"Extracts from Theodotus" and "Selected passages from the prophetic books"

Patrological studies indicate that Clement of Alexandria did not have time to write the eighth book of the Stromatus and that the so-called eighth book of the Florentine manuscript, as well as the Extracts from Theodotus and Selected Passages from the Prophetic Books, are only sketches and preparatory works that Clement intended for the continuation of the seven books of the Stromatus or for another dogmatic work. “Extracts from Theodotus” were written in line with anti-Gnostic polemics and contain features of the Christology of Clement of Alexandria (the doctrine of the two natures of Christ with the unity of His subject), the doctrine of the “heavenly hierarchy”, etc. “Selected Passages from the Prophetic Books” contains brief interpretations of selected prophetic sayings. Clement of Alexandria speaks of the need to study the Holy Scriptures. In this work, Clement’s teaching on Orthodox “gnosis” is also outlined. It says that "gnostic virtue" creates a person as a "divine image" and, with the help of love, makes him a "philanthropist." *Titles of essays in Greek: - ᾿Εκ τῶν Θεοδότου κα τῆς ἀνατολικῆς καλουμένης διδασκαλίας κατὰ τοὺς Οὐαλεντίνου χρόνους ἐπιτομαί. - ᾿Εκ τῶν προφητικῶν ἐκλογαί. *Titles of essays in Latin: - Excerpta e Theodoto (by CPG); Excepta ex scriptis Theodoti et doctrina quae orientalis vocatur ad Valentini tempora spectantia (according to PG). - Eclogae propheticae (according to CPG); Ex scripturis propheticis eclogae (according to PG). Contents of Clement of Alexandria “Extracts from Theodotus” and “Selected Passages from the Prophetic Books”. Prof. A. I. Sagarda I. “Extracts from the works of Theodotus and the so-called eastern teachings of the times of Valentine.” "Extracts from Theodotus" and "Selected passages from the prophetic books." Clement of Alexandria "Extracts from Theodotus" and "Selected passages from the prophetic books." Alexandria, a major cultural center where the religious views of East and West collided, where the theosophical systems of India, Chaldea and Egypt and Jewish Kabbalah came into contact with the best fruits of ancient Greek culture, should, as one can already assume a priori, be one of the main centers of heretical gnosis, which arose on the basis of the desire to create a system of this kind that would contain the solution of theological and cosmological problems in their philosophical production 1. Indeed, such prominent representatives of gnosis as Basilides, his son Isidore, Carpocrates and Epiphanes, Valentinus and their numerous disciples came from Alexandria or lived and taught there. Rich in talents, received an excellent education 3, prolific writers 4, these leaders of gnosis captivated believers and subjugated representatives of pagan thought. How great was their influence in Alexandria and what enormous significance they had in the life of the Alexandrian Church can be judged by the fervor with which Clement, usually calm and tolerant of other people’s opinions, speaks of the Gnostics. He portrays them as people full of pride and self-satisfaction, as people who sacrifice the truth to their ambitious desire to shine among the crowd and build their glory on the ignorance of others. “Do not return to heresies,” writes the famous catechist: for they, not knowing the real God, argue in every possible way 6 (among themselves)” 7 . Heretics “and do not want to turn to the truth, because they are afraid to abandon the deception of their pride and cannot confirm their opinions, since they are raping Scripture” 8. Seeing that they were in danger not in relation to one (any) dogma, but in relation to (the very) existence of heresies, they cared not about finding the truth (for they neglected as insignificant that which was accessible to everyone and ready-made, which they found among us), but about surpassing the general faith, they moved away from the truth. “For, having not studied the secrets of church gnosis and not embracing the greatness of the truth, due to their frivolity, not reaching the depth of things, having superficially read the scriptures, they neglected them” 9. “So, proud of imaginary wisdom, they spend their lives in disputes, obviously caring more about appearing (to be philosophizing) than to philosophize” 10. And just as bad children lock up a teacher, so these (heretics) exclude prophecies from their church, fearing exposure and instruction. They invent numerous lies and fabrications to make it appear that they do not accept the scriptures on reasonable grounds. Thus, they are wicked because they resist the divine commandments, that is, the Holy Spirit. Just as empty almonds are called not only those in which there is nothing, but also those in which the core is not suitable for anything - similarly we say that heretics are deprived of the will of God and the traditions of Christ, being the perpetrators of bitter teachings, truly like bitter almonds, except that, thanks to the action of truth, they could not reject or hide” 11. Understanding the activities of the leaders and leaders of gnosis in this way, Clement necessarily had to enter into a literary polemic with them, especially since the problems that served as the subject of his thoughts were the same as those of the Gnostics 12, but were resolved by them in the direction opposite to heretical gnosis. In Clement's Stromatae a lot of space is devoted to polemics, and the main opponents with whom the Alexandrian catechete does not miss the opportunity to break spears are the Gnostics. Numerous fragments cited by the Alexandrian catechist from the works of the latter are of enormous importance for church-historical knowledge, since they shed light on one of the most interesting and at the same time the least studied phenomenon in the history of ancient Christian thought and life. But especially important in this regard should belong to two passages that are found after the VIII book of Stromatus, both in the codices and in the editions. The first of them is “Extracts from the writings of Theodotus and the so-called Eastern teachings of the times of Valentine” Excerpta ex Theodoto ("Excerpt from Theodotus"). The second passage, “Selected Passages from the Prophetic Books” (Ἐκ τῶν προϕητικῶν ἐκλογαί), is usually called Eclogae propheticae. On the question of what these two passages actually represent, there is a fairly extensive series of studies in the West, of which the most significant not in volume, of course, but in the thoroughness and likelihood of solving this problem is the work of Arnim-De octavo Clementis Stromateorum libro (Rostochii 1894). The main thesis of this study, which has received almost general acceptance among historians of ancient Christian literature, 13 is this: Excerpta ex Theodoto and Eclogae propheticae are extracts from the writings of the Gnostics made by Clement. I. "Extracts from the writings of Theodotus and the so-called Eastern teachings of the times of Valentine." Excerpta ex Theodoto give an exposition of the teachings of Theodotus 14 and other representatives of the eastern school of Valentinians 15 . According to the nature of Excerptorum, the sayings are given in them either with ϕησί 16, then with ϕασί 17, then with οἱ ἀπὸ Οὐαλεντίνου ϕασί 18, then with the name of Theodotus 19 as the author of certain messages. Separate and brief remarks regarding the Basilidians 20 stand completely apart; the rest of the Extracts from Theodotus concerns the Valentinian school. Messages of Clement of various kinds. They sometimes contain an interpretation of individual passages of Holy Scripture, sometimes a presentation of the views of the Gnostics. The one who tells us this last information feels in conflict with the main provisions of gnosis and adds his brief remarks to one or another point of presentation. He sometimes puts: ἡμεῖς δὲ as something opposite to the stated teaching, and tries to justify his point of view on the basis of Holy Scripture and reason. Thus, the character of this fragment is quite variegated: it either represents an objective presentation of the dogmas of gnosis, then colors them in the light of subjective thoughts, then presents them in the order of a consistent and harmonious development of the idea, then interrupts them with a number of brief remarks that have no connection with either the previous or the subsequent. It is clear that the author of the excerpts is not the one who wants to teach others, but the one who interrupts the presentation with his brief remarks 21. "Extracts from Theodotus" and "Selected passages from the prophetic books." § 1. “Father! says: “Into your hands I commit My spirit” (Luke 23:46) 22. Sophia, says (Theodotus), produced a calf for the Logos, a spiritual seed 23. Having clothed himself with it 24, the Savior descended (to earth). Therefore, during suffering, He transfers Sophia to the Father 25 in order to receive her from the Father and so as not to be held here by 26 left (evil) 27 forces 28 . Thus, He transmits all the spiritual seed of the elect 29 through the above saying. By the chosen seed (cf. 1 Peter 2:9) we call the spark kindled (cf. Isa. 42: 3) by the Logos, and the pupil of the eye ( Deut. 32: 10), and the mustard seed ( Matt. 13: 31), and the leaven ( Matt. 13: 33) 30 that unites in faith ( Eph. 4, 13), apparently divided nations. § 2. The Valentinians say that when the psychic body was formed, the Logos implanted in the chosen soul, which was in a state of sleep, the male seed, which is the outflow of the angelic, so that there would be no lack (in it). And this seed fermented, uniting what seemed divided: soul and flesh, separately and created by Sophia. Adam’s sleep was the oblivion of the soul, which did not allow the spiritual seed placed into the soul by the Savior to be separated from it. This seed was the outflow of male and angelic seed. Therefore, the Savior says: “you and your soul will be saved” 31. § 3. Indeed, the Savior, having come, awakened the soul from sleep and kindled a spark, for “the words of the Lord are power” (Luke 4:32). Therefore He said: “Let your light shine before men” (Matthew 5:16). And after His resurrection, having breathed into the apostles the Spirit (John 20:22), He blew the earth from Himself like ashes and separated it, kindled a spark and revived it (L: ἐζωποίει). § 4. Out of much humility, the Lord appeared not as an angel, but as a man, and when He appeared in glory to the apostles on the mountain (Matthew 17:1-8; Mark 9:2-8; Luke 9:28-36), He did not do it for His own sake, but for the sake of the Church, which is the “chosen race” (1 Peter 2:9), so that she would know His glorification upon his departure from flesh. For He was the light above, and what appeared in the flesh and what was visible here was not lower than what was above (1 Tim. 3:16) and was not separated (from Him) or moved from above to here, changing place after place, in order to receive one thing and leave another, but what existed was everywhere with the Father, and here 32, for it was the power of the Father 33. In addition, this word of the Savior had to be fulfilled, Who said: “There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man in glory” (Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1; Luke 9:27). So Peter, James and John saw and died. § 5 Why (the apostles), seeing the bright sight, were not amazed, but when they heard the voice, they fell to the ground? Because ears are more mistrustful than eyes and an unexpected voice is more frightening. John the Baptist, hearing this voice, was not afraid, because he heard it in a spirit accustomed to this kind of voice (Matthew 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). A simple person, having heard it, would be amazed. Therefore, the Lord tells them: “Do not tell anyone what you saw” (Matthew 3:17; Mark 9:9). However, the apostles did not see the light with carnal eyes (for there is nothing related or close between that light and this flesh), but the power and will of the Savior strengthened the flesh for contemplation. In addition, what the soul saw, it conveyed to those who were with it through the plexus in communication of the flesh. “Tell no one,” so that, having learned who the Lord is, they would not be able to resist laying hands on the Lord (Matthew 26:50), and the dispensation would not remain unfulfilled, and death would not depart from the Lord, for it would in vain test Him endlessly. One voice on the mountain was one who had already been called to understand, so they were surprised, since the one in whom they (and themselves) believed was testifying, while the other on the river was one who had faith, so they, being under the guidance of the scribes, neglected this voice. § 6. The expression: “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” 34, the Valentinians understand this. They call the beginning the Only Begotten, whom they also confess to be God, 35 just as John openly calls him God, saying: “The only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has revealed” (John 1:18). With the word “in the beginning,” that is, in the Only Begotten, in Mind and Truth, (the apostle) indicates Christ, Logos and Life 36. Therefore, it is right (Apostle John) to call Him (the Logos) God existing in God's Mind. What was in Him, the Logos, was Life (cf. John 1, 3 et seq.), His syzygy 37. Hence the Lord says: “I am the Life” (John 11:25, 14:6). § 7. So, the unknown Father wanted the aeons to know Him, and through the thought of Himself, in order to know Himself, the Spirit of knowledge, existing in gnosis, produced the Only Begotten. This is how gnosis, that is, the Son, came from gnosis, that is, the Father's Thought, because the Father was known by the Son (Matthew 11:27; Luke 11:22). The spirit of love, having originated from Truth, like gnosis from Thought, mixed with the spirit of knowledge, like the Father with the Son, and Thought with the Truth. And the Only Begotten Son, who abided in the bosom of the Father (John 1:18), through gnosis explains the Thought to the aeons, because He came from His bosom; the one visible here is not the only begotten, but is confessed by the apostle “as the only begotten” - “glory as the only begotten” (John 1:14), because one and the same is both the firstborn among creation 38 and Jesus the only begotten in the Pleroma. He is such that he can dwell in every place. And the one who descends is never separated from the one who abides. For the apostle says: “He who ascended is also the one who descended” (Eph. 4:10). The Demiurge is called the image of the Only Begotten (Valentinians). Therefore, the deeds of the image are the same (as the prototype) 40. Therefore, the Lord, having made the dead whom He raised up an image of the spiritual resurrection, raised them not incorruptible in the flesh, but having to die again. § 8. We call God in God the same Logos, of whom it is said that He is in the bosom of the Father (cf. John 1:18), the limitless, immeasurable, one God. “All things came into being through Him” (John 1:3), that is, according to the immediate action of the same Logos - both spiritual, intelligible and sensory. He revealed the bosom of the Father (John 1:18), the Savior and Firstborn 41 of all creation (Col.1:15). The same Only Begotten, by whose infinite power the Savior acts, 42 this is the light (John 1:4) of the Church, which was previously in darkness and ignorance. “And the darkness did not comprehend Him” (John 1:5) 43: the apostates and the rest of men did not know Him, and death did not possess Him. § 9. Faith is not one, but different (faiths). At least the Savior says: “let it be done according to your faith” (cf. Matthew 9:29). Hence it is said: “those who are called will go astray at the coming of the Antichrist, but for the elect (this) is impossible” 44. Therefore (the Savior) says: “If it is possible, also my chosen ones.” Again: when he says, “Get out of my Father’s house” (John 2:16), he speaks to those who are invited. Again: he who returned from a foreign land and squandered his property, for whom they slaughtered a fatted calf, has a calling, just as when the king called those on the roads to the wedding feast (Matthew 22:9). So, everyone is called equally, “for (God) sends rain on the just and the unjust, and the sun shines on everyone” (cf. Matt. 5:45), but those who believe more are chosen, 45 in relation to whom (the Savior) says: “No one has seen my Father except the Son” (John 6:46), “you are the light of the world” (Matthew 5:14), and: “Holy Father, Sanctify them in Your name” (John 17:17). § 10. But neither the spiritual and intelligible, nor the archangels, nor the primordial 46, nor even He (the Logos) is without image and form, without form and without body, but has its own image and body, in accordance with His superiority over all spiritual beings, as well as the primordial ones, in accordance with their superiority over the beings subordinate to them. For what is born is not at all devoid of nature, but in image and body it is not like the bodies that are in this world. The things here are masculine and feminine and differ from each other. There is the only begotten and actually intelligible, having his own form and his essence, the purest and most dominant, closely participating in the power of the Father; the primordial ones, although they differ in number and each of them is limited and describable, but the similarity of objects proves their unity, equality and similarity. For it is not that one of the seven primordial beings was given more, another less, and they do not need any advancement, because from the very beginning they received from God through the Son, along with the first being, perfection. He is also called “the unapproachable light” (1 Tim. 6:16), “like the only begotten” (John 1:14) and “the firstborn” (Col. 1:15), “that which eye has not seen and ear has not heard and has not entered into the heart of man” (1 Cor. 2:9), and there will be no such thing either among the first-born or among people. They “always see the face of the Father” (Matthew 18:10), and the face of the Father is the Son, through whom the Father is known 47. So, the contemplative and the contemplated cannot exist without form and form. They see not with the sensory eye, but with the eye that the Father gave them - the mental one. § 11. When the Lord said: “Do not despise one of these little ones, truly I say to you, their angels always see the face of the Father” (Matthew 18:10), then he indicated that such is the nature of the first-created, such will be the elect, having achieved perfect success: “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God” (Matthew 5:8). How can a disembodied person have a face? The apostle saw heavenly bodies that were beautiful and intelligible. How would their various names be called if they were not describable in terms of form, image and body? “There is one glory of those in heaven, another of those on earth” (1 Cor. 15:40). One is the glory of the angels, the other is the glory of the archangels. In comparison with the local bodies (for example, stars), they seem incorporeal and formless, but, in comparison with the Son, they are measurable and sensory bodies. So is the Son in comparison with the Father. Although each of the spiritual beings has its own power and its own economy, they not only came into being together, but also received perfection, a common and indivisible service. § 12. The primordial ones see the Son and themselves and lower beings, just as the archangels see the primordial ones. The Son, called the face of the Father, is the beginning of paternal contemplation. Angels are intelligible fire and intelligible spirits, purified in relation to nature; The highest moral success is the perfect intelligible light from the intelligible purified fire, “that into which the angels desire to penetrate” (1 Peter 1:12) - says (Apostle) Peter. The Son is even purer than this fire, “unapproachable light” (1 Tim. 6:16) and “the power of God” (Rom. 1:16) and, according to the Apostle, we have been redeemed by His “precious, undefiled” and pure blood (1 Peter 1:18-19). His “robes” shone like light, and his face was like the sun (Matthew 17:2), which is not easy to look at. § 13. He is the bread of heaven and the spiritual food of life, abundant for food and knowledge, the light of people, that is, of the Church. Those who ate the heavenly bread died, but he who eats the true spiritual bread will not die. The “living bread” is the Son, given by the Father to those who wish to eat. “The bread that I will give says: my flesh is” (John 6:51), or (the bread) with which the flesh is nourished through the Eucharist, or, what is more correct, His flesh is His body, “which is the church” (cf. John 6:51; Ps. 77:24), “the bread of heaven,” a blessed congregation, because the elect in their essence came from the same nature and will reach the same end. § 14. Demons are called incorporeal not because they do not have a body (for they even have a form; that is why they feel punishment), but, being a shadow in comparison with the spiritual bodies of those being saved, they are called incorporeal. And angels are corporeal, therefore they are visible. But the soul is also the body. Therefore, the apostle (says): “The natural body is sown, the spiritual body is raised” (1 Cor. 15:44). How would punished souls, being incorporeal, feel (punishment). “Fear,” says (the Savior), “who is able after death to cast both soul and body into Gehenna” (Matthew 10:28; Luke 12:5). For what is visible is not purified by fire, but returns to the earth. Lazarus and the rich man directly show that the soul is a body with bodily members (cf. Luke 16:24). § 15. “As we bear the image of the earthly, we will also bear the image of the heavenly” (1 Cor. 15:49), the spiritual, becoming perfect. (The Apostle) again speaks of an image, because there are spiritual bodies. And again: “Now we see through a glass darkly, but then face to face” (1 Cor. 13:12). For immediately we begin to recognize... whose face, image, form and body. Form is contemplated by form and face by face, and the knowable is known in relation to forms and essences. § 16. And the dove, which some call the Holy Spirit, the Basilidians - a servant, the Valentinians - the spirit of the Father's Thought, was seen as a body (cf. Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32-33) 48 descending on the flesh of the Logos 49. § 17. According to the teaching of the Valentinians, Jesus and the Church and Sophia are a possible mixture of all bodies. The human mixture of two seeds mixed in marriage produces the existence of one child, and the body returned to the earth is mixed with earth and water with wine, but better and more excellent bodies have a slight mixture: spirit, for example, is mixed with spirit. It seems to me that in this case there is not confusion, but sub-position. Of course, not in the sense that divine power, having settled in the soul, sanctifies it to the extent of moral success. “God is spirit, and where He wills He breathes” (John 4:24, 3:8). For power does not spread according to essence, but according to strength and strength: but spirit is attached to spirit, as spirit is to soul. § 18. The Savior, having descended to earth, was visible not only to the angels - that is why they preached the gospel about Him (cf. Luke 2:10) - but also to Abraham and the rest of the righteous, who are in repose among the righteous (cf. Matt. 25: 33-34). For it is said: “(Abraham) was glad to see my day” (John 8:56), that is, coming in the flesh. Therefore, the Lord, having risen, preached the good news to the righteous who were in repose, and delivered and brought in (cf. 1 Peter 3:19) 50, and all will live under his shadow. For the appearance of the Savior here is a shadow of His glory with the Father. The shadow of light is not darkness, but radiance. § 19. “And the word became flesh” (John 1:14), not only by appearance (here on earth), becoming a man, but also in the beginning the same Logos (became flesh), becoming a son in a figurative sense, but not in essence. And again He “became flesh” working through the prophets. The Savior is called the son of this same Logos. Therefore (it is said): “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God. What was in him is life” (John 1: 1, 4); Life is the Lord. And Paul (commands): “Put on the new man, created according to God” (Eph. 4:24), that is, believe in Him, by God, according to God and in the God-created Logos. “Created according to God” can show the goal of prosperity that a person intends to achieve, equal to “pursue the purpose for which you were created.” The apostle says much more clearly and definitely in another place: “He is the image of the invisible God”; then he adds: “the firstborn of all creation” (Col. 1:15). For he calls the image of the invisible God the Son of the same Logos, the first-born of all creation, because born dispassionately, He was the creator and ancestor of every creature and essence. In him the Father created everything. That is why it is said that He took on the form of a servant, not only flesh when He appeared here, but also His very nature. This nature is called slavish because it is subject to suffering and is subject to an effective and most important cause. § 20. The expression: “Before the morning star I begat you” (Ps. 109:3) we hear regarding the first-born God the Word, and “before the sun” and the moon and every creature “Your name” (Ps. 71:17). § 21. The expression “In the image of God he created them, male and female he created them” (Gen. 1:27), say the Valentinians, is said about the best work of Sophia, whose male is election, and whose female is calling. They call the angelic masculine and themselves feminine, the perfect seed. Thus, even under Adam, the male seed remained with him, but the female seed, manified by him, became Eve, from whom women (begin) as from that man. The masculine is located with the Logos, while the masculine feminine unites with the angels and lives in the Pleroma. Therefore it is said that a wife is changed into a husband, and the local church into angels 51. § 22. And when the Apostle said: “Otherwise what do those who are baptized do for the dead” (1 Cor. 15:29), for us, he says, the angels, of which we are a part, were baptized. We, mortified by this condition, are dead; the men, who are not involved in this kind of condition, are alive. If the dead do not rise, then why are we baptized? So we will rise again, restored equal to the angels of men, members to members. “But the angels who are baptized for (us) dead” are baptized, say (the Valentinians), because of us, so that we, having a name, will not encounter obstacles from Oros and the Cross to penetrate into the Pleroma. Therefore, at the laying on of hands at the end they say, “into angelic redemption,” that is, into that which the angels also have, so that the one who has received redemption will be baptized with the same name with which his angel was baptized. The angels at the beginning were baptized in the name of the one who descended on Jesus in the form of a dove and redeemed Him. Jesus also needs redemption, so as not to be held back by Thought, as Theodotus says. § 23. The Valentinians call Jesus the Comforter, because he came full of aeons, since he came out of the whole (Pleroma). For Christ, having left Sophia, which produced Him, came to the Pleroma, asking for help from Sophia left outside, and, with the consent of the aeons, Jesus the Comforter is produced to the abandoned aeon. In the image of the Comforter, Paul became the apostle of the resurrection. Immediately after the Lord's suffering, he was sent to preach. Therefore, he preached the Savior in two ways, as born and suffered through the left, because, having the opportunity to know Him in this place, they were afraid, and spiritually from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin, as the right angels know Him. For everyone knows the Lord in his own way, and all the angels of these little ones, the elect, who are destined to be in the same inheritance and perfection, see the face of the Father differently. The face (of the Father) is the Son, and what is understandable in the Father is contemplated by those taught by the Son; the rest of the Father is unknowable. § 24. The Valentinians say that the spirit which each of the prophets had for his ministry is poured out upon all the members of the church. Therefore, the signs of the Spirit: healings and prophecies are accomplished through the church. But they do not know that the Comforter, who is constantly active now in the church, is of the same essence and power with the one who was constantly active in the Old Testament. § 25. The Valentinians defined an angel as a word having the gospel of things. They also call the eons by the same name as the Logos, logoi. The apostles, he says, are transferred to the twelve signs of the zodiac, for just as the latter govern birth, so the apostles oversee rebirth. § 26. The visible side of Jesus was Sophia and the Church of the perfect seeds, into which the Savior was clothed through the body 52, as Theodotus says. The invisible side of Him was the name, which is “Only Begotten Son.” Therefore, when the Lord said: “I am the door,” it means that you, the perfect seed, will reach the limit that I am. When He Himself enters, then with Him the seed collected and introduced by the door will also enter the Pleroma. Prof. V.V. Bolotov, Lectures on the history of the ancient Church. Ed. prof. A. I. Brilliantova. II (St. Petersburg 1910), 169–183; P. Wendland, Die hellenistisch-römische Kultur. Aufl. II-III. Tübingen 1912. S. 163–187. Cp. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses I, XVIII Harvey I, p. 196; Clement Al., Str. III, II, 5 Stählin II, p. 197; Eusebius, H. E. IV, 7 Schwartz p. 129; Epiphanius, Adversus haereses XXIV, XXXI, etc. Clement Al. Str. III, II, 5 Stählin II p. 197. Clement Al. Str. II, VIII, 36; XX, 113 Stählin II p. 132, 174; III, I, 2; III, II, 5–9; VII, 59 St. II p. 223; IV, XII, 81–88; XIII, 89 St. II, p. 287; VI, VI, 52–53, St. II p. 458–459; Eusebius, H. E. IV, 7 Schwartz p. 129–130 Epiphanius, Adversus haereses XXXII. Wed. W. Christ, Philologische Studien zu Clemens Alexandrinus. München 1900. S. 4; Cognat, Clément d'Alexandrie. Paris 1859. P. 25. Ἐρίζουσι Stählin, Ἐθνίζουσι Mayor Ἐθίζουσι L. Str. VII, XVI, 93 III p. 68 St. Ibidem, 96. That the Gnostics, who pretended that their every word was confirmed by the data of Scripture (cf. Tertullian, De praescriptionibus haereticorum, 15 Migne, s. lat. t. II, col. 33; De resurrectione carnis, 63 Migne, s. lat., t. II, coll. 886), in reality approached the sacred books with firmly established, regardless of church teaching, with their personal views, this, in addition to Clement, is evidenced by Irenaeus (cp. Adv. haeres. I, 6 Harvey I, p. 30–31; I, 15, H. I, p. 66–67; I, 20 H. I, 85–86; II, IX H. I, 273), Hippolytus, Tertullian, Origen et al. Wed. Str. IV, I, 1–3. St. II p.: “Comprehension of the world (ϕυσιολογία – κοσμολογία καὶ θεολογία. Cf. Faye, Cl. D’Al. 79 2) according to the canon of a truly Gnostic tradition, or rather contemplation begins with the doctrine of the world, ascending from here to the knowledge of God.” Wed. E. Faye, Clément d’Alexandrie. Paris 1898 p. 84–86; Bardenhewer, Geschichte der altchristliehen Litteratur. Fr. im. Br. 1903. B 1 2, S. 30–37; A. Harnack, Die Chronologie der altchristliehen Litteratur bis Eusebius, Leipzig 1904. Β II, 18 3; P. Barth, Die Stoa. Stuttgart 1908 S. 261 9; H. Meyboom, Clemens Alexandrinus. Leiden 1912. Theodotus is only known from these “Extracts from Theodotus.” Zahn's assumption (Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutest. Kanons und der altchristlichen Litteratur T. III (1884) S. 125) that this Theodotus is identical with Paul's student Theodos, whom the Valentinians called the teacher of Valentinus (Cf. Clement Al., Strom. VI, XVII, 106 Stählin III p. 75), rejected on sufficient grounds by Harnack (Geschichte des altchristlichen Litteratur II, 1, 295). Cp. Bardenhewer, Geschichte I 2, 335. The Valentinian school, which spread around the middle of the 2nd century throughout almost the entire Roman Empire, at the same time split on the issue of the body of Christ into two independent branches: eastern (ἀνατολική) and Italian (ἰταλιωτική) - western. “The Italians... say that the body of Jesus was psychic...; the eastern ones say that the Savior’s body was pneumatic” (Hippolytus, Philosophumena VI, 35 – Migne XVI, 3, col. 3250). The main representatives of the Western Valentinian school were two personal students of Valentinus (Origenes, Johannescommentar. II 8 Preuschen 70, 4) Heracleon and Ptolemy (cf. Hippolytus, ibidem), the eastern one was Aksionik (faithful student of Valentinus - cf. Tertullian, Adv. Valent. 4 Mg., s. lat. t. II, coll. 547) and Vardesan (Hippolytus, ibidem). Wed. Heinrici, Die Ualentinianische Gnosis und die heilige Schrift. Berlin 1871. S. 88 ff. The translation of Excerptorum ex Theodoto, which we give below, was made by us according to the edition of O. Stählin: Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte herausgegeben von der Kirchenväter-Commission der königl. preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaft. B. 15. Clemens Alexandrenus. B. III, p. 105–133. The notes to the text were partly taken from Stählin, partly based on personal observations. For a different explanation of this text, compared to § 1, see below, in § 62: “the soul of Christ, when His body suffered, delivered itself into the hands of the Father.” Wed. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses I. 13 (Ed W. W. Harvey 1857 T. I, p. 60): “in him (the Savior) was a spiritual seed, descended from Achamoth (ἀπὸ τῆς Ἀχαμώθ).” Wed. Hippolytus, Philosophumena VI, 34 Migne, s. gr., t. XVI col. 3250: “the body of Christ was pneumatic.” The identification of Sophia and the spiritual seed, which we find in this §, can also be noted in Hippolytus, Philos. VI, 34 Mg., ibid., col. 3247: “Sophia is called spirit.” Μὴ κατασκεθ ῇ. Wed. § 22: “Jesus also needed redemption, so as not to be held back by Thought.” Ἀριστερῶν δοναμέων. This reading, which is offered by Bernays y Bunsen (Anallecta Antenic. 1 p. 201) should be given preference over that of Potter (Opera Clementis Al. II p. 966), Dindorf (Opera Clem. Al. III, p. 424) and Stählin (Clemens Alexandrmus III, p. 105) because the term The Valentinians actually applied ἀριστερός to beings and powers (arising from passion and matter) and, precisely, to those who opposed the Savior. Wed. Exc. ex Theodoto § 71; Irenaeus Ad. haereses I, 18. That the elect (ἐκλεκτοί) are the spiritual seed, see below § 26: “the visible part of Jesus was Sophia and the Church of the perfect seeds”; likewise in Irenaeus, Adv. haer. I, 10 (Hervey 1, 51): “for the Demiurge did not know both the Mother and her seed, which itself, they say, is the Church, the image of the Church on high.” A completely different meaning of leaven (τῆς ζύμης) in the Valentinian interpretation is noted by Irenaeus Adv. haer. I, 16 (Harvey 72): “the Savior himself is called leaven, teach the Valentinians.” This saying has two canonical parallels: the Old Testament - Gen. XIX, 17 (LXX) σώζων σῶζε τὴν σεαυτοῦ ψυχύν, and the New Testament, which is undoubtedly based (cf. Luke 17:31) Gen. 19, 17 – Luke. 17, 32: μνημονεύετε τῆς γυναικὸς Αώτ, 33: ὁς ἐὰν ζητήσ ῃ τὴν ψυχὴν ἀυτοῦ σῶσαι κτλ. Wed. A. Resch, Agrapha. Aufl. II. T. und Untersuch. XXX, 3–4 S. 180–181. Hilgenfeld (Nov. Test, extra can. IV 4 S. 44. 47) suggests that this saying is taken from the “Gospel of the Egyptians,” and this assumption has its basis in the fact that Theodotus undoubtedly used this gospel. See § 67 Cf. I. H. Ropes, Die Sprüche Iesu, die in den kanonischen Evangelien sind. Texte und Unters. XIV, 2 S. 122–123; Resch, 180. Wed. Str. VII, II, 5 (St. III, 5 35 – 6 1): “The Son of God, not divided, not cut, not moving from place to place, but existing everywhere and never encompassed.” Δύναμις γὰς ἧ ν τοῦ πατρός . Wed. Str. VII, II, 7 (St. III, 7 22): “Some paternal energy is the Son.” Gnostic interpretation of John. 1, 1 see Irenaeus Adversur haereses I, 18 (W. W. Harvey I, 75–80). Cp. Irenaeus Adv. haer. I, 18 (Harvey 75–76): “The Lord’s disciple John, wishing to speak of the creation of all things, during which the Father produced all things, presupposes a certain beginning, first of all begotten by God, whom he called both the Only Begotten Son and God, in whom the Father produced all things in the form of a seed.” Wed. Hippolytus Philosophumena VI, 31 (Migne, S. gr. t. XVI, 3 col. 3240): “All the aeons ran with prayer (to the Father) so that He would calm the sad Sophia, since she cried and grieved over the miscarriage she gave birth to - that’s what they call (Enphimisis). The Father, taking pity on Sophia’s tears and heeding the prayer of the eons, commands to produce more; but not himself, he says, but Mind and Truth produced Christ and the Holy Spirit. Irenaeus I, 4 (Harvey I, 20-21): “after the Enphimisis was separated from the pleroma of the aeons and his mother was restored to her syzygy, the Only Begotten, in accordance with the provision of the Father, so that none of the aeons would suffer like her, produced another syzygy: Christ and the Holy Spirit, as a stronghold and strengthening of the pleroma. Adv. haeres III, 11. 7 (Harvey II, 40): “The Only Begotten is the beginning, and the Logos is the true son of the Only Begotten.” Ibidem II, 13, 4 (Harvey I, 285): “from him (i.e. Mind), they (Valentinians) say, came the Word and Life, the creators of this pleroma.” Wed. Hippolytus, Philosophumena VI, 29 (Migne, S. gr. t. XVI, col. 3238): “And He (Mind), imitating the Father, produced Logos and Life.” Origenes, Johannes commentar, II, 24 (E. Preushen, 81, 1–3). Wed. Origenes, Johannescommentar, II, 24 (Preuschen 81, 4): “syzygy of the Logos - Life”... Irenaeus Adv. haeres. I, 18 (Harvey I, 77): “what was in Him (Logos), says (St. John), is life. Here (St. John) pointed precisely to the syzygy, for he said that everything happened through Him, and life is in Him.” Πρωτότοκος π ᾶ σης κτίσεως Col. I, 15. Irenaeus, Adv. haer. I, 9 (Harvey I, 43): “this (Demiurge) was the image of the Only Begotten Son, and the other eons were the archangels and angels who received existence from them”; Ibidem II, 5, 2 (Harvey I, 266): “the image of the Only Begotten, tell me, was made by the creator” (the Savior, - cp. Adv. haer. I, 8 Harvey I, 41). Διὸ καὶ ἀυτὰ τῆς εἰκόνος τὰ ἔργα . In this case we accept the codex L reading, although it is not the only one. Stahlin, referring to Userer, reads this passage as follows: δ. κ. λυτὰ τ. εἰκ. τ. ἔρ., and finds a New Testament parallel to this reading in 1 John. 3, 8. Bernays, instead of ἀυτὰ and λυτὰ, reads ἀργά. Ὁ σωτὴρ καὶ πρωτότοκος κτλ. Between the words καὶ and πρωτότοκος in Codex L, and then in all editions of Clement’s works, there is a note from the reader or copyist in the margins of the following content: “Isaiah (says): “And I will give their works into their bosom” (LXV, 7) into their thought, which is in the soul, from which the first movement comes.” Wed. below § 19: “the Savior is called the son of the same Logos.” For this saying, which we would look in vain for in the canonical gospels, Resch (S. 175–176) cites a number of parallels from the works of ancient Christian church literature: the Epistles of Barnabas (XV, 5), the Didache (XVI, 4), Origen’s discourses on the book of the prophet Jeremiah (IV), the Apostolic Constitutions (VII, 32), etc. Wed. Str. VII, II, 7 (St. III, 6, 29 – 7, 1–3). Between οἱ ἀρχάγγελοι and οἱ πρωτόκτιστοι Bunsen suggests inserting οὐδέ. A sufficient basis for the difference between the archangels and the firstborn is § 12 of the same “Extracts from Theodotus”, where we read: “the firstborn see the Son and themselves and the beings below them, like the archangels of the firstborn (οἱ ἀρχάγγελοι τούς πρωτοκτίστους ). Wed. § 27. Paed. I, 57; Str. V, 34; VII, 58; Exc. ex Th, 12: “The Son, who is called the face of the Father, is the beginning of the father’s contemplation” Cf. ibidem, 23. Usener, Religeongeschiehtliche Untersuchungen I, S. 57. Str. II, 36 (St. II, p. 132). Cp. Irenaeus, Adv. haer. I, 13 (Harvey I, p. 58). Str. VI, 46 (St. II, p. 454). Wed. Origenes, Johannes-commentar VI, XX (Preuschen, 129, 21–22); below § 79: “while the seed does not yet have an image, they say it is the child of a woman; Having received the image, he changes into a husband and becomes the son of the groom. Wed. Str. III, 92 (St. II p. 238).