[490] _De profug._ 20 (i. 562): so God is spoken of as the husband of σοφία in _de Cherub._ 14 (i. 148). But in _de ebriet._ 8 (i. 361), God is the Father, Knowledge the Mother, not of the _Logos_ but of the universe. [491] _Quod a Deo mit. somn._ i. 683. [492] i.e. Sethiani ap. Iren. 1. 30. 1. [493] Ptolemæus, _ad Flor._ 7. [494] _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_, 10. 2-4. [495] Cf. the Ebionites, Alogi, and the _Clementines_. [496] Origen, _c. Cels._ 7. 36; cf. _de princ._ 1. 1. 7. [497] _Con. Cels._ 7. 37, καὶ δογματίζειν παραπλησίως τοῖς ἀναιροῦσι νοητὰς οὐσίας Στωϊκοῖς; cf. Keim, p. 100. See also Orig. _in Gen._ vol. ii, p. 25 (Delarue), and Eus. _H. E._ iv. 26, for a view ascribed to Melito. [498] Harnack, _Dogmengesch._ p. 160. [499] _Dial. c. Tryph._ c. 127. [500] _Legatio_, 10. [501] _Ad Autolycum._ 1. 3; cf. Minuc. Felix, _Octavius_, 18, and Novatian, _de Trin._ 1. 2. [502] _Adv. Marc._ 1. 3. [503] _Adv. Prax._ 7. [504] ap. Hippol. 7. 21, p. 358. [505] ἀνεννόητος καὶ ἀνούσιος, _ibid._ 6. 42, p. 302; cf. 12 ff., pp. 424 ff., for Monoïmus, and also Ptolemæus, _ad Floram_, 7. [506] _Pædag._ 1. 8. [507] Möller, _Kosmologie_, p. 26, cf. 124, 129, 130. [508] _Strom._ 5. 12. [509] _c. Cels._ 6. 19 sqq. [510] _De princ._ 1. 1. 2, 5, 7. [511] _Ibid._ 1. 1, _passim_; cf. 4. 1. 36. [512] e.g. Min. Felix, c. 10; cf. Keim, _Celsus_, 158. [513] The older sort, who clung to tradition pure and simple, were dubious of the introduction of dialectic methods into Christianity: see Eus. v. 28; cf. v. 13. “Expavescunt ad οἰκονομίαν,” Tert. _adv. Prax._ 3. Cf. Weingarten, p. 25. [514] Pantænus, when asked by outside philosophers, “How can God know the world, if like knows like?” replied (Routh, _Rel. Sac._ i. p. 379): μήτε αἰσθητῶς τὰ αἰσθητὰ μήτε νοερῶς τὰ νοητὰ· οὐ γὰρ εἶναι δυνατὸν τὸν ὑπὲρ τὰ ὄντα κατὰ τὰ ὄντα τῶν ὄντων λαμβάνεσθαι, ἀλλ’ ὡς ἴδια θελήματα γινώσκειν αὐτὸν τὰ ὄντα φαμέν ... for if he _made_ all things by His will, no one can deny that He knows His own will, and hence knows what His will has made. Cf. Julius Africanus (Routh, ii. 239), λέγεται γὰρ ὁμωνύμως ὁ θεὸς πᾶσι τοῖς ἐξ αὐτοῦ, ἐπειδὴ ἐν πᾶσιν ἐστίν. [515] γίνομαι ὃ Θέλω καὶ εἰμὶ ὃ εἰμί, as used by the Naassenes, ap. Hipp. 5. 7. [516] Cf. Harnack, art. in _Encycl. Brit._ “Sabellius.” [517] Hipp. 9. 10; Schmid, _Dogmeng._ 47, _n._ [518] Tert. _c. Valent._ 4; cf., διαθέσεις of Ptol. ap. Iren. 1. 12. 1. [519] ap. Iren. 1. 12. 3. [520] Hipp. 6. 12. [521] Ptolemy ap. Iren. 1. 12. 1; cf. Hipp. _c. Noet._ 10, πολὺς ἦν. [522] ap. Iren. 1. 2. 1, 5 (Valentinians). [523] ap. Iren. 1. 24. 3 (Basilides): cf. Clem. Al. _Protrep._ 10, the Logos is the Son of νοῦς. [524] Iren. 1. 14. 1, προήκατο λόγον ὅμοιον αὑτῷ. [525] As compared with Philo, who emphasizes the Logos in relation to the work of creation, Justin lays stress on the Logos as Revealer, making known to us the will of God: cf. ἀπόστολος, _Tryph._ 61. [526] Justin, _Apol._ i. 63. [527] _Apol._ ii. 8.