The Book of Various Heresies, Chapters 29–43: The Gnostic Schools
Introduction
Filastrius (also known as Philastrius) served as bishop of Brescia in northern Italy until his death around 397 AD. His Diversarum Hereseon Liber — the Book of Various Heresies — is among the most ambitious heresiological catalogs produced by the Latin Church. Written around 385 AD, the work enumerates 156 heresies: 28 pre-Christian Jewish sects followed by 128 Christian deviations. It is the earliest surviving Latin work devoted exclusively to cataloging heresies, predating Augustine’s De Haeresibus by several decades.
The fifteen chapters translated here (29–43) form the core of Filastrius’s treatment of Gnostic Christianity. Beginning with Simon Magus — whom all heresiologists treat as the fountainhead of Gnostic thought — Filastrius moves systematically through the Basilideans, the Nicolaitan-Gnostics (with their Barbelo cosmogony and the figure of Ialdabaoth), the Cainite rehabilitation of Judas, the Carpocratians, and the full Valentinian succession: Valentinus himself, then Ptolemaeus, Secundus, Heracleon, Marcus, and Colorbasus. This is a complete survey of the Gnostic landscape as understood by a fourth-century Latin bishop.
Filastrius draws on earlier Greek sources — primarily Irenaeus’s Adversus Haereses and, likely through intermediaries, the work of Hippolytus — but his Latin redaction is not a mere translation. He compresses, rearranges, and occasionally introduces details or framings not found in his sources. His account of the Nicolaitan-Gnostic cosmogony (chapter 33), with its primordial darkness rushing upon the spirit to beget the first Aeons, preserves a variant of the Barbelo-Gnostic creation narrative that differs in specific details from the versions in Irenaeus and Epiphanius. His treatment of the Cainite theology of Judas (chapter 34) is notably concise yet preserves the essential argument: that Judas acted from scientia — knowledge — understanding that Christ’s suffering would bring salvation to humanity.
A recurrent theme unifies these chapters: the question of the divine spark (scintilla). In chapter 31, Filastrius describes how the supreme power sent a spark down into the body fashioned by the angels, and this spark — not the body — is what is saved. This idea, that a fragment of divine light is trapped within the material world and awaits liberation, runs through nearly every system Filastrius describes. It is the theological thread that connects Simon’s Ennoia imprisoned in Helen, the Valentinian soul awaiting release from the Demiurge’s creation, and the Carpocratian doctrine that only the soul ascends to heaven while the flesh is abandoned. For the Gnostics, matter is not simply inferior to spirit — it is a prison. Salvation is the spark’s escape.
No complete English translation of Filastrius’s Diversarum Hereseon Liber has ever been published. The text presented here is the first English rendering of any portion of this work.
POST PASSIONEM AUTEM CHRISTI DOMINI NOSTBI ET ASCENSIO- NEM IN CAELUM Simon quidam fuit Magus, genere Samaritanus, Githeus, de loco quae uilla est in Samaria ita uocitata: qui magicis uacans artibus multos fallebat, dicens se esse uirtutem quandam dei, quae supra omnes, inquit, uirtutes est.Quem Samaritani quasi patrem uenerantur et suae hereseos institutorem perniciosae extollunt, multisque eum praeferre laudibus enituntur.Qui baptizatus a beatis apostolis recessit a fide eorum, sceleratamque et perniciosam heresim seminauit, dicens se transformatum putatiue, id est quasi per umbram, et ita se passum fuisse, cum non, inquit, pateretur. Qui et audebat dicere mundum ab angelis factum, angelos autem factos a
After the passion of Christ our Lord and his ascension into heaven, there was a certain Simon the Magician, a Samaritan by origin, from Gitta — a village in Samaria so called. Practicing magical arts, he deceived many, saying that he was a certain power of God which is, he said, above all powers. The Samaritans venerate him as a father and extol him as the founder of their pernicious heresy, and they strive to exalt him with many praises.
Having been baptized by the blessed apostles, he departed from their faith and sowed a wicked and pernicious heresy, saying that he had been transformed in appearance only — that is, as through a shadow — and that he had suffered in this way, though he did not, he said, truly suffer. He also dared to say that the world was made by angels, and that the angels were made by him through certain powers bestowed from heaven, and that they had deceived the human race.
He asserts that a certain other Intellect (Intellectus) descended into the world for the salvation of humanity — that Helena, he says, who is proclaimed in the Trojan War by the most vain of poets. And the powers that had made the world, he says, driven by desire for that Helena, were stirring up strife. For she, he says, arousing desire in those powers and appearing in female form, was unable to ascend into heaven, because the powers that were in heaven did not permit her to ascend. She was waiting for another power — that is, for the arrival of the Magician Simon himself — who would come and save her.
He also asserts by allegory that the wooden horse which the most vain of poets say existed in the Trojan War was the ignorance of all the impious nations — since it is established that that Helena who was with the Magician was a prostitute from Tyre, and that Simon the Magician had followed her, and with her had perpetrated various sorceries and various crimes.
When he fled from the blessed apostle Peter from the city of Jerusalem and came to Rome, and there fought against the blessed apostle before King Nero, he was vanquished on every side by the prayer of the blessed apostle and struck down by an angel, and so he deserved to perish — so that his sorcery and deceit might be made manifest to all people.
Post hunc Menandrus quidam nomine * qui discipulus factus ipsius, impietatem est eius secutus in omnibus.
After him, a certain man named Menander, who became his disciple, followed his impiety in all things.
Post istum Saturnilus quidam et ipse sumens inde fomenta doctrinae mortiferae adserebat dicens mundum ab angelis factum, et distare angelos a uirtute illa et mundum esse diuisum per ordinem angelis, et cogitasse eos ut facerent hominem.Fecerunt itaque hominem, et opus ipsorum, inquit, erat homo; de uirtute enim superna lumen fuisse dimissum, quod inluminauit mundum istum et ad concupiscentiam adduxit angelos, statimque ascendit in caelum.At illi cupidi luminis ipsius facti uirtutem eius uidere cupiebant; non praeualentes autem adinuicem dixerunt: Faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram. Et facto homine, quia inpotens erat, saluari non potuit.Videns itaque uirtus superna quod illi hoc fecerunt, misit scintillam, quae correxit hominem et suscitauit et fecit eum uiuere. Scintillam itaque uolunt saluari, alia autem uirtutibus illis quae fecerunt dimitti ac derelinqui suspicantur.Christum autem umbraliter apparuisse adfirmant, non carnem hominis ueram et animam accepisse, atque omnem oeconomiam mysterii saluato ris Iris ita complesse.
After him, a certain Saturninus, himself also taking from there the kindling of his deadly doctrine, asserted that the world was made by angels, and that the angels were distant from that supreme power, and that the world was divided by rank among the angels, and that they had conceived the idea of making a human being.
And so they made a human being, and man was their handiwork, he says. For from the power above, a light had been sent down which illuminated this world and drew the angels to desire it, and immediately it ascended back into heaven. But they, made eager for that light, desired to see its power. Being unable to do so, they said to one another: “Let us make man in our image and likeness.” And when man was made, because he was powerless, he could not be saved.
Therefore the power above, seeing that they had done this, sent a spark (scintilla), which corrected man and raised him up and made him live. They hold, therefore, that the spark is saved, but that all else is given over and abandoned to those powers that made it.
They affirm, moreover, that Christ appeared as a shadow — that he did not take on true human flesh and soul — and that he fulfilled the entire economy of the mystery of the Savior in this manner.
Post istos Basilides, ** qui et heresiarches dicitur a multis, quia de lege et prophetis et apostolis proponendo et loquendo, sentiendo autem aliter, iura uiolabat Christianae ueritatis. Qui cum uenisset Aegyptum, docebat ita definiens: de innato et solo deo natum fuisse Intellectum, de Intellectu Verbum, de Verbo Sensum, de Sensu autem Virtutem et Sapientiam, de Virtute autem et Sapientia Principatus et Potestates et angelos factos diuersos.Ipsi enim angeli fecerunt, inquit, caelum, post illos alii angeli fecerunt caelum *, ita ex aliis alii prolati fecerunt tertium caelum. Qui secundum ordinem: et alii, inquit, fecerunt trecentos sexaginta quinque caelos. Et imponit uirtutibus illis nomina angelica, et ipse magiis uacans itidem multos imperitos decipit. Hominem autem ab angelis factum adserit: deum etiam uerum omnipotentem, et eum audet angelum dicere, et accepisse genus Iudaeorum in hereditatem, et eduxisse eos de terra Aegypti.Hic ergo audacior factus, elatus est, inquit, aduersus ceteros angelos, et uolens in subiectionem habere alios, habuit contrarias gentes, quas commouerunt uirtutes inimicae eius.Ideo et contra Iudaeos diuersae gentes, inquit, surrexerunt. Christum autem dicit quasi per umbram putatiue passum fuisse. Simonem etiam Cyreneum pro eo ad passionem uenisse adfirmat. Ipse enim, inquit, portauit crucem.Hic etiam male permittit uiuere, et dat licentiam uitiis saecularibus inherere. Prohibet etiam pati martyrium homines pro nomine Christi domini, dicens ita: Ignoras quid desideras. Non enim passus est, inquit, Christus, neque crucifixus est.Quomodo itaque potes, inquit, confiteri hunc crucifixum, cum non sit crucifixus, et ignoras qui passus sit?
After these came Basilides, who is called by many a heresiarch, because by quoting and speaking about the Law and the Prophets and the Apostles while thinking otherwise, he violated the principles of Christian truth.
When he came to Egypt, he taught, defining thus: from the unbegotten and sole God was born Intellect (Intellectus); from Intellect, the Word (Verbum); from the Word, Sense (Sensus); from Sense, Power (Virtus) and Wisdom (Sapientia); and from Power and Wisdom were made diverse Principalities and Powers and angels. For these angels made a heaven, he says; after them, other angels made another heaven; and thus, some brought forth from others made a third heaven. And in this order, others, he says, made three hundred and sixty-five heavens.
He assigns angelic names to those powers, and being himself devoted to magic, he likewise deceives many ignorant people. He asserts that man was made by angels. He even dares to call the true omnipotent God an angel, and says that he received the Jewish race as his inheritance and led them out of the land of Egypt. This God, therefore, becoming more audacious, was exalted against the other angels, he says, and wishing to hold the others in subjection, he had opposing nations which hostile powers stirred up against him. And therefore diverse nations, he says, rose up against the Jews.
He says that Christ suffered as through a shadow, in appearance only. He also affirms that Simon of Cyrene came to the passion in his place — for he, he says, carried the cross.
He also wickedly permits his followers to live loosely and gives them license to cling to worldly vices. He also forbids people to suffer martyrdom for the name of Christ the Lord, saying: “You do not know what you desire. For Christ did not suffer, he says, nor was he crucified. How then can you confess him crucified, when he was not crucified, and you do not know who actually suffered?”
Videamus et Nicolaus Antiochenus aduena qua est deceptus amentia. Qui sub apostolis fuit atque ab eis est electus diaconus septimus, ut scriptum est in Actibus Apostolorum, posteaque recedens ab eis atque a sana doctrina diuersis erroribus et fallaciis pessumdatus est.Qui fuit primum cum apostolis et Stephano beatissimo martyre, qui dicit et ipse uirtutes esse plurimas; unde et Gnostici, qui scire se aliquid putant, maxime emerserunt. Isti Barbelo uenerantur et Noram quandam mulierem, alii autem ex eis Ialdabaoth quendam, alii autem Calacaun hominem. Dicunt autem et dogma ponentes ista:Ante, inquit, erant solum tenebrae et profundum et aqua, atque ex his diuisio facta est in medio, et spiritus separauit haec elementa. Tunc ergo tenebrae inruentes in spiritum genuerunt quattuor Aeonas, et isti quattuor genuerunt alios quattuor Aeonas.Hoc autem dextra atque sinistra, lux, inquit, sunt et tenebrae. Quendam etiam concubuisse cum illa muliere et uirtute dicunt, de qua nati sunt dii. et homines, et angeli, et septem spiritus daemoniorum Addunt etiam prophetas quosdam natos de ea, speciosum nomine et Barcaban.Alii autem euangelium consummationis et uisiones inanes et plenas fallaciae et somnia uidere diuersa adserunt delirantes.
Let us also consider by what madness Nicolaus the Antiochene, a convert, was deceived. He lived under the apostles and was chosen by them as the seventh deacon, as it is written in the Acts of the Apostles. Afterward, departing from them and from sound doctrine, he was overwhelmed by diverse errors and deceits. He was first with the apostles and with the most blessed martyr Stephen. He himself says that there are many powers — from which especially the Gnostics (Gnostici), who think they know something, emerged.
These venerate Barbelo and a certain woman Noria; others among them worship Ialdabaoth, and others a man called Calacaun. They set forth this teaching:
“Before all things,” they say, “there were only darkness and the deep and water, and from these a division was made in the midst, and a spirit separated these elements. Then the darkness, rushing upon the spirit, begot four Aeons (Aeonas), and these four begot four other Aeons.”
This, they say, is right and left — that is, light and darkness. They also say that a certain being lay with that woman and power, from whom were born gods and men and angels and seven spirits of demons. They also add that certain prophets were born from her, one named Speciosus and another Barcaban.
Others, moreover, assert a “gospel of consummation” and vain visions full of deceit, and they claim to see diverse dreams while raving.
Alii autem ab Iuda traditore instituerunt heresim, dicentes bonum opus fecisse ludam quod tradiderit saluatorem. Hic enim, inquit, nobis omnis scientiae bonae auctor extitit, per quem caelestia nobis mysteria manifestata sunt.Virtutibus etenim in caelo nolentibus, inquit, pati Christum, et scientibus quod, si fuerit passus, uitam hominibus donaturus est, hoc sciens, inquit, ludas, quod, si fuerit passus Christus, salutem hominibus adlaturus est, hinc tradidit saluatorem. Hoc autem malum adsertionis impiae quibusdam uanis et uaecordibus quasi uerisimile uidetur esse interdum, cum sit in omnibus contrarium et exsecrabile, cum propheta eum Dauid beatus ante et dominus saluator damnauerit, et beati apostoli sententiam domini aduersus eum confirmauerint edocentes.
Others established a heresy from Judas the betrayer, saying that Judas did a good work in betraying the Savior. “For he,” they say, “became for us the author of all good knowledge (scientia), through whom the heavenly mysteries were revealed to us.”
For the powers in heaven, they say, did not want Christ to suffer, knowing that if he suffered, he would give life to humanity. Knowing this, they say, Judas understood that if Christ suffered he would bring salvation to humanity — and therefore he betrayed the Savior.
This evil assertion of impiety seems to some vain and senseless people to be plausible at times, though it is in all respects contrary and execrable — since the blessed prophet David before him, and the Lord Savior himself, condemned him, and the blessed apostles confirmed the Lord’s judgment against him in their teaching.
Post istum Carpocras nomine surrexit, et ipse dicens unum principium, de quo principio, id est de deo, prolationes factae sunt, inquit, angelorum atque uirtutum: quae autem uirtutes deorsum sunt, fecerunt creaturam istam uisibilem ubi nos, inquit, consistimus.Christum autem dicit non de Maria uirgine et diuino spiritu natum, sed de semine Ioseph hominem natum arbitratur, deque eo natum carnaliter, sicut omnes homines, suspicatur.Qui post passionem, iuquit, melior inter Iudaeos uita integra et conuersatione inuentus est;cuius animam in caelum susceptam praedicant, carnemI uero in terram dimissam aestimant, animique salutem sonus, carnis autem non fieri salutem opinantur.
After him, one named Carpocrates arose, himself also saying there is one principle, from which principle — that is, from God — emanations (prolationes) of angels and powers were made, he says. Those powers that are below made this visible creation where we dwell, he says.
He says that Christ was not born of the Virgin Mary and the divine Spirit, but considers him a man born from the seed of Joseph, and supposes him born in the flesh just like all other men.
After his passion, he says, Christ was found to be superior among the Jews in the integrity and conduct of his life. They proclaim that his soul was received into heaven, but consider that his flesh was left on the earth. They believe that salvation belongs to the soul alone, and that salvation of the flesh does not occur.
Cerinthus successit huius errori et similitudini uanitatis, docens de generatione itidem saluatoris deque creatura angelorum, in nullo discordans ab eo, nisi quia ex parte solum legi consentit, quod a deo data sit, et ipsum deum Iudaeorum esse aestimat qui legem dedit filiis Israhel.Docet autem circumcidi et sabbatizari, et Christum nondum surrexisse a mortuis, sed resurrecturum adnuntiat.Apostolum Paulum beatum non accipit, ludam traditorem honorat, et euangelium secundum Matheum solum accipit, tria euangelia spernit, Actus Apostolorum abicit, beatos martyres blasphemat. Hic sub apostolis beatis quaestionem seditionis commouit, dicens debere circumcidi homines, cuius causa contra illum et heresim eius decreuerunt in suis Actibus beati apostoli sententiam: non debere lam homines Iudaismo, id est circumcisionis aliisque talibus superstitionis uanae parere carnalibus, qui de gentibus uenientes credebant in Christum dominum nostrum saluatorem.
Cerinthus succeeded to this error and to the likeness of its vanity, teaching about the generation of the Savior and about the creation of angels in no way disagreeing with Carpocrates, except that he consents to the Law only in part — accepting that it was given by God — and considers the God of the Jews to be the one who gave the Law to the children of Israel.
He teaches circumcision and sabbath observance, and says that Christ has not yet risen from the dead but announces that he will rise. He does not accept the blessed apostle Paul. He honors Judas the betrayer. He accepts only the Gospel according to Matthew and spurns the three other Gospels. He rejects the Acts of the Apostles. He blasphemes the blessed martyrs.
Under the blessed apostles he stirred up a controversy, saying that men ought to be circumcised — on account of which, against him and his heresy, the blessed apostles decreed the judgment in their Acts: that people coming from the gentiles who believed in Christ our Lord and Savior should no longer be required to obey Judaism — that is, circumcision and other such vain superstitions of the flesh.
Hebion discipulus eius Cerinthi, in multis ei! similiter errans saluatorem nostrum hominem de Ioseph natum carnaliter aestimabat, nihilque diuinitatis in eo fuisse docebat, sed sicut omnes prophetas, sic et eum gratiam dei habuisse adserebat, non tamen deum maiestatis et dei patris filium cum patre sempiternum esse credebat, cum diuinae scripturae deum sempiternum cum patre uero ac sempiterno ubique testantur ac praedicant.
Ebion, the disciple of Cerinthus, erring similarly in many things, considered our Savior a mere man born in the flesh from Joseph, and taught that there was nothing of divinity in him. He asserted that Christ had the grace of God just as all the prophets did, yet he did not believe him to be the God of majesty and the Son of God the Father, coeternal with the Father — though the divine scriptures everywhere testify and proclaim him to be the eternal God with the true and eternal Father.
Post istum Valentinus quidam surrexit, Pythagoricus magis quam Christianus, uanam quandam ac perniciosam doctrinam eructans et uelut arithmeticam, id est numerositatis notitiam fallacissimam praedicans, multorumque animas ignorantium captiuauit. Et inprimis quidem fuit in ecclesiam.Elatior autem factus postmodum errore non paruo deceptus est degensque in Cypri prouincia coepit hoc definire;Nihil erat aliud ante, inquit, in mundo, nisi Profundum maris et Silentium, quod poetae uani Chaos adserunt edocentes, deque hoc Profundo et Silentio processisse Intellectum et Veritatem, de Intellectu autem et Veritate Verbum et Vitam, de Verbo autem et Vita Hominem et Ecclesiam:de Homine autem et Ecclesia processisse duodecim Aeonas, id est Saecula et de Verbo et Vita decem Aeonas processisse, de Intellectu autem et Veritate octo Aeonas, et esse hanc triacontada Saeculorum, id est triginta Aeonas Aeonon. De ogdoada ergo et decada et duodecada consistere triginta Aeonas delirat.Dicit autem Christum a patre, quem Profundum nomine appellat, ad totius mundi salutem fuisse dimissum, deque caelo eum carnem detulisse, nihil autem accepisse de sancta uirgine, sed ut aquam per riuum, ita transisse per eam adfirmat. Animam ergo solam saluari, corpus autem hominis non saluari arbitratur.
After him a certain Valentinus arose, more Pythagorean than Christian, belching forth a vain and pernicious doctrine and preaching what was essentially arithmetic — that is, a most deceitful science of numbers — and he captivated the souls of many ignorant people. At first, indeed, he was in the Church. But having become too proud, he was afterward deceived by no small error, and while living in the province of Cyprus he began to define his system thus:
“There was nothing else before in the world,” he says, “except the Deep (Profundum) and Silence (Silentium), which the vain poets assert as Chaos. From this Deep and Silence proceeded Intellect (Intellectus) and Truth (Veritas); from Intellect and Truth, the Word (Verbum) and Life (Vita); from the Word and Life, Man (Homo) and Church (Ecclesia). From Man and Church proceeded twelve Aeons — that is, Ages; from the Word and Life proceeded ten Aeons; from Intellect and Truth, eight Aeons. And this is the Triacontad of Ages — that is, the thirty Aeons of Aeons.”
From the Ogdoad, therefore, and the Decad and the Dodecad, he raves that the thirty Aeons consist.
He says that Christ was sent by the Father — whom he calls by the name Deep (Profundum) — for the salvation of the whole world, and that he brought flesh down from heaven and took nothing from the holy Virgin, but passed through her, he affirms, as water through a channel. He holds that the soul alone is saved, but that the body of man is not saved.
Alii sunt successores ipsius: Ptolemeus, qui doctrinam aeque uanam intulit, dicens quattuor esse Aeonas, et alios quattuor, nouum quid uolens commenti falsi decernere quam Valentinus doctor eius est ementitus. U
There are other successors of his: Ptolemaeus, who likewise introduced a vain doctrine, saying that there are four Aeons and another four — wishing to decree something new of false invention beyond what his teacher Valentinus had fabricated.
Post hunc quidam Secundus nomine Aeonas similiter docens adserit factos infinitos, Christum autem quasi per fantasiam apparuisse id est ueluti umbram humano generi, et non ueram carnem hominis habuisse suspicatur.
After him, a certain Secundus, likewise teaching about the Aeons, asserts that infinite ones were made. He suspects that Christ appeared to the human race as through a phantasm — that is, as a shadow — and that he did not have true human flesh.
Post hunc Heracleon discipulus ipsius surrexit, dicens principium esse unum, quem deum appellat, deinde de hoc natum aliud, deque his duobus generationem multorum adserit principiorum, cum suis itidem delirans doctoribus.
After him, his disciple Heracleon arose, saying that there is one principle, which he calls God; then from this, another was born; and from these two he asserts the generation of many principles — raving likewise with his teachers.
Marcus autem quidam post istum successor eius numerum et mensuram et cauculum, rationem etiam computationis faciens litterarum, quasi uerisimilis et cuiusdam rei nouae inuentor, cum aestimaret a quibusdam se posse laudari, non in paruam itidem erroris incurrit amentiam. Dicit enim ita: Viginti quattuor, inquit, litterae sunt, quae perfectionem habent omnium rerum. Propter quod et Christus, inquit, dicebat: Ego sum A et Q. Dicebat etiam quod in postremo tempore Christus descendit ad Iesum in figura et similitudine columbae, et Christum ipsum columbam esse docebat, quae descendit, inquit, ad duodecim Aeonas, id est ad duodecim apostolos, et unum ex eis cecidisse, id est ludam, aestimabat. Christum autem putatiue dicit apparuisse, et passum fuisse quasi per umbram, non tamen uere passum corpore arbitratur.
After him, a certain Marcus, his successor, devising a system of number and measure and reckoning, and even a method of computing by letters — as if something plausible and the invention of some new thing, though he supposed he could win praise from certain people — fell into no small madness of error.
For he says thus: “There are twenty-four letters, which hold the perfection of all things. On account of which Christ also said: ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega.’” He also said that in the last time Christ descended upon Jesus in the figure and likeness of a dove, and he taught that Christ himself was the dove which descended, he says, to the twelve Aeons — that is, to the twelve apostles — and he believed that one of them had fallen: that is, Judas.
He says that Christ appeared in appearance only and suffered as through a shadow, yet he does not believe that he truly suffered in the body.
Post hunc Colorbasus *, qui similiter in litteris et numero elementorum astrorumque septem uitam omnium hominum et generationem consistere adserebat, non in Christi maiestate et potentia, neque in ipsius carnali praesentia ueram hominum sperari salutem aduertebat.
After him, Colorbasus, who similarly asserted that the life and birth of all people consist in letters and the number of the seven elements and the stars, did not perceive that the true salvation of humanity is to be hoped for in the majesty and power of Christ, and in his bodily presence.
Translator’s Notes
- §29: Filastrius's account of Simon Magus follows the tradition established by Irenaeus (Adversus Haereses I.23) and continued by Hippolytus and Epiphanius. The Intellectus that Simon says descended into the world is the Greek Ennoia (Έννοια) — Thought or First Thought — one of the earliest Gnostic concepts of a divine emanation trapped in matter. Filastrius uses the Latin Intellectus where Greek sources use Ennoia; the identification of this figure with the Helena of Troy is a distinctive feature of Simonian mythology. The allegorical reading of the Trojan Horse as the ignorance of nations appears to be unique to Filastrius's Latin redaction.
- §31: The word scintilla — spark — is the crucial term in this passage and one of the most important in Gnostic theology. The divine spark sent by the supreme power into the body fashioned by the angels is the fragment of divine light trapped in matter. Filastrius's formulation is notable for its clarity: the spark corrected man (correxit), raised him up (suscitauit), and made him live (fecit eum uiuere). The Saturninian system as described here is close to Irenaeus's account in Adversus Haereses I.24.1–2, but Filastrius's emphasis on the spark as the sole element worthy of salvation is particularly sharp.
- §32: The emanation chain described here — God → Intellectus → Verbum → Sensus → Virtus et Sapientia — corresponds to the Basilidean system as described by Irenaeus (Adversus Haereses I.24.3–7). The claim that the God of the Jews is merely one angel among many who became arrogant and sought dominion over the others is a core Gnostic reinterpretation of the Hebrew scriptures. Basilides' prohibition of martyrdom is logically consistent with his docetism: if Christ did not truly suffer, then suffering for Christ is based on a misunderstanding. The substitution of Simon of Cyrene for Christ on the cross (cf. Mark 15:21) became one of the most notorious Gnostic teachings.
- §33: This chapter is of particular interest. The Gnostici whom Filastrius traces to Nicolaus are identified with the Barbelo-Gnostics (or Barbeloites) known from other heresiological sources and from the Nag Hammadi texts, particularly the Apocryphon of John. The cosmogony described here — primordial darkness, deep, and water; a spirit that separates the elements; darkness rushing upon the spirit to beget four Aeons who in turn beget four more — is a variant of the Barbelo-Gnostic creation myth that differs in specific details from the versions in Irenaeus (Adversus Haereses I.29) and Epiphanius (Panarion 25–26). The name Ialdabaoth (also spelled Yaldabaoth) designates the chief archon or Demiurge in Sethian-Gnostic texts. Calacaun is likely a corruption of Caulacau, a term appearing in other heresiological accounts of Gnostic invocations. Noria (or Norea) appears in several Gnostic texts as a female spiritual figure, sometimes identified as the wife of Noah or the sister of Seth.
- §34: Filastrius's account of the Cainite theology of Judas is striking in its concision. The argument he preserves — that the heavenly powers opposed Christ's passion because they knew it would bring salvation, and that Judas, possessing scientia (knowledge/gnosis), acted deliberately to ensure humanity's redemption — anticipates the theology found in the Gospel of Judas, a Gnostic text discovered in the Codex Tchacos and published in 2006. The word scientia here is the Latin equivalent of the Greek gnosis (γνῶσις), underscoring the centrality of knowledge in Cainite soteriology.
- §35: The term prolationes — emanations or projections — is a key technical term in Latin heresiological vocabulary, translating the Greek probolai (προβολαί). The Carpocratian system is distinctive in its adoptionism: Christ is not divine by nature but earned spiritual superiority through the integrity of his life. The sharp distinction between soul (saved) and flesh (abandoned) is a characteristic Gnostic dualism.
- §38: Filastrius's characterization of Valentinus as “more Pythagorean than Christian” (Pythagoricus magis quam Christianus) is a pointed rhetorical move, linking Valentinian numerology to pagan Greek philosophy rather than Christian revelation. The Valentinian system of paired Aeons (syzygies) is rendered here in systematic Latin terminology: Profundum/Silentium, Intellectus/Veritas, Verbum/Vita, Homo/Ecclesia. These correspond to the Greek pairs Bythos/Sige, Nous/Aletheia, Logos/Zoe, Anthropos/Ecclesia as described by Irenaeus (Adversus Haereses I.1). The Triacontad — the system of thirty Aeons organized as an Ogdoad (8), Decad (10), and Dodecad (12) — is the defining structural feature of Valentinian cosmology. The image of Christ passing through Mary “as water through a channel” (ut aquam per riuum) is Filastrius's vivid rendering of Valentinian docetism.
- §42: Marcus the Magician, or Marcus the Marcosian, developed an elaborate system of letter-mysticism and numerical theology. The twenty-four letters of the Greek alphabet were held to contain the fullness of divine truth — a system that combined Pythagorean numerology with Johannine theology (Revelation 1:8, 21:6, 22:13). Marcus's identification of Christ with the dove that descended at Jesus's baptism (cf. Mark 1:10) represents a variant of the Gnostic distinction between the human Jesus and the divine Christ — a distinction that Filastrius, like all the heresiologists, regards as fundamental to Gnostic error.
Source & Cross-References
- Source text: CSEL 38 (ed. F. Marx, 1898) — view original
- Critical edition: Marx, F. (ed.), Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 38, Vienna: Tempsky, 1898