The six books of Proclus, the Platonic successor, on the theology of Plato (vol. 1 of 2) : $b translated from the Greek, to which a seventh book is added, in order to supply the deficiency of another book on this subject, which was written by Proclus, but since lost, also, a translation from the Greek of Proclus' Elements of theology, to which are added a translation of the treatise of Proclus, On providence and fate, a translation of extracts from his treatise, entitled, Ten doubts concerning — Plato — John Shaqi
The six books of Proclus, the Platonic successor, on the theology of Plato (vol. 1 of 2) : $b translated from the Greek, to which a seventh book is added, in order to supply the deficiency of another book on this subject, which was written by Proclus, but since lost, also, a translation from the Greek of Proclus' Elements of theology, to which are added a translation of the treatise of Proclus, On providence and fate, a translation of extracts from his treatise, entitled, Ten doubts concerning
Plato · en
I have said that I should prove from the testimony of the Apostle
Paul, that the Jews were not consistent in confounding _angels_
properly so called with Gods. And this appears to me to be evident in
the first place from the following passage in Hebrews ii. v. 3. πιστει
νοουμεν κατηρτισθαι τους αιωνας ρηματι θεου, εις το μη εκ φαινομενων
τα βλεπομενα γεγονεναι. This in the English version is erroneously
rendered; “Through faith we understand, that the worlds were framed by
the word of God, so that things which are seen, were not made of things
which do appear.” I say this is erroneously translated, because in the
first place, _the worlds_ is evidently a forced interpretation
of αιωνας; and even admitting it is not, leaves the passage very
ambiguous, from the uncertainty to what worlds Paul alludes. If we
adopt _ages_, which is the general sense of the word in the New
Testament, we shall indeed avoid a forced and ambiguous interpretation,
but we shall render the meaning of the Apostle trifling in the extreme.
For as he has elsewhere said, “that all things were framed by the word
of God,” what particular faith does it require to believe, that by the
same word he framed the ages?
In the second place, from the definition of faith, given in the first
verse of this chapter, that it is “the evidence of _things not seen_,”
it is clear, that Paul is speaking in this passage of something
_invisible_. Since then αιωνας is neither _worlds_ nor _ages_, what
shall we say it is? I answer, the _æones_ of the Valentinians. And
agreeably to this, the whole passage should be translated as follows:
“By faith we understand, that the _æones_ were framed by the word of
God, in order that things which are seen, might be generated from such
as do not appear (i.e. from things _invisible_).” Every one who is much
conversant with Greek authors, must certainly be convinced that εις το
means _in order that_; and Bishop Pearson translates as I have done the
latter part of this verse.
Now we learn from the second book of Irenæus against the heretics,
that according to the Valentinians, all created things are the images
of the _æones_, resident in the _pleroma_, or _fulness_ of deity. And
does it not clearly follow from the above version, that according to
Paul too, the æones are the exemplars of visible or created things? To
which we may add, that this sense of the passage clearly accords with
the assertion that “faith is the evidence of things not seen.” For here
the things which do not appear are the _æones_; these, according to
the Valentinians, subsisting in deity. So that from our version, Paul
might say with great propriety, that “we understand by faith, that the
_æones_ were framed by the word of God, in order that things which
are seen, might be generated from such as do not appear,” for this
naturally follows from his definition of faith.