respect. They say there are two men represented by Cain and Abel; the latter was slain by Cain. Nevertheless the higher power from above, which they call mother, prevailed. For 'knowing that Abel was killed, she procured the birth of Seth, and put her power in him; that is, a divine' principle, and spark from above; whereby he became the chosen seed, and was disposed to righteousness and all virtue. Hereby the seed of Seth was from the beginning separated from the other race. But in process of time, they say, the seed of Cain and Abel (or Seth) mingling together, wickedness prevailed in the earth. The mother from above looking down, and seeing this, she determined to secure a holy seed: accordingly she brought on the flood, and destroyed all mankind in general; that for the future there might be in the world, a pure, holy, and righteous race of men only in the family of Seth. Nevertheless, Ham, a child of the evil angels, clandestinely got into the ark. For eight souls were saved therein, seven of which were of the good race. But Ham being also preserved, who was one of the ' other race, from thence sprang error, ignorance, inconsideration, and by degrees all manner of ' wickedness; till at length the world was become as wicked and disorderly as before the flood. But from Seth by a continued succession, though not in the ordinary way, but in a wonderful 'manner, descended Jesus the Christ, who dwelled among men, sent from the mother above; that is, being born of a virgin, and anointed for his office by the Holy Spirit of God, whom the Sethians spoke of as the mother of all.' So Epiphanius; and to the like purpose the author of the Additions to Tertullian's book of Prescriptions, whom I transcribe largely below.

с

SECTION IV.

There never was a Sect of Christians who called themselves Cainites, or who professed the Principles above described.

THIS then having been a common way of speaking among men, especially among the Sethians, I think it may be questioned whether there ever was a sect of Christians, or number of men, who called themselves Cainites, and professed the principles abovementioned. But some evil men were represented as children of the evil one, and as resembling Cain and other bad men mentioned in the scriptures. Hence some who were willing enough to multiply heresies took occasion, or by mistake were led, to talk of a sect with that denomination.

Κεκρατηκέναι δε την ανω δυναμιν, ἣν μητερα φάσκεσι, και θηλειαν. p. 284. D.

* Και τον Σηθ θειαν τινα δυναμιν είναι φασι. Theod. p. 205. B.

• Και έτως ὁ κόσμος εις το αρχαίον της αταξίας αυθις ανεκαμψε, και ενεπλήσθη κακων, ως εξ αρχης προ τε κατακλυσε με. Από δε το Σηθ κατα σπερμα. κ. λ. p. 286. Α.

Sed et illo hæresis processit, quæ dicitur Sethoitarum. Hujus perversitatis doctrina hæc est: duos homines ab angelis constitutos, Caïn et Abel; propter hos magnas inter angelos contentiones et discordias exstitisse; ob hanc causam, illam Virtutem quæ super omnes virtutes est, quam matrem pronuntiant, dum Abel interfectum dicerent, voluisse concipi

et nasci hunc Seth, loco Abelis, ut evacuarentur angeli illi -Permixtiones enim dicunt angelorum et hominum iniquas fuisse; ob quam causam, illam Virtutem, quam (sicut diximus) pronuntiant matrem, ad vindictam etiam cataclysmum inducere, ut et illud permixtionis semen tolleretur; et hoc solum semen, quod esset purum, integrum custodiretur. Sed enim illos qui seminis illos prioris instituissent, occulte et latenter, et ignorante illa matre Virtute, cum illis octo animabus in arcam misisse etiam Cham, quo semen malitiæ non periret, sed cum cæteris conservatum, et post cataclysmum terris redditum, exemplo cæterorum excresceret, et effunderetur, et totum orbem et impleret et occuparet. De Przs. cap. 47. p. 251. C. D.

CHAP. XV.

OF THE OPHIANS, OR OPHITES.

SECTION I.

The Ophians are said by Irenæus and Theodoret to be the same with the Sethians.

WE come next to the Ophians, which are joined with the Sethians by Irenæus and Theodoret in the same chapter, as was observed formerly. And Theodoret says at the beginning of his chapter that it was the opinion of some that the Ophians were the same with the Sethians.' If so, we have already seen the opinions of these people. They believed Jesus to have been born of a virgin, and to be the Christ, and other things before spoken of the Sethians. The opinions of each are represented together by Irenæus and Theodoret, as common to both. Consequently the Ophites, according to this view of the matter, were Hebrew believers, or Jewish Christians, as well as the Sethians, and were one and the same people, or sect, under different titles and denominations; called Sethians from their frequently speaking of themselves as descendants of Seth, and the children of God; and Ophians from some other particular tenet," or manner of understanding, and explaining some texts, and perhaps applying them to the Messiah.

SECTION II.

Very different Representations given of these People by Epiphanius and others.

HOWEVER it must be acknowledged that these people are represented in a very different light by some authors; let us therefore see what other ancient writers say of them.

с

The Ophites,' says Epiphanius in his Summary, have a veneration for the serpent; they esteem him the same as Christ, and keep a real serpent in a chest.'

In his Panarium itself he says that the Ophites have sprung from the Nicolaitans and Gnostics, and former sects. They are called Ophites from the respect which they shew to the serpent. They said the serpent was the occasion of all the knowledge which men had obtained, and therefore they shewed him great honour. He again says they have a real serpent in a chest; and speaks of other things that seem not to deserve to be mentioned. He adds that beside other texts of scripture, they insisted upon the account of Moses erecting a brazen serpent, recorded in Numb. xxi. 8, 9, and also John iii. 14, 15.'

i

k

h

I put in the margin Augustine's article almost entire; and also took a large part of the

• Οἱ δε Σηθιανοι, ές Οφιανες η Οφίτας τινες ονομάζεσιν. Η. F. 1. 1. c. 14. p. 204. B.

Id quod proximâ dissertatione Ophitarum exemplo ostendemus, qui et ipsi Sethiani fuerunt, uti quidem Theodoretus narrat: vero cum non tantum vaticinia et historias Vet. T. docte atque eleganter exponerent, sed et typos, atque inter alios illum de serpente æneo, Num. xxi. ex mente Christi Joh. iii. 14, 15, et Cabbalistarum dextre interpretarentur, nomen meruerunt. Rhenf. de Sethian. c. ult. p. 193.

• Όφιται εισιν, οἱ τον οφιν δοξάζοντες, και τέτον τον Χρισον ἡγεμενοι. Εχόντες δε φύσει το ερπετον εν χιση τινι. p. 229. D. d H. 37. n. 2. p. 268. A.

• Λεγοντες, ὅτι οὗτος αρχη γεγονε γνωσεως τοις ανθρωποις. n. 3. p. 270. B.

f Ağakeσiv ev autoV SIA TYV TOIKUTYY yvwoix. n. 5. p. 272. A.

1

8 Ibid. A.

Η Φερεσι δε και άλλας μάρτυρας λεγοντες, ότι και Μωϋσης εν τη ερήμω τον οφιν τον χαλκον ύψωσε. κ. λ. n. 8. p. 273. C. Ophite a colubro nominati sunt: hunc autem Christum arbitrantur. Sed habent etiam verum colubrum assue um eorum panes lambere, atque ita eis velut eucharistiam sanctificare. Quidam dicunt istos Ophitas ex Nicolaïtis sive Gnosticis extitisse, et per eorum fabulosa figmenta ad colubrum colendum fuisse perventum. Aug. H. 17.

k Accesserunt his hæretici etiam illi, qui Ophitæ nuncu pantur. Nam serpentem magnificant in tantum, ut illum etiam ipsi Christo præferant. Ipse enim, inquiunt, scientiæ nobis boni et mali originem dedit. Hojus animadvertens potentiam et majestatem Möyses, inquiunt, æreum posuit serpentem. Et quicumque ipsum aspexerunt, sanitatem conse

article in the Additions to Tertullian's book of Prescriptions; where we are again assured that they argued from the forementioned places of the book of Numbers and St. John's gospel.

SECTION III.

Origen's Account of the Ophians, with some Observations thereon.

LET us now see what Origen says of the Ophians in his time. Of him we have hitherto made no use in our inquiries concerning this and the two foregoing heresies; but he has some things about Ophians that may by no means be overlooked.

C

b

a

Upon occasion of some things in Celsus, Origen says that they who are called Ophians, are so far from being Christians, that they are as ready to calumniate Jesus as Celsus himself. Nor would they admit any one into their society without his first cursing Jesus.' And presently afterwards he says that they glory in one Euphrates as their master.' In another place he says that so far from owning Jesus for God, or Saviour, they do not allow him to be master, or the Son of God.' Nevertheless, possibly Origen might be mistaken here. I choose not to lay much stress upon a passage of Origen's Latin Commentaries of St. Matthew, where the Ophians are mentioned with divers Christian heretics; for it may have been added to the original by the translator, or by somebody else since. But I shall take notice of several things concerning these persons in his books against Celsus. That heathen writer had objected to the Christians the divisions which there were among them. Origen answers that it was perhaps likely Celsus had heard of some sects who had not the very name of Christians; as of the Ophians and Caians, or some such other people who had entirely forsaken the Christian doc'trine. But,' says he, that is no disparagement to the Christian religion.' Here Ophians are mentioned with Caians, who are generally supposed to have been Christians. And it was not uncommon with catholic writers to say of heretics that they did not agree with them so much as in name. This passage therefore might rather incline us to think they were Christians by profession, or a Christian sect. He speaks of them to the like purpose in another place, saying that they are far removed from the true Christian doctrine held by sound Christians.' Again: Celsus directs his discourse to all Christians in general; when what he says can be applied to none but such as are altogether estranged from the doctrine of Jesus; as the Ophians who reverence him, as we said before, and some others. Which too might be said of a Christian sect that was supposed to be very erroneous. Moreover, he speaks of the Ophians as ascribing to the serpent the knowledge which men had; the same which is said of them by others, who reckoned them a Christian sect. Farther, Celsus referred to a diagram, which Origen procured; and he says he supposeth it to belong to the Ophians. But in that diagram are expressions which probably belong to Christians; for they speak of the Father ' ' and the Son,' and the living Word; and pray again and again that the grace of the Father may be with them; not to mention any other expressions. They are also afterwards represented by Origen as invoking seven angels, or God under seven names; most of them certainly Hebrew, and, as * Origen owns, taken out of the scriptures; several of which also are to be

k

h

τοιαύτη εξ όλων αποφοιτήσασα το Ιησε ανεση γνωμη. κ. λ. lib. 3. p. 455. D.

f Lib. 6. p. 656. C. D.

8 Έξης δε τοις εξετασθεισιν ὁ Κελσος, ὡς πρὸς παντας Χρισιανες αποτείνει λογον, όν τινα προς τις παντη αλλοτρίες της Ιησε διδασκαλιας όμολογοντας είναι αρα λεγειν ήρμόζει. Οφιανοι γαρ (ως και εν τοις ανωτέρω ελεγομεν) τον Ιησεν εξ ¿λwv agreμevoi. x. λ. 1. 7. p. 358. Cant. p. 722, C. D. Bened. h Lib. 6. p. 648. C. D. 653. D.

* Ενθεν ειλικρινης πεμπομαι, φωτος ηδη μέρος υἱς και πατρος" η χαρις συνεδω μοι, ναι, πάτερ, συνεσω. p. 654. D.- εργον τελειον υιω και πατρι η χαρις συνεδω μοι, ναι, πάτερ, συνεζω -λoyw ZwYTI. p. 653. A. B. Bened,

* Ibid. p. 657. A.

found in Irenæus's chapter of the Sethians and Ophites, as Jaldabaoth, Jao, Sabaoth, Eloæus, Adonæus, Astaphæus, Horæus; which makes me think they were Christians, but still very much attached to Judaism. And when Origen says that they would not admit any into their society without cursing Jesus, it seems to me that he then took them for unbelieving Jews; whereas they were indeed Jews by birth, or Hebrews, but Christians by religion and profession. And in divers of his passages before quoted, he seems to me to speak of them as a Christian sect, but very erroneous, and so absurd in their opinions as not to deserve the name of Christians. However, I apprehend that Origen had a very imperfect knowledge of the sentiments of these men.

As for what is said of them by some, that they thought the serpent to be Christ, it must be a mistake. The truth is, they thought the brazen serpent in the wilderness to be a type or figure of Christ. As for worshipping the serpent, and keeping a living serpent in a chest, and bringing him out to partake of, or consecrate the Eucharist, they are mere calumnies. And their having a living or real serpent in a chest, is mentioned by none but Epiphanius, and Augustine, and Damascenus, his followers. That story is not in Irenæus, nor Philaster, nor Theodoret, nor the Additions to Tertullian's book of Prescriptions.

Note by the Editor of the former Edition.

THESE Ophians can scarce be considered as Christian heretics. This appeared to me to be the case when I was completing the history of the Basilidians. I had accordingly mentioned it as my opinion at the end of Book II. chap. ii. sect. 27, p. 553. But, by the advice of a learned friend, I omitted it there, lest it should be deemed premature; because it represented them in a different manner from that in which Dr. Lardner himself afterwards considered them.

If they were a Christian sect, of which I am still doubtful, they were certainly very erroneous in their opinions. The Simonians, who are by many regarded as Christian heretics, appear to me in the same point of view with the Ophians.

The following quotations from Origen are the grounds of my opinion with respect to both these sects. Dr. Lardner, however, did not consider them in the same light in which they strike me. Perhaps he may be right. With the utmost deference therefore to his superior judgment, I will just give the substance of what I had inserted in the place before referred to, and leave it to the reader to follow which of the two opinions appears to be best founded.

a

b

The Simonians, Origen tells us, would never confess Jesus to be the son of God. Simon was probably an impostor, who wanted to overturn the whole Christian doctrine. So also, according to him, was Euphrates, the father of the Ophites or Ophians; they were so far from being Christians, that they spoke against Jesus as much as Celsus himself; and would not admit any one into their society till he had pronounced curses against him.

* Ουδαμώς τον Ιησεν ὁμολογεσι υἱον Θε8 Σιμωνιακοι. Contra Celsum. lib 5. p. 272. Spencer. Opp. T. 1. 625. Benedict. * Και Οριάνοι καλέμενοι τοσετον αποδέυσι το είναι Χρισι ανοι, ώσε εκ ελαττον Κέλσε κατηγορείν αυτός το Ιησε. Και

μη πρότερον προσείσθαι τινα επι το συνέδριον ἑαυτων, εαν μη agas JyTaι HATA T8 Io8. Contra Cels. lib. 6. p. 294. Spen. Opp. Tom. 1. p. 652. A. Bened. See also note p. 656, of this chapter. Δικοι δε, κ. τ. λ.

4 P

VOL. IV.

a

CHAP. XVI.

OF ARTEMON,

SECTION I.

Of his Opinions.

ARTEMON, called also Artemas, says Theodoret, agrees with us in acknowledging the supreme Deity, and owning him to be the Creator of the universe. But he said that our Lord Jesus Christ was a mere man, born of a virgin, and superior in virtue to the prophets. He said that this was the doctrine of the apostles, perverting the sense of the sacred scriptures, and affirming that since the time of the apostles some had taught the divinity of Christ without reason.

SECTION II.

He founded them on Scripture, and paid a Regard to its Authority.

HERE we see at once what was Artemon's doctrine, that he founded it upon the scriptures, and owned the authority of the apostles.

b

с

I formerly gave a particular account of the work of an anonymous author against the followers of Artemon, supposed to have been written about the year 212. Theodoret agrees mightily with him. The design of the first passage, transcribed from that work, and found in Eusebius, was to shew the novelty of that opinion, that our Saviour was a mere man: whereas they said that all the ancients and even the apostles themselves, received and taught the same things which they now held; and that the truth of the gospel had been preserved till the time ⚫ of Victor, the thirteenth bishop of Rome; but by his successor, Zephyrinus, the truth had been 'corrupted.'

с

SECTION III.

Several others held the same Opinions.

THAT author speaks of several who seem to have been much of the same opinion with Artemas. Their names are Theodotus the tanner, Asclepiades, or Asclepiodotus, and Theodotus the banker: also Hermophilus, and Apollonius, or Apollonides, not to say any thing of Natalis: that author brings some charges against these men, as corrupting the scriptures, which were considered formerly; there is no occasion to repeat what was then said, but I beg leave to refer my readers to it.f

g

Eusebius himself says that it was Artemon's opinion which Paul of Samosata had endeavoured to revive. The bishops of the council of Antioch speak to the like purpose, as does