-

-

-

the world was governed by inferior gods, p. 16. — Opin-

ions of Plato on this subject, pp. 17-25.- Analogy of

the doctrines of the Gnostics to those of the heathen

philosophers, pp. 25, 26. Analogy to those of Philo,

pp. 26, 27.-To those of the Jewish Rabbis and of

Origen, who believed the world to be governed by

angels, pp. 28-31.-To the opinion of the early Chris-

tians, that the heathen gods were evil demons, and the

pagan world the realm of Satan, pp. 31, 32. To the

doctrine generally of the rule of Satan over the world,

pp. 33-39. — History of this doctrine, pp. 34-39.

Analogy remarked by Origen between the Creator of

the Gnostics and the Logos of catholic Christians, pp.

39, 40.- The Gnostics led to their doctrine of an Un-

known God, not the Creator, by the preceding state of

religious opinion in the world, pp. 40, 41.-General

tendency to the belief of some being or beings inter-

posed between God and his creatures of this world, pp.

41-43.- Illustrated by Cudworth's doctrine of Plastic

Nature, pp. 42, 43. — Reasoning of the fathers against

the Gnostic doctrine of the Creator, pp. 44, 45. — Ar-

guments of the Gnostics in its support, pp. 45, 46.

SECTION II.

On the Opinions of the Gnostics concerning Evil as

inherent in Matter.

-

That evil is inherent in matter was a common belief long

before the time of the Gnostics, p. 47.—It was the

doctrine of Plato, pp. 48-50.- Was held by some

Christians not Gnostics, p. 50.- Connected with the

common notion of the evil nature of the body, p. 51. –

The body considered as evil by Plato, pp. 51, 52. — By

Philo, pp. 52, 53.- By St. Paul, pp. 53, 54. - Remarks

on this opinion, pp. 54, 55.- This opinion did not find

much favor with the early fathers, p. 56. Influences

of it upon the practice and doctrines of the Gnostics,

47

pp. 56, 57.

-

Opinions of the Gnostics relating to the
Devil, pp. 57-62. — Error of Irenæus concerning them,
pp. 58-61.
The Gnostics regarded the principle of
evil in the universe as inherent in matter, not as a fall-
en angel, pp. 58-62.- Concluding remarks; views of
some of the catholic Christians respecting the origin of
evil, pp. 62-64.

---

Reasons for introducing these remarks, pp. 65, 66. — Diffi-
culties attending the study of ancient philosophy from
a want of correspondence between the ideas of the an-
cients and our own, pp. 66–71. — Reasoning upon the
higher subjects of thought a less serious thing with the
ancient heathen philosophers than it is at the present
day, pp. 71-73.- The art of reasoning very imper-
fectly understood by the ancients, p. 73.- They fell
into the error of founding hypotheses on preconcep-
tions and not on facts, pp. 74, 75.- Notice of similar
hypotheses in modern times, pp. 75, 76. Remarks
on the general character of such hypotheses, pp. 76-78.
-The illogical reasoning of the ancient philosophers
caused much inconsistency in their speculations, pp.
78-80. Truth in respect to the higher objects of
thought of less importance in ancient times than in our
own, pp. 80-82.- The loose reasoning of the ancients
proceeded from a want of clear conceptions; conse-
quently the meaning of the language employed in it
was indeterminate, p. 82.—The same cause producing

-

65

-

the same result at the present day, p. 83. — Obscurity
affected by ancient philosophers, pp. 84-89. — The
preceding remarks illustrated by Plato's account of the
formation of the Soul of the Universe in his Timæus,
pp. 89–102. Character of Plato, pp. 103, 104, note;
106-110. His speculations compared with those of
the Gnostics, pp. 103-106.-Reasons why his writings
had great influence on the minds of the catholic Chris-
tians, pp. 107-110.-The speculations of the theo-
sophic Gnostics connected with the Platonic philoso-
phy; but the doctrine of emanation, on which they are
essentially founded, probably not introduced into this
philosophy till long after the time of Plato, pp. 110, 111.

SECTION II.

On the Speculations of the Theosophic Gnostics con-
cerning the Developement of the Deity, and the Spir-
itual World .

-

Of these speculations the theory of the Ptolemæo-Valen-
tinians affords the best type, p. 112. This theory stat-
ed and illustrated, pp. 113-130. Considerations re-
specting it, pp. 130–148. — The derivative Æons were
formed of the substance of the Deity, p. 130.- Analo-
gy of this doctrine to other prevalent opinions, pp.
131 - 134. — How the derivative Eons were regarded
under their character as persons, pp. 134-138. - Re-
marks of Irenæus and Tertullian concerning these
Eons, considered as hypostatized attributes or Ideas of
the Divine Mind, pp. 138–141. — The conception of
hypostatized attributes and Ideas of the Divine Mind
has prevailed very extensively, pp. 141, 142. — These
beings considered as capable of erring, of sinning, and
of suffering, p. 142.- Notions of the Gnostics concern-
ing the aberrations and sufferings of the Eon, Wisdom,
p. 143. Of some of the fathers concerning the suffer-
ings of the Logos, pp. 143, 144.-Scheme of the Val-

-

112

entinians a sort of allegory, transformed into a system

of doctrines, pp. 144-146.- Systems essentially simi-

lar held by the other theosophic Gnostics, pp. 146–148.

Mention of the Basilidians, p. 148. — Account of the

Marcosians, pp. 148–154.

SECTION III.

-

On the Speculations of the Theosophic Gnostics con-

cerning the Formation of the Visible Universe

An account given of the scheme of Ptolemy as the best

example of these speculations, pp. 155–164.

CHAPTER VIII.

ON THE OPINIONS OF THE GNOSTICS CONCERNING THE

PERSON OF CHRIST

-

-

155

. 165

The Gnostics generally believed that Christ had not a

proper body of flesh and blood, p. 165. - The Marcion-

ites denied his nativity, and believed his apparent body

to be a mere phantom, pp. 165, 166. The theosophic

Gnostics generally appear to have believed him to pos-

sess a real body, p. 166. — Complex scheme, probably

adopted by many of them, respecting the constitution of

the Saviour, pp. 166, 167. — The Marcionites did not

doubt the truth of the accounts of the miracles of Christ,

or of his death and resurrection, pp. 168-171. — Pas-

sage of Tertullian quoted and explained, pp. 171–174,

note. Extraordinary tradition preserved by Origen,

that Christ assumed different forms at different times,

pp. 172-175.

Remarks on this tradition, and on the

opinion of the Marcionites, pp. 175, 176.

VOL. III.

-

b

-

-

CHAPTER IX.

ON THE OPINIONS OF THE GNOSTICS RESPECTING THE

DESIGN OF CHRISTIANITY

On this subject the Gnostics did not differ essentially

from the catholic Christians, p. 178.- Remarks on the

division of men into three classes, made by the theo-

sophic Gnostics, and their belief that the "spiritual "

were elect by nature, pp. 178, 179.- Opinions of the

Marcionites, pp. 179, 180. Neither the Gnostics nor

the early catholic Christians believed the modern doc-

trine of the Atonement, pp. 180, 181. — Gnostics wide-

ly different from those religionists of modern times,

who, through reliance on their spiritual intuitions, reject

the belief of Revelation, pp. 181, 182.

-

178

. 183

CHAPTER X.

ON THE MANNER IN WHICH THE GNOSTICS RECONCILED

THEIR DOCTRINES WITH CHRISTIANITY

-

Discrepance between the doctrines of the Gnostics and

the teaching of Christ such, as may lead one at first

view to suspect that they held the Gospels in no es-

teem, p. 183. But a similar discrepance has existed

between the doctrines of a great majority of professed

Christians and the teaching of Christ, pp. 183–186. —

Prevalence of religious error, pp. 186, 187.- Faith, in

consequence, disconnected from reason, and founded on

a pretended intuitive discernment of spiritual things,

pp. 187, 188.- Prevalent errors respecting the charac-

ter and interpretation of the Scriptures, pp. 188 – 192.

Means by which the Gnostics, in particular, recon-

Iciled their doctrines with their Christian faith, pp.

192-211.- The allegorical and other false modes of

-