion to the True God, whom Marcion called the Wanderer or Foreigner. TGF, adesp. fr. 111. I have rearranged the second and third lines. Euripides, Iphigenia at Aulis, 161–3. Euripides, Antiope, fr. 211. Euripides, Supplies, 269–70. FPG I, 200; cf. Plutarchus, Moralia, 286 d-e. Wed. Apollonius, Mirabilia, 46. Matt. 8:22. "Let the dead bury their dead." Clement goes on to offer a metaphorical understanding of this passage. This position was followed by the Nicolaelites, see: Strom. II 118, 3. Eph. 4:20–24, 5:1–4, 5, 11. Wed. the statements of Tertullian (Adversus valentinianos, 4, 2) and Irenaeus (Adversus haereses I, 11, 1), which also speak of the seed of a certain ancient doctrine from which the Valentinians “conceived.” This verbal similarity is quite remarkable. For the possible meaning of the passages of Irenaeus and Tertullian, see the article: Quispel G. Valentinus and the Gnostikoi. – Vigiliae Christianae 50 (1996), p. 1–4, but this place is not mentioned there. In. 8:34. However, these are the words of Jesus. Perhaps there is a gap in the text. According to Epiphanius (Panarion 45, 2), such views were held by the Gnostics Severians. Wed. Matt. 5:25. The exact text is: “Make peace with your opponent quickly, while you are still on the road with him, so that your opponent does not hand you over to the judge (...) and they throw you into prison. Truly I tell you: you will not leave there until you have paid the last coin.” As we see, Clement’s interpretation of this passage significantly changes the context and meaning of the Gospel commandment. Andronicus, De affect. 12, 4 Kreuttner. Hesiodus, Opera et dies, 211. This is what Homer calls Scylla (Odyssea, XII, 118). Gal. 2:11, 3:1–3, 5–6, 8–9. Aristoteles, Ethica Nicomachea, I 4, 1096 b 29. Quote from the lost Gospel of the Egyptians. For fragments see: Hennecke-Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, 1.166–9. Clement often refers to this text, which was probably quite popular in Alexandria. See his Excerpta ex Theodoto, 67, and also later in this book (Strom. III, 63-64). Wed: Matt. 19:6, 24:37–39; OK. 17:26–30, 18:8, 21:23. Plato, Leges, VIII 840 a; Aelianus, De natura animalium VI 1; Varia historia III 30. Ister of Cyrene was a student of Callimachus and a writer of the second half of the third century BC. e. Fragments see: FGrH 3 B 334. Col. 2:18.23; 1 Cor. 7:2–5, 27. 1 Kings 17:6; 1Ezra 9:24. Matt. 11:18–19. Peter was indeed married (Mark 1:30; 1 Cor. 9:5), but the New Testament says nothing about Philip's children or marital status. Phil. 4:3. The place is ambiguous and the interpretation of Clement is controversial. There is indeed a mention of a certain employee (or employee named Sizygos). In fact, the reference is to the first letter (I Tim. 5:9–15). Matt. 25:35.40; Prov. 19:17, 3:27. Prov. 3:3, 10:4; Ps. 14:5; Prov. 13:8. Matt. 19:19–21; Lion. 19:18 et. al. Prov. 13:11, 11:24 ; Ps. 111 9. Wed. Matt. 11:19. Note that the passage does not directly imply that Jesus had a body of a psychic or spiritual nature. Everything that has been said fits perfectly into the scheme proposed in the Gospel of Matthew. The context of the statement shows that Clement here quotes Valentinus more in support of his thoughts than for the purpose of polemics. Perhaps there is a gap in the text. This probably refers to Buddhist “stupas” - sacred structures where various sacred objects are usually walled up, from mantra texts to the remains of saints. However, Buddhists usually did not go naked. Clement's source here is also most likely Alexander Polyhistor. For a mention of the Buddha, see the first book of the Stromata (Strom. I 21). 2 Cor. 5:10.17, 6:14–16, 7:1. Wed. Plato's tripartite division of the soul (Rep. IV 435 b – 441 c). 1 Tim. 3:4–5; 1 Cor. 7:22–24. Rome. 7:2; 1 Cor. 7:39–40. Tatian (or Tatian), c. 150 A.D., author of a work called Diatessaron, which is an attempt to harmonize all versions of the Gospel. From other sources it is known that he really advocated extreme asceticism. Clement quotes Epist. Barnabae, 11:9. The source of this "prophecy" is unknown. Indeed, see: Strom. VII 75, 3; VI 147, 1. Ref. 20:14 ; Deut. 5:18. This name is not mentioned by anyone except Clement before Jerome. It is difficult to say anything more definite regarding the views of this early Christian writer. See also: Strom. I 101. In this phrase, either in the manuscript, or in Clement himself, the parts of the sentence are not entirely consistent. The meaning, however, is clear. The same passage is quoted by Clement of Rome (II Clem. Ad Cor. 12, 2). Wed. Plato, Phaedo 81 c; Phaedrus 248 c. Life 3:21; cf. Philo, Legum Allegoriae, III 69. In. 13:33; Gal. 4:19 ; 1 Cor. 4:15. Deut. 23:1; Matt. 19:12. Those who observe fasting are spoken of in Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1, 3 (J. Ferguson). In the sense, “and Adam knew his wife Eve...”. Wed. Life 2:9. Unknown location. Wed. Open 9:10.19. Both words mean "tail" but are often used to refer to the penis. The metaphor, however, is quite obvious. This is exactly how the last word is used, for example, in the comedy of Aristophanes (Aristophanes, Thesmophoriazusae, 239). Obviously, a quote from the first letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (I Ad Cor. 46, 8). Wed. Matt. 26:24; OK. 17:2, etc.