It is probable, that the apostle Paul might allude to the great respect paid to these invisible aons, by what he says of the worshipping of angels, and intruding into those things which a man has not feen, vainly puffed up in bis fleshly mind, Col. ii. 18. as the last circumstance evidently marks the Gnostics. And as they pretended to great spirituality and dislike of the flesh, the apostle might intend a farther rebuke to them by insinuating that their minds were fleshly.

Lastly, it is possible that the apostle Peter might allude to these idle Gnostic fables, when he said, 2 Pet. i. 16. We have not followed cunningly devised fables, &c.

SECTION

SECTION III.

The Doctrine of the Gnoftics concerning the Soul.

THERE was fomething peculiar in the

doctrine of the Gnoftics, with re-.

fpect to the foul. As it was a fundamental principle with all the ancients, that there could be no proper creation, and confequently that fouls, not being material, nor yet created out of nothing, were either parts detached from the foul of the univerfe, or emanations from the divine mind, this doctrine was held by the Gnoftics. And as fome men are vicious and others virtuous, it was fuppofed that their fouls had two different origins, and were therefore good or bad by nature, the good having fprung from the divine mind, mediately, or immediately, and the bad having had some other origin, the fame from which every thing evil was fuppofed

VOL. I.

M

supposed to have sprung. They likewise held that the future fates of men depended upon their original nature. Saturninus, Theodoret fays, held that "there were two "kinds of fouls, the one good, and the "other bad; and that they had this dif"ference from nature, and that as the evil "dæmon affifted the bad, fo the Saviour "came to affift the good*." Origen says, that the difciples of Bafilides and Valentinus, held that "there is a kind of "fouls that are always faved, and never perish, and others that always perish, "and are never faved +."

66

He also says that "Marcion introduced different kinds

* Δυω των ανθρωπων είναι λέγει διαφορας, και τες μεν είναι αγα 985, 785 δε πονηρες, κ) ταύτην εν φύσει την διαφοραν ειληφέναι. των δε πονηρων δαιμόνων τοις πονηροις συμπρατίονίων, ήλθε, φησιν, ο Σωτήρ επαμύναι τοις αγαθοις. Hær. Fab. lib. 1. cap. 3. vol. 4. p. 194.

+ Nefcio quomodo qui de fchola Valentina et Bafilidis veniunt, hæc ita a Paulo dicta non audientes, putent effe naturam animarum quæ femper falva fit, et nunquam pereat, et aliam quæ femper pereat et nunquam falvetur. In Rom. Opera, vol. 2. p. 596.

2

" of.

On

"of fouls *." This doctrine of the original difference of fouls, is likewise well known to have been part of the Manichean fyftem; and therefore a confiderable topic of argument with Austin, and others who wrote against the Manicheans, is to prove that men are not wicked by nature, but from the abuse of free will. this subject Auftin, who wrote against the Manicheans in the early part of his life, advanced many excellent things in favour of free will, and the natural power of man to do good and evil, which he contradicted when he afterwards wrote against the Pelagians. We find this doctrine of fate afcribed to Simon in the Recognitions †.

As the Gnostics were always ready to alledge the fcriptures in fupport of their doctrines, they pretended to have an authority in them even for this part of their fyftem; for Cyril of Jerufalem fays, that

* Marcion tamen, et omnes qui diverfis figmentis varias introducunt animarum naturas. Ibid. p. 479.

+ Et Simon nefcio inquit fi vel hoc ipfum fciam. Unufquifque enim ficut ei fato decernitur vel fapit aliquid, vel intelligit, vel patitur. Lib. 3. cap. 22. p. 523.

"fome inferred from 1 John iii. 10. By "this we know the children of God, and the "the children of the Devil, that some men "were to be faved, and others to be damned

by nature. But this holy fonship," he fays, "we arrive at, not from neceffity, but "choice. Neither," adds he, " was Judas "the traitor the fon of the devil, or deftruction, by nature*."

As these Gnoftics held that the fouls of all good men were derived from the divine. mind, they could have no difficulty in admitting that Chrift, whom they supposed to be one of the greater æons, was of the fame fubftance with the Father. Accordingly, Beaufobre observes, that, on this principle, they efcaped all cenfure at the council of Nice. They even used the famous term (1) confubftantial, with refpect to the human foul; in oppofition to which principle Theodoret says, “ The

66

Ου γαρ ανεξόμεθα των κακως εισλαμβανονίων το ειρημένον εκείνο : το εκ τελε γινωσκομεν τα τεκνα τε θες, και τα τεκνα τε διάβολε, ως ονίων φύσει τινων, σωζομένων απολλυμένων εν ανθρωποις. ελε γαρ επαναγκες, αλλ' εκ προαιρέσεως εις την τοιαύτην αγίαν υιοθεσιαν ερχομεθα. δε εκ φύσεως ο προδότης Ιεδας υιος ην διαβολο και απώλειας Cat. 7. p. 108..

"foul