The Gnostic Nature of Jesus

The Gnostic Nature of Jesus

or

The None Docetic Gnostic Nature of Jesus

The gnosics had different views on the nature of Jesus one of those understandings is called docetism from the Greek dokein, “to seem.” Docetists took Paul literally when he said, in Romans 8:3, that Jesus came “in the likeness of sinful flesh.” Jesus only seemed to be a flesh-and-blood human, but in reality he was a spirit that had a merely phantasmal body.

Likeness

Gospel of Thomas (28) Jesus said: I stood in the midst of the world, and I appeared to them in the flesh. I found them all drunk; I found none of them thirsting, and my soul was afflicted for the sons of men; for they are blind in their heart, and they do not see that they came empty into the world, (and) empty they seek to leave the world again. But now they are drunk. When they have thrown off their wine, they will repent.

Paul used the word "likeness" to emphasise the sameness of the Lord's nature to that of our own; a complete physical identification with humankind (Heb. 2:14,17; 4:15, etc.).

Let us consider this. What about this "likeness"? Moses informs us (Gen. 5:3) that Adam begat a son in his own image and likeness. You would not say the word "likeness" means that Seth was, in any wise, different from Adam.

There is the word "image". Suppose the word "image" had been used in this remark of Paul's: "sent His Son in the image of the earthy nature". We should then have had this argument — "Ah, you see it is only the image; it is not the nature itself". Whereas, Paul says concerning ourselves in 1 Cor. 15:49: "We have borne the image of the earthy, and shall also bear the image of the heavenly". Shall we say we have not borne the earthy? Do not we bear the earthy? Yes. Therefore in apostolic language "earthy" and "the image of the earthy" mean the same thing. Upon the same principle, sinful flesh and the likeness of sinful flesh mean the same thing.

The truth of the matter does not depend upon the word "likeness" or any other single term, but upon the combination of statements made — which are all in language plain enough to be free from obscurity. At the same time, it has to be pointed out that the word "likeness" in the Greek has the force of resemblance so complete as to be sameness. This is illustrated in the statement that Jesus was made in "the likeness of men" (Phil. 2:7). The extent of the likeness is defined as extending to "all points" and "all things" (Paul's words — Heb. 2:17; 4:15). What can we say but that he was a man, and not the mere likeness of a man

Question How could Jesus have been made free from that sin which God laid upon him in his own nature, "made in the likeness of sinful flesh," if he had not died for himself as well as for us? 
Answer: He could not.

None Docetic Gnostic

Not all gnostics held this teaching some sects believed that Jesus was a man in the flesh:

Furthermore, they will say of him that he is unbegotten, though he has been begotten, (that) he does not eat, even though he eats, (that) he does not drink, even though he drinks, (that) he is uncircumcised, though he has been circumcised, (that) he is unfleshly, though he has come in the flesh, (that) he did not come to suffering, <though> he came to suffering, (that) he did not rise from the dead, <though> he arose from the dead. (The Nag Hammadi Library Melchizedek)

Here is a fragment from Basilides addressing this question. It demonstrates that early Christianity could have no qualms about attributing a deficit of goodness to Jesus while he was in the flesh:

Basilides, in Book 23 of his "Commentaries," writes

{Then, farther along, he adds:} A new-born baby, then, has never sinned before; or more precisely it has not actually committed any sins, but within itself it has the activity of sinning. Whenever it experiences suffering, it receives benefit, profiting by many unpleasant experiences. Just so, if by chance a grown man has not sinned by deed and yet suffers, he suffered the suffering for the same reason as the new-born baby: he has within him sinfulness, and the only reason he has not sinned (in deed) is because he has not had the occasion to do so. Thus not sinning cannot be imputed to him. Indeed, someone who intends to commit adultery is an adulterer even without succeeding in the act, and someone who intends to commit murder is a murderer even without being able to commit the act. Just so, if I see the aforementioned sinless person suffering despite having done no wrong, I must call that person evil by intent to sin. For I will say anything rather than call providence evil.

Nevertheless, let us suppose that you leave aside all these matters and set out to embarrass me by referring to certain figures, saying perhaps, "And consequently so-and-so must have sinned, since he suffered!" If you permit, I shall say that he did not sin, but was like the new-born baby that suffers. But if you press the argument, I shall say that any human being that you can name is human; God is righteous. For no one is pure of uncleanness, as someone once said. (Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 4.81.2-4.83.2)

Even the flesh of babies is considered to have the potential to sin and thereby will profit from suffering

This reminds us of the passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews that declares even Jesus Christ profited and learned as a result of suffering.

Hebrews 5:8 Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered.

Here it seems Basilides is referring to the suffering of Jesus and quotes from the book of Job chapter 14 to show that Jesus did not sin but had our unclean human nature 

The quotations from the teachings of Basilides is very similar to the teachings of Dr. John Thomas in Elpis Israel 1884: 

Sin, I say, is a synonym for human nature. Hence, the flesh is invariably regarded as unclean. It is therefore written, "How can he be clean who is born of a woman?" (Job 25:4) "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one." (Job 14:4) "What is man that he should be clean? And he which is born of a woman that he should be righteous? Behold, God putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight. How much more abominable and filthy is man, who drinketh iniquity like water?" (Job 15:14-16) This view of sin in the flesh is enlightening in the things concerning Jesus. The apostle says, "God made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin" (2 Cor. 5:21); and this he explains in another place by saying, that "He sent his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom. 8:3) in the offering of his body once (Heb. 10:10,12,14). Sin could not have been condemned in the body of Jesus, if it had not existed there. His body was as unclean as the bodies of those for whom he died; for he was born of a woman, and "not one" can bring a clean body out of a defiled body; for "that", says Jesus himself, "which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3:6). (Elpis Israel)

Son of Man and Son of God

The nature of Jesus' humanity and divinity:

How did the Lord proclaim things while he existed in flesh and after he had revealed himself as Son of God? He lived in this place where you remain, speaking about the Law of Nature - but I call it 'Death'. Now the Son of God, Rheginos, was Son of Man. He embraced them both, possessing the humanity and the divinity, so that on the one hand he might vanquish death through his being Son of God, and that on the other through the Son of Man the restoration to the Pleroma might occur; because he was originally from above, a seed of Truth, before this structure had come into being. In this many dominions and divinities came into existence. (The Treatise on the Resurrection)

Here "flesh" is not a vehicle for a docetic Christ. Instead, the Treatise on the Resurrection describes Jesus tv onpici and speaks favorably about the flesh throughout. 

Distinct from other Valentinian texts, the Treatise on the Resurrection does not divide humanity into three classes: spiritual, psychical, and material. 

The second occurrence (47,S) refers to Rheginus, indicating that both he and the Lord possessed the same type of fleshly body. 

The Lamb of God

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

1Peter 1:19 but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ.

Fragment 10, on John 1:29 (In John 1:29, “The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, ‘Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!’”) John spoke the words, "Lamb of God" as a prophet, but the words, "who takes away the sin of the world" as more than a prophet. The first expression was spoken with reference to his body, the second with reference to Him who was in that body. The lamb is an imperfect member of the genus of sheep; the same being true of the body as compared with the one that dwells in it. Had he meant to attribute perfection to the body he would have spoken of a ram about to be sacrificed. (Heracleon: Fragments from his Commentary on the Gospel of John)

The lamb is a symbolic representation of the human nature assumed by Christ and subsequently sacrificed at the crucifixion

Heracleon also suggests that the phrase "lamb of God" refers to the physical form (body) of the Saviour, while the phrase "who takes away the sin of the world" indicates the being dwelling in that body the logos. The imperfection of the lamb in relation to other members of its species is relative to the imperfection of the body that harbours a perfect being such as the logos

The imperfection of the lamb does not reflect the perfection of the saviour's body in other words the body of the saviour does not have an immaculate nature. 

God "sent forth His Son made of a woman made under the law" (Gal. 4:4). Being made of a woman, he was of our nature -- our condemned and weak and mortal nature: but being begotten of God and not of man, he 13 was in character spotless "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners". Sin had hold of him in his nature, which inherited the sentence of death from Adam: but it had no hold of him in his character: for he always did those things that were pleasing to his Father. 

the character of Jesus was holy, harmless, undefiled, without spot, or blemish, or any such thing; but his flesh was like our flesh, in all its points—weak, emotional, and unclean. Had his flesh been like that of Angel-Elohim, which is consubstantial with the Eternal Spirit, it would have been unfit for the purpose of the Deity in his manifestation. Sin, whose wages is death, had to be condemned in the nature that had transgressed; a necessity that could only be accomplished by the Word becoming Adamic-Flesh, and not an immaculate nature.

According to Valentinian theologians, Jesus derived his animate "body" or essence from the Craftsman. His spiritual essence is the entire "church of the superior seed" (Excerpts of Theodotus 17:1) deriving from Wisdom (Sophia). That is why the angel told Mary, "The Holy Spirit (i.e. Wisdom) will come upon you and the power of the Most High (i.e. the Craftsman) will overshadow you" (Luke 1:35 cf. Refutation of Heresies 6:35:3-4, also Excerpt of Theodotus 60, Against Heresies 1:15:3). According to Ptolemy, the contributions from Wisdom (Sophia) and the Craftsman pass through Mary into Jesus "like water through a pipe" (Against Heresies 1:7:2). This human being is the "lamb of God" (John 1:26 cf. Fragments of Herakleon 10), that is, the one the "Father of All chose to obtain knowledge of himself" ( Against Heresies 1:15:3).

Jesus became closely identified with humanity by taking on a human body. His human body is seen as consubstantial with the Church.

The Baptism of Jesus

When he was thirty years old, he went to John the Baptist to be baptized (Luke 3:23). As soon as he went down into the water, "he came out laughing at everything (of this world), not because he considers it a trifle, but because he is full of contempt for it" (Gospel of Philip 71:3-15). The divine Savior, referred to as the "Spirit of the Thought of the Father", descended on him in the form of a dove (Matthew 3:16 and parallels cf. Against Heresies 1:7:2, 1:15:3, Excerpts of Theodotus 61:6, Refutation of Heresies 35:3) and the "Word became flesh" (John 1:14).

Jesus' baptism and the descent of the "Spirit" is his redemption (Gospel of Philip 70:34-36). Redemption was necessary even for Jesus so that "he might not be detained by the thought of the deficiency in which he was placed" (Excerpts of Theodotus 22:7 cf. also Tripartite Tractate 124:31-125:11). This is the true "virgin birth" and resurrection from the dead, for he was reborn of the virgin Spirit (cf. Gospel of Philip 70:34-71:7, Refutation of Heresies 35:5, Gospel of Philip 56:15-18).

The Redeemed Redeemer

Hebrews 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, having offered up both supplications and entreaties to him who was able to save him out of death, with strong crying and tears; (and having been heard because of his piety

The Father did not save him "from death" (A.V.), but "out of death" (Gk., eky Heb. 5:7). Death had to come before deliverance.

Hebrews 5:3 Because of this he is required as for the people, so also for himself, to offer sacrifices for sins.

Hebrews 7:27 who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people’s, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.

Hebrews  9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

So he died for us; but did he not die for himself also? How otherwise could he have been made free from that sin which God laid upon him in sending him forth in the likeness of sinful flesh? Paul says that "he that is dead is freed from sin," and that "in that Christ died, he died unto sin once," being raised from the dead, death hath no more dominion over him (Rom. 6:7, 9, 10).

The fact that Jesus needed to be saved out of death means that he himself needed to be redeemed in many Gnostic books this is referred to as the Saved Saviour or the Redeemed Redeemer

Jesus revealed himself [at the] Jordan River as the fullness of heaven’s kingdom. The one [conceived] before all [71] was conceived again; the one anointed before was anointed again; the one redeemed redeemed others. (Gospel of Philip)

Ode 8:21 And you who were loved in the Beloved, and you who are kept in Him who lives, and you who are saved in Him who was saved. (Odes of Solomon)

Ode 42:18 May we also be saved with You, because You are our Savior. (Odes of Solomon)

And as for us, we are adepts at the Word. If we sin against it, we sin more than Gentiles. But if we surmount every sin, we shall receive the crown of victory, even as our Head was glorified by the Father. (The Interpretation of Knowledge)

So that we might not be in doubt in regard to the others, even the Son himself, who has the position of redeemer of the Totality, needed redemption as well, - he who had become man, - since he gave himself for each thing which we need, we in the flesh, who are his Church. Now, when he first received redemption from the word which had descended upon him, all the rest received redemption from him, namely those who had taken him to themselves. For those who received the one who had received (redemption) also received what was in him. (Tripartite Tractate)

"He ever liveth to make intercession" (Heb. 7:25); so by reason of his bearing of sin he is himself "saved out of death" (Heb. 5:7, R.V. marg.) "through death" (Heb. 2:14), "through the blood of the everlasting covenant" (13:20).

He included Himself in the Living Offering

he emitted himself and he relinquished his majesty, taking scorn in exchange for the name. For our sake he endured the scorn. he appeared in flesh. And the humiliated one has no equipment. He has no need of the glory that is not his; he has his own glory with the name, which is the Son. Now he came that we might become glorious through the humiliated one that dwells in the places of humiliation. And through him who was reproached we receive the forgiveness of sins. And through the one who was reproached and the one who was redeemed we receive grace. (The Interpretation of Knowledge) 

He included himself in the living offering, together with your offspring. He offered them up as an offering to the All. For it is not cattle that you will offer up for sin(s) of unbelief, and for the ignorances, and (for) all the wicked deeds which they will do [...]. And they do not reach the Father of the All [...] the faith ...... (20 lines unrecoverable) 

(The Nag Hammadi Library Melchizedek) 


... (2 lines unrecoverable)
... is the sacrifice of [...], whom Death deceived. When he died, he bound them with the natures which are leading them astray. Yet he offered up offerings [...] cattle, saying, "I gave them to Death, and the angels, and the [...] demons [...] living offering [...]. I have offered up myself to you as an offering, together with those that are mine, to you yourself, (O) Father of the All, and those whom you love, who have come forth from you who are holy (and) living. And <according to> the perfect laws, I shall pronounce my name as I receive baptism now (and) forever, (as a name) among the living (and) holy names, and (now) in the waters. Amen." (The Nag Hammadi Library Melchizedek) 


What does the text of Melchizedek mean when it says "He (Jesus) included himself in the living offering, together with your offspring. He offered them up as an offering to the All." 


The same idea is found later on in the text "I have offered up myself to you as an offering, together with those that are mine, to you yourself, (O) Father of the All" 


The interpretation of this is the Lord's sacrifice was necessary for his own redemption. His sacrifice was a public demonstration that his flesh was rightly related to death and a declaration of the righteousness of God that required the offering of his life in devotion to Him. By his sacrifice the ungodly propensities (diabolos) of his nature was destroyed (Heb. 2:14; 9:12; 7:27), thus providing for the granting of immortality. 


It was necessary that Jesus should offer for himself for the purging of his own nature, first, from the uncleanness of death, that having by his own blood obtained eternal redemption for himself, he might be able afterward to save to the uttermost those that come to God by him 

Summary

Certain Gnostics embrace the idea that Jesus had a physical body made of flesh
The human body is unavoidably, from birth, inbuilt with the “activity of sinning” without actually transgressing God's laws.
Jesus in the days of his flesh had our unclean nature from which he needed to be saved  

Kabbalah and Gnostic Tarot Cards

Kabbalah and Gnostic Tarot Cards

Is magic part of classical Gnosticism? To answer this question we will have a reading from a text from the Nag Hammadi Library, called "On the Origin of the World"

Let us return to the aforementioned rulers, so that we may offer some explanation of them. Now, when the seven rulers were cast down from their heavens onto the earth, they made for themselves angels, numerous, demonic, to serve them. And the latter instructed mankind in many kinds of error and magic and potions and worship of idols and spilling of blood and altars and temples and sacrifices and libations to all the spirits of the earth, having their coworker fate, who came into existence by the concord between the gods of injustice and justice. (On the Origin of the World)

In nineteenth century Europe, spiritualism revived witchcraft and mysticism, and when wed with false Christianity, Satanism was born.

In the twentieth century, public Satanism came out, which coincides with a decline in power of Catholic church.  The opportunity for Satanism to grow comes at times of weakness and a need for good leadership.

Today, ‘Kabbalah’ is united with Satanism.  Tarot cards go with ‘Kabbalah’, the practice which developed in Babylon in the early middle ages.  The New Age religions appeal to believers of these powers, as do Free Masons, Order of the Golden Dawn.  Modern Satanism tries to define the occult in honest ways.

‘KABBALAH’. (HEBREW: tradition).  The mystical religious stream in JUDAISM, transmitted alongside the written law, seeks to explain the connection between God and creation, the existence of good and evil, to show the road to spiritual perfection, always preserving its basic Hebrew character.  Practicers of Kabbalah: Kabbalists. 

EXAMPLES: Superstitious belief in verses on amulets, or good luck charms, to protect from evil.

Spiritists: are also concerned with messages from the dead, They get involved in the whole range of spiritualist practices; tarot cards, ouija boards, automatic writing, etc.

People in the past wore amulets and talismans to protect themselves, and they turned to medicine men and shamans for cures. People today still carry “Saint” Christopher medals or wear “good luck” charms, and they have their séances, Ouija boards, crystal balls, horoscopes, and tarot cards

Some fortune-tellers work with Tarot cards. These special cards include 22 “Tarots” (or trumps) and 56 numeral cards. The numeral cards are divided into four suits. Each suit is given an overall sense and each card is given a specific meaning. The cards are interpreted according to their assigned meanings, modified by the combination of one card with another when dealt, drawn or spread out.

Tarot reading, too, is connected with astrology. The book How the Tarot Speaks to Modern Man explains that Tarot readers “base their interpretation of the cards upon the structure of the universe, particularly the solar system as symbolized by the Holy Cabala.” The “Cabala” (a body of Jewish occult doctrine) divides up the universe into three elements (fire, air and water), seven planets and the twelve signs of the zodiac—22 in all, corresponding with the 22 trump cards of the Tarot deck.

Isaiah 8:19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits and unto the wizards, that chirp and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? on behalf of the living [should they seek] unto the dead?

20 To the law and to the testimony! if they speak not according to this word, surely there is no morning for them..

Aeon Cards

AEONOLOGY BOOK AND CARDS

Limited first edition of 300.
AEON cards re-discover the ancient practice of Aeonology.
This gorgeous first edition of the book is both a guide and explanation of the origin Aeons. Only 300 books were published in foiled, linen covered, hardback book with incredible images of each of the Aeon cards and guidance for how to do your own aeonology readings.

Each numbered book comes with a beautiful set of Aeon cards.

NOCKWOOD CARDS

The original Nockwood behavioral archetype cards are available at the store. Each deck comes with the beautiful designed 'guide' which explains the different archetypes and their historic origin.

https://www.nockwoodcards.com/buy

https://www.nockwoodcards.com/buy/AEON-c18195019

This beautiful numbered set of book, cards and a poster of the 2nd Century poem "Thunder, the perfect mind".

The AEON book is beautifully printed, hard back, foiled and linen cover. Each of these first edition books is numbered and a record will be kept of the 300 people who are lucky enough to order these books.

The book describes the origins of the Aeons and the meaning of each of the cards. At the back of the book are a number of different methods for conducting readings.

The cards are high quality, playing cards designed for regular use. They are specifically made for heavy use so they will keep their colorful design through the most rigorous of daily reflections or rituals.

These 300 books also come with a poster sized representation of the 2nd Century poem ":Thunder, the perfect mind". This poem a beautiful piece has been transformed into a circular mandala representing wholeness of being. It's an amazing tool for reflection and focus.

AEON: LIMITED FIRST EDITION BOOK + CARDS AEON - AEONOLOGY Cards only $60.00 $35.00 NOCKWOOD CARDS $35.00

Secrets of Salome: Unveiling the Hidden Disciple

Secrets of Salome: Unveiling the Hidden Disciple

Secrets of Salome, is an in-depth investigation into the identity and traditions surrounding Salome, a disciple of Jesus.

Secrets of Salome: Unveiling the Hidden Disciple Kindle Edition
by Angela Elwell (Author) Format: Kindle Edition

https://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Salome-Unveiling-Hidden-Disciple-ebook/dp/B08L8J25VN/

The Hierarchy of the Pleroma

The Hierarchy of the Pleroma

Or

The Hierarchy of the Aeons

**The Hierarchy of the Pleroma: A Structure of Divine Manifestation in the *Tripartite Tractate***

The *Tripartite Tractate*, a foundational Valentinian Gnostic text from the *Nag Hammadi Library*, offers a rich theological vision of the Pleroma—the divine Fullness—as a living hierarchy of Aeons emanating from the ineffable Father through the mediation of the Son. This hierarchy is not rigid but dynamic, formed through the interplay of divine thought, word, and spiritual generation. The text portrays the Pleroma as the realm of the incorruptible, where the Aeons exist in ordered harmony, manifesting the intentions and purposes of the Father.

> “For they are ineffable, unnamable, and inconceivable. Only they are able to name themselves in order to conceive of themselves.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 60,1–6)

At the highest level stands the **unborn, unnamable Father**, whose nature transcends comprehension. He is not one being among others but the source of all being, described in absolute terms of ineffability and unknowability. He is not rooted in creation and cannot be grasped by thought or word. His very nature defies articulation. He is the invisible Depth (*Bythos*), the primal source who holds within himself the All in a hidden form.

The text affirms that:

> “The All… existed eternally in the Father’s Thought… while they were in the hidden depth—the Depth himself certainly knew them, but they… were incapable of knowing the depth in which they found themselves.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 60,31–61,4)

From this primal Depth emerged the divine hierarchy. Initially, the Aeons existed in a seminal state—likened to seeds or embryos—contained within the Father’s mind. Though not yet distinct, they were real and present, awaiting a moment of manifestation.

The Father, desiring that they come into their own existence—not merely in his thought but also as beings-for-themselves—initiates the process of emanation by **sowing a seed**, a thought that enables the Aeons to come to self-awareness.

> “He sowed a thought as a seed… that they might understand what kind of Father they have.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 61,31–62,3)

**The Son** emerges from this divine initiative as the **first-begotten**, the one who reveals the Father and brings the Aeons into self-consciousness. He is described as “the full and faultlessly perfect one,” the light and voice through whom the Aeons receive both name and knowledge.

> “That which he now made to rise like a light… that by which they are given a name, that is the Son.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 62,33–63,3)

This Son is not a separate entity but the manifest face of the Father—“the body of the incorporeal, the form of the formless, the word of the inexpressible” (66,5–67,1). He is the mediator through whom the Father makes himself known, yet he remains united with the Depth from which he emerges.

From the Son emanates a complex hierarchy of **Aeons**, divine attributes or personified realities that exist in harmonious pairs and spiritual generations. They do not produce through biological means but through **spiritual faculties**—mind and word, thought and will. The Aeons replicate the mode of their origin, expressing the divine in a pattern of mutual glorification and contemplative emanation.

> “Just as the marvels of silence are eternal births—births of mind—so also the faculties of the word are spiritual emissions… minds and spiritual births for the glory of the Father.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 63,29–64,7)

The ability of the Aeons to procreate reflects the perfection of the Pleroma. Each Aeon is an expression of divine energy—wisdom, strength, life, unity—manifested through spiritual song, knowledge, and contemplation. They give birth not by effort but by simply willing, thinking, and glorifying.

This hierarchy is not static. The Father does not grant perfection at once:

> “He withheld the perfection for a time… in order that the Aeons should not receive their perfection from the beginning and thereby exalt themselves… as equal to the Father.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 62,6–18)

Perfection is reserved, not from jealousy, but to preserve humility and dependence upon the Father. Through this delay, the Aeons grow and mature, ultimately receiving perfection as a gift rather than as an innate possession.

At the heart of the hierarchy is **the distinction between the Father and the Son**, though they are deeply united. The Father remains utterly transcendent—so much so that even the highest Aeon would perish if exposed directly to his full majesty.

> “Even the highest of the Aeons… would have perished.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 64,28–65,4)

Yet through the Son, the Father extends himself and provides structure, nourishment, and illumination. The Son becomes the **dwelling place of the All**, the one in whom the many are gathered and sustained.

Finally, the Son embodies all the names of the Father in a way that is truthful and without deception:

> “He is all these names without falsehood… the form of the formless, the body of the incorporeal, the face of the invisible, the word of the inexpressible…” (*Tripartite Tractate* 66,5–67,34)

Thus, the **Hierarchy of the Pleroma** reflects a movement from ineffable unity to structured multiplicity, always grounded in divine love and mutual glorification. The Aeons are not gods apart from the Father, but expressions of his fullness, arranged in a living, spiritual order through the mediation of the Son. Each Aeon contributes to the ongoing revelation of the Father, and together they form the harmonious Totality that is the Pleroma.

Sure! Here's a continuation and conclusion of your document titled **"The Hierarchy of the Pleroma: A Structure of Divine Manifestation in the Tripartite Tractate"**, beginning at *Tripartite Tractate* 68,36 and completing through 74,18, as you requested.

---

*

# The Hierarchy of the Pleroma: A Structure of Divine Manifestation in the *Tripartite Tractate*

*Continuation from 68,36 to 74,18*

### The Three Fruits of Glorification (68,36–70,19)

The *Tripartite Tractate* continues its exploration of divine structure by describing a triadic glorification process that arises from the Aeons—divine emanations—each bearing fruit in harmony with the Father. This glorification unfolds in three progressive stages:

> "This, then, was a tribute from the aeons to the one who had brought forth the All, a firstfruit offering of those who are immortal and eternal" (*Tractate* 69).

The first glorification stems directly from the Aeons to the Father—immortal beings giving glory in fullness and communion. This reciprocal glorification causes them to become "perfect and full," mirroring their source, the perfect and full Father.

The second glorification emerges from the Father's own response. The glorification He receives is returned, manifesting again in the Aeons:

> “He returns the glory they give to those who glorify him, so as to make them manifest by what he himself is.”

The third glorification arises through the Aeons’ own free will, individually and collectively, exercising their divine power to offer unique and unified praise:

> “They became fathers of the third glorification… enabling them to give glory in unison while at the same time independently of one another, according to the will of each.”

These glorifications are layered expressions of divine perfection, flowing from the One Who Is, through the Aeons, and back again, each manifestation reinforcing the fullness (*Pleroma*).

> “For this reason they exist as minds over minds, words over words, superiors over superiors, degrees over degrees…”

Each Aeon thus occupies a particular station or rank in this sacred order, contributing to the glorification of the Father according to its capacity.

---

### The Harmony of the Aeons (70,19–71,7)

This divine structure is not chaotic but harmonious. The Aeons emit offspring through mutual help:

> “They give birth by way of mutual help, and their emissions are unlimited and immeasurable.”

There is no envy or rivalry in the Pleroma. The Father delights in these emissions because they express His own image:

> “Whomever he desires to make a father—he himself is their Father; or a god—he himself is their God.”

Even earthly angels and rulers may bear names like those in the Pleroma, but they lack the eternal substance. Only those within the Fullness share the true likeness and origin of the Father.

---

### The Aeons’ Search for the Father (71,7–35)

Despite this order, the Aeons do not fully comprehend the Father:

> “Although the Father does reveal himself, he did not want them to know him from eternity, but he presented himself as something to be reflected upon and sought after…”

The Father remains inscrutable by choice, a mystery to inspire reverent longing. He plants within them "faith and prayer," "hope," and "a fertile love," guiding them toward Himself. Their journey is one of loving yearning, not possession.

---

### The Spirit as Divine Guide (71,35–73,18)

The Spirit—the Father’s Will—breathes into the Aeons as a fragrance that causes them to seek its origin:

> “Just as somebody is moved by a fragrance to seek the source of that fragrance…”

Through this divine fragrance, the Aeons are drawn to unity and mutual support. They are silently transformed, contemplating the Father without speaking, because His form is ineffable:

> “He manifested \[himself], though he cannot be spoken... the aeons keep silent about the way the Father exists in his form, his nature, and his greatness.”

Still, through the Spirit, they are empowered to understand:

> “Through his Spirit, which is the trace by which he may be sought, he gives himself to them to be thought and spoken.”

Each Aeon is, therefore, a name—a distinct quality—of the Father. While the Father is One, He is also many through these qualities:

> “The Father is a single Name because he is One, but nevertheless innumerable in his qualities and names.”

---

### The Nature of the Emission (73,18–74,18)

The final section of this passage contemplates the nature of the emission of the Aeons. Their origin is not separation but expansion:

> “Their birth has the form of a spreading out, by which the Father spreads himself out into that which he wishes…”

This extension mirrors the division of time: a single aeon divided like years into seasons, days into moments—each part preserving unity:

> “The true aeon also is single yet multiple, being glorified by small as well as by great names according to what each is able to comprehend.”

The metaphors are striking—spring to river, root to tree, body to limbs. The Pleroma, like a living body, expresses itself in diversity, yet retains wholeness. The Father emanates through each Aeon, great or small, in the form of glorification appropriate to their station and comprehension.

---

### Conclusion: A Divine Ecology of Order and Freedom

In this rich tapestry from *Tripartite Tractate* 68–74, we witness the cosmic choreography of the Pleroma. The Father, though One and unknowable in His essence, manifests through the Aeons in an ever-deepening circle of glorification. Each Aeon, operating in freedom and harmony, participates in the divine fullness by manifesting what they receive.

This divine hierarchy is not about power but about love, mutual recognition, and the eternal movement toward the ineffable One. The Aeons glorify the Father, and the Father glorifies them in return, creating an eternal cycle of perfect manifestation.

As the *Tripartite Tractate* affirms, the Pleroma is not divided but fully united, a divine order of indivisible parts eternally seeking, revealing, and reflecting the glory of *The One Who Is*.

---

**The Names of the Aeons in Relationship to the Hierarchy of the Pleroma**

> “Each of the aeons is a name corresponding to each of the Father’s qualities and powers. Since he exists in many names, it is by mingling and through mutual harmony that they are able to speak of him, by means of a richness of speech… Thus, the Father is a single Name because he is One, but nevertheless innumerable in his qualities and names.”

> — *The Tripartite Tractate* (73:5–74:1)

In the Valentinian cosmology, the Pleroma is a structured realm of divine emanations. These emanations, known as *Aeons*, are not independent beings but the expressive attributes and powers of the One Who Is, the incomprehensible and unnamable Father. The *Tripartite Tractate* describes how these Aeons are not separate in substance from the Father but are “the members of the All,” born through a process of divine manifestation rather than division:

> “The emission of the members of the All that comes from the One Who Is has not taken place by way of a division… their birth has the form of a spreading out, by which the Father spreads himself out into that which he wishes” (*Tripartite Tractate* 73:18–74:18).

### The First Four Aeons: Emanations from the Father

The structure of the Pleroma begins with the first four Aeons, who directly emanate from the Father. These four form the foundational hierarchy of divine manifestation and embody the core aspects of the Father’s identity and emanative force.

1. **Bythos** (*Depth*, also “the One Who Is”) — the source of all existence, the unbegotten origin beyond comprehension.

2. **Sige** (*Silence*, also known as *Charis*, *Ennoia*) — the hidden stillness and receptive potential of the divine will.

3. **Nous** (*Mind*) — the first-born of Bythos and Sige, the thinking faculty through which all subsequent Aeons proceed.

4. **Aletheia** (*Truth*) — paired with Nous, she reveals the hidden character of the divine source.

These four, referred to as the *Tetrad*, are the root of the Pleroma. From Nous and Aletheia, the rest of the Aeons emanate.

> “He is all these names without falsehood… the word of the inexpressible, the mind of the inconceivable, the spring that flowed from him, the root of those who have been rooted…” (*Tripartite Tractate* 66:5–67:10).

### The Remaining Aeons: Emanations from the Son

According to the Valentinian tradition, the Son is “the Name and the Names of the Father” (*Tripartite Tractate* 66:5–67:34). From the Son emanate twenty-six additional Aeons, revealing the Father's many attributes. These unfold in complementary male-female pairs, expressing both initiation and manifestation, unity and harmony.

**Third Generation (from Nous and Aletheia):**

5\. **Logos** (*Word*)

6\. **Zoe** (*Life*)

**Fourth Generation (from Logos and Zoe):**

7\. **Anthropos** (*Man*)

8\. **Ecclesia** (*Church*)

> “While all the members of the All exist in the single one… he is entirely himself forever; he is each and every one of the members of the All eternally at the same time.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 67:1–10)

**Fifth Generation — Two streams of Aeons:**

**From Logos and Zoe:**

9\. **Bythios** (*Profound*)

10\. **Mixis** (*Mixture*)

11\. **Ageratos** (*Never old*)

12\. **Henosis** (*Union*)

13\. **Autophyes** (*Essential Nature*)

14\. **Hedone** (*Pleasure*)

15\. **Acinetos** (*Immovable*)

16\. **Syncrasis** (*Commixture*)

17\. **Monogenes** (*Only-begotten*)

18\. **Macaria** (*Happiness*)

**From Anthropos and Ecclesia:**

19\. **Paracletus** (*Comforter*)

20\. **Pistis** (*Faith*)

21\. **Patricas** (*Paternal*)

22\. **Elpis** (*Hope*)

23\. **Metricos** (*Maternal*)

24\. **Agape** (*Love*)

25\. **Ainos** (*Praise*)

26\. **Synesis** (*Intelligence*)

27\. **Ecclesiasticus** (*Son of Ecclesia*)

28\. **Macariotes** (*Blessedness*)

29\. **Theletus** (*Perfect*)

30\. **Sophia** (*Wisdom*)

These Aeons, though spoken of with distinct names, are never divided from the One. Their unity is emphasized repeatedly:

> “He is not divided as a body, nor is he split apart by the names in which he exists… Rather, he is entirely himself forever.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 67:5–10)

Just as a spring remains one even when it flows into various streams, or a root is still one as it branches into limbs, so the Father remains One while emanating into the Aeons. The hierarchy is not one of subordination but of participation and mutual glorification:

> “They exist as minds over minds, words over words, superiors over superiors, degrees over degrees… each has his own station, rank, dwelling place, and place of rest, which is the glorification he brings forth.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 70:5–15)

### The Aeons as the Father's Names

The Aeons are not independent deities or cosmic beings; they are the Father’s **names**, that is, his attributes revealed in relational form. The Son contains all of these names and reveals them, not by change, but by the Father’s will to be known in multiplicity:

> “The Father is a single Name… but nevertheless innumerable in his qualities and names.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 73:5–10)

> “When they speak, they are all in the one single Name; and if he brings them forth, it is in order that they may be found to exist as individual qualities forming a unity.” (*Tripartite Tractate* 72:15–20)

Thus, the hierarchy of the Pleroma is not a structure of ascending ranks of divine beings, but a harmonic arrangement of divine attributes. These attributes form the fullness (*pleroma*) of the divine nature, revealed in the Son, and made known to the Aeons, who glorify the Father as they return to their source in unity.

In this way, the Aeons are the visible names of the invisible, and their number, thirty, corresponds to the richness of divine speech, each one a reflection of the Father’s power, will, and wisdom.