[Footnote 180: ποιήσαντα, Cruice, _servare_, Macm., “fulfilled.” In either case a curious meaning for ποιέω. Cf. the ποιέω τὴν μουσικήν of Plato, _Phaedo_, 60. E.] [Footnote 181: In the accounts of the two Theodoti, which may here be taken together, Hippolytus leaves Irenæus, from whom he has hitherto been content to copy his account of the smaller heresies, and draws from some source not yet identified, but which may be the _Little Labyrinth_ of Caius (see Salmon in _D.C.B._, s.v. “Theodotus.”). His description of the heresy of Theodotus of Byzantium corresponds with that of Eusebius (_Eccl. Hist._, V, 28). The Melchizedekian theory of the “other” Theodotus is mentioned by Philaster (c. 53, p. 54, Oehl.) without reference to Theodotus, although on the preceding page he has given the Byzantine heresy as in our text. Pseudo-Tertullian in _Adv. Omn. Haer._ (II, p. 764, Oehl.) gives the story of both Theodoti much as here, which may give support to the theory that this tract is a summary of the lost _Syntagma_ of Hippolytus. Epiphanius (_Haer._ XXXIV, XXXV) divides the Melchizedekians from the Theodotians, and says the first were ἀποσπασθέντες from the second, but without naming the banker. He also gives some particulars about the first Theodotus, which he does not seem to have taken from Hippolytus. He quotes one Hierax as saying that Melchizedek was the Holy Spirit, and says that “some” say that Heracles was his father and Astaroth or Asteria his mother, while Melchizedek plays a great part in the earliest part of the _Pistis Sophia_ as the “Receiver of the Light.”] [Footnote 182: ἀποσπάσας, lit., “torn away.”] [Footnote 183: So that Hippolytus believed in the mythical founder of the Ebionites.] [Footnote 184: εὐσεβέστατον.] [Footnote 185: _i. e._ the heretics.] [Footnote 186: γνῶμαι.] [Footnote 187: Acts vi. 5.] [Footnote 188: Rev. ii. 6.]