The Lost and Hostile Gospels: An Essay on the Toledoth Jeschu, and the Petrine and Pauline Gospels of the First Three Centuries of Which Fragments RemainBaring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
History
The Lost and Hostile Gospels: An Essay on the Toledoth Jeschu, and the Petrine and Pauline Gospels of the First Three Centuries of Which Fragments Remain
Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
Apocryphal Gospels
Valentine accepted the Old Testament, but only in the same light as he
regarded the great works of the heathen writers to be deserving of
regard.(473) Both contained good, noble examples, pure teaching; but in
both also was the element of discord, contradictory teaching, and bad
example. Ptolemy, the Valentinian who least sacrificed the moral to the
theosophic element, scarcely dealt with the Old Testament differently from
St. Paul. He did not indeed regard the Old Testament as the work of the
Supreme God; the Mosaic legislation seemed to him to be the work of an
inferior being, because, as he said, it contained too many imperfections
to be the revelation of the Highest God, and too many excellences to be
attributed to an evil spirit. But, like the Apostle of the Gentiles, he
saw in the Mosaic ceremonies only symbols of spiritual truth, and, like
him, he thought that the symbol was no longer necessary when the idea it
revealed was manifested in all its clearness. Therefore, when the ideas
these symbols veiled had reached and illumined men’s minds, the necessity
for them—husks to the idea, letters giving meaning to the thought—was at
an end.
Like St. Paul, therefore, he treated the Old Testament as a preparation
for the New one, but as nothing more. We ascertain Ptolemy’s views from a
letter of his to Flora, a Catholic lady whom he desired to convert to
Valentinianism.(474)
In this letter he laboured to show that the God of this world (the
Demiurge) was not the Supreme God, and that the Old Testament Scriptures
were the revelation of the Demiurge, and not of the highest God. To prove
the first point, Ptolemy appealed to apostolic tradition—no doubt to
Pauline teaching—which had come down to him, and to the words of the
Saviour, by which, he admits, all doctrine must be settled. In this letter
he quotes largely from St. Paul’s Epistles, and from the Gospels of St.
Matthew and St. John.
Like Marcion, Ptolemy insisted that the Demiurge, the God of this world,
was also the God who revealed himself in the Old Testament, and that to
this God belonged justice, wrath and punishment; whereas to the Supreme
Deity was attributed free forgiveness, absolute goodness. The Saviour
abolished the Law, therefore he abolished all the system of punishment for
sin, that the reign of free grace might prevail.
According to Ptolemy, therefore, retributive justice exercised by the
State was irreconcilable with the nature of the Supreme God, and the
State, accordingly, was under the dominion of the Demiurge.
To the revelation of the old Law belonged ordinances of ceremonial and of
seasons. These also are done away by Christ, who leads from the bondage of
ceremonial to spiritual religion.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account