Valentinians and John 1

**Valentinians and John 1**

Valentinians often refer to the prologue of the Gospel of John when it says, *“In the beginning was the Word”* (John 1:1). In their understanding, the “Word” (Logos) corresponds to the divine Mind and Truth. This interpretation is clear in the writings of Theodotus, a prominent Valentinian teacher.

Valentinian cosmology is complex and doctrinal. Unlike some modern spiritual movements that view dogma as limiting, classical Gnostics—including the Valentinians—considered doctrine crucial. For modern Gnostics, understanding these doctrines matters because cosmology (the study of the universe’s origin) directly shapes anthropology (the study of human nature in relation to the divine). Simply put, our view of mankind depends on our view of the cosmos.

Valentinian cosmology arises largely from a study of John’s prologue, which itself is a reflection on creation and divine attributes. Together, these elements constitute the Pleroma.

The Pleroma, meaning “fullness,” does not represent something eternal or unchanging. Rather, it was produced and formed by the Eternal Spirit through a process called emanation. The Pleroma refers to all existence beyond the visible universe — the world of the Aions, the spiritual heavens, or the spiritual universe. Bythos, the spiritual source of all, emanates the Pleroma.

The Pleroma is both the dwelling place and essential nature of the True Ultimate Deity, or Bythos. It is also a state of consciousness.

Different versions of this cosmological myth appear throughout Valentinian texts. The Aions are emanations of the Divine Mind. Unlike some Gnostic systems, Valentinians do not use the terms Barbelo or Yaldabaoth. Instead, the emanations form pairs (syzygy) such as Logos (male) and Zoe (female), Anthropos (male) and Ekklesia (female).

A brief summary of the Valentinian system is this: from the transcendent Deity emanated a male principle called Mind and a female principle called Thought. From these principles emanated others in male-female pairs, making a total of thirty Aions. These Aions collectively form the fullness, or Pleroma — the divine realm, the spiritual world beyond the physical heavens, also called the Third Heaven.

**John 1:1–4** says:

*“In the beginning was the Word (Logos or the first thought or reason of God), and the Word was with God (the Monad, the transcendent Deity), and the Word was God.

The same was in the beginning with God.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

In him was life; and the life was the light of men.”*

From *Excerpta ex Theodoto* (Theodotus), we read:

*“The verse, ‘In the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with God and the Logos was God,’ the Valentinians understand thus: the ‘beginning’ is the ‘Only Begotten’ and he is also called God. The Logos in the beginning — that is, in the Only Begotten, in the Mind and the Truth — indicates the Christ, the Logos and the Life \[Zoe]. Hence, he also appropriately calls God him who is in God, the Mind. ‘That which came into being in him,’ the Logos, ‘was Life,’ the Companion. Therefore the Lord also says, ‘I am the Life.’”*

This Logos, understood as Mind and Truth, compares with the *Tripartite Tractate*:

*“The Father, in the way mentioned earlier, in an unbegotten way, is the one in whom he knows himself, who begot him having a thought, which is the perception of him... that is, silence and wisdom and grace, if designated properly.”*

Theodotus further explains:

*“Therefore, the Father, being unknown, wished to be known to the Aions, and through his own thought, as if he had known himself, he put forth the Only-Begotten, the spirit of Knowledge which is in Knowledge. So he too who came forth from Knowledge, that is, from the Father’s Thought, became Knowledge, that is, the Son, because ‘through the Son the Father was known.’”*

The first thought is the Logos, also called Mind and Truth. The Father, through that first thought, brings forth the Only Begotten Son.

Valentinian cosmology begins with the primal being, the Monad, meaning the One. The *Valentinian Exposition* states:

*“The Monad who is, the Father, that is, the Root of the All, the Ineffable One. He dwells alone in silence, and silence is tranquility since he was a Monad and no one was before him.”*

From the *Valentinian Exposition*, we see that the primal ineffable Father has two components or aspects: a male called Bythos (Depth) and a female called Sige (Silence). The supreme Deity is incomprehensible, cannot be seen or heard, and is androgynous. This is expressed in the phrase:

*“He dwells in the Dyad and in the Pair, and his Pair is Silence.”*

This dyadic or syzygy consists of the primal Depth (male) and Ennoia or Thought (female).

A biblical parallel appears in **Proverbs 8:22–30**, where Wisdom is personified as being brought forth before creation:

*“Jehovah possessed me in the beginning of his way... When there were no depths, I was brought forth... When he established the heavens, I was there... Then I was by him, as a master workman; and I was daily his delight.”*

Here, Wisdom is not a separate deity but the personification of God’s attribute of wisdom: truth, justice, value, faithfulness, and eternal companionship.

Thus, from both John 1 and Proverbs 8, the God of the Bible is seen as incorporating masculine and feminine characteristics through these aspects, with the Father creating the universe. This aligns with the Valentinian understanding.

Returning to John’s prologue, Ptolemy’s *Commentary on the Gospel of John* states:

*“The entirety was made through it, and without it was not anything made” (John 1:3). For the Word became the cause of the forming and origination of all the Aions that came after it.”*

From *Excerpta ex Theodoto*:

*“All things were made by him; things both of spirit, mind, and senses, in accordance with the activity proper to the essential Logos. ‘This one explained the bosom of the Father,’ the Saviour... ‘First-Born of all creation.’ But the essential Only-Begotten... is the Light of the Church, which previously was in darkness and ignorance.”*

*“And darkness comprehended him not”: the apostates and the rest of men did not know him, and death did not detain him.”*

Valentinians maintain that the essential Logos is God in God, “in the bosom of the Father,” continuous and undivided — one God.

Ptolemy’s commentary further explains the pair (syzygy):

*“That which came into being in it was Life” (John 1:4). This discloses a pair. The entirety came into being through it, but Life is in it, joined with it and through it bears fruit. Since ‘Life \[Zoe] was the light of human beings,’ John discloses the Church by means of a synonym, so with a single word he might disclose the partnership of the pair.”*

*“From the Word \[Logos] and Life \[Zoe], the Human Being \[Anthropos] and the Church \[Ekklesia] came into being. He called Life the light of human beings because they are enlightened by her, i.e., formed and made visible.”*

John thus reveals the second quartet: Word, Life, Human Being, Church.

Moreover, John discloses the first quartet: Father, Grace, Only-Begotten, Truth. Together, these two quartets form the first octet — the mother of all Aions. The Savior is, according to Irenaeus, the fruit of the entire Pleroma.

In conclusion, the Valentinian reading of John 1 centers on divine emanations — Mind, Truth, Life, Human Being, and Church — as the fundamental components of the spiritual cosmos, formed through emanation from the Monad, the ultimate transcendent Deity. This reading reflects a deeply doctrinal and cosmological vision, affirming the essential importance of dogma in understanding the human condition and our place in the fullness (Pleroma) beyond the material world.

Valentinian Theology: Emanation, the Rejection of the Trinity, and the Nature of Monogenes

### Valentinian Theology: Emanation, the Rejection of the Trinity, and the Nature of Monogenes

Valentinianism stands as one of the most influential strands of early Christian Gnosticism, notable for its distinctive cosmology and theology rooted in emanation rather than the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. Contrary to orthodox Christianity’s affirmation of the co-eternal, co-equal Persons of the Godhead, Valentinians developed a complex system in which the divine reality unfolds through successive emanations from the ineffable Father, rather than existing as a triune unity. This difference reveals a fundamentally divergent understanding of the divine nature, one that avoids the language and dogma of the Trinity and instead emphasizes hierarchical emanations and distinct hypostases.

#### Historical Context: Early Christian Groups and the Rejection of the Trinity

Historical evidence from patristic sources such as Epiphanius of Salamis highlights that many early Christian groups rejected the doctrine of the Trinity altogether. In his *Panarion*, Epiphanius lists groups such as the Ebionites, Cerinthians, Merinthians, and Basilidians as contemporaneous with or preceding the Valentinians, all of whom held adoptionist or unitarian Christologies. These groups emphasized a singular divine power and rejected the notion of a triune Godhead. The Valentinians, who appeared somewhat later, inherited and developed this rejection of a triune God in favor of an emanationist worldview.

The Ebionites, for example, are well known for their strict monotheism and rejection of Jesus’s divinity as co-equal with the Father. Cerinthus similarly denied the full divinity of Christ, teaching instead that the Christ-spirit descended upon the man Jesus at baptism but was not himself the eternal Son. These early adoptionists and unitarians set the stage for Valentinian theology by insisting on the Father's supremacy and singularity, denying any co-eternal or co-equal Son within the Godhead.

This theological background is crucial for understanding Valentinianism’s departure from the later orthodox Trinitarian formulations. When the Arian controversy arose in the early fourth century, Arius himself distanced his views from those of Valentinus by denying that the Son was an emanation of the Father as Valentinians taught. This distinction illustrates that Valentinian emanationism was recognized even by orthodox opponents as a heterodox alternative to the orthodox Trinity.

#### Emanation and the Structure of the Valentinian Divine Reality

At the heart of Valentinian theology lies the concept of emanation (Greek: *proodos*), where the One ineffable Father—the primal Depth or *Bythos*—emanates divine hypostases that progressively unfold the fullness (*pleroma*) of divine reality. This process is not one of three equal persons in eternal relationship but a hierarchical unfolding where each emanation arises from the preceding one, and ultimately from the Father.

The primary emanation from the Father is *Monogenes*, the Only-Begotten. However, unlike orthodox Christology, Monogenes is not co-eternal or co-equal with the Father but is rather a secondary hypostasis that derives from the primordial Depth and Silence. Within Monogenes, there is a further internal duality: it consists of two aeons—*Nous* (Mind, masculine) and *Aletheia* (Truth, feminine). This androgynous duality reflects a principle of cosmic balance and completeness within the divine emanation. The unity of male Mind and female Truth within Monogenes produces a complete but derivative expression of divinity.

Thus, Monogenes is an emanation, not an eternal person equal to the Father. It is a mediated and contingent reality that exists within the fullness of the pleroma but is ontologically subordinate to the Father. This theological structure sharply contrasts with the orthodox Trinity, which holds Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as co-eternal, consubstantial, and equally divine.

#### Theological Implications of the Valentinian Trinity as Emanation

The Valentinian rejection of the Trinity doctrine stems from a deeper metaphysical view that insists on the transcendence and ineffability of the Father, who is utterly beyond being and the cosmos. For the Valentinians, the Father cannot be approached directly by creation or even by the subsequent emanations without mediation. Hence, the unfolding of the divine realm in successive emanations is necessary for the revelation and interaction with lower realms, including the natural and material worlds.

The triadic structure within Valentinianism—often called the Valentinian Trinity—should not be confused with the orthodox Trinity. It is better understood as a threefold distinction of natures or principles: the Spirit (the highest divine principle, often associated with the Father or the ultimate Godhead), the Soul (associated with the Demiurge or the creator god of the material cosmos), and Matter (associated with the material realm and the powers that govern it). This theological schema mirrors the tripartite division of human nature into spirit, soul, and flesh.

Therefore, the Valentinian Trinity is more a cosmological and anthropological framework than a statement of co-equal divine persons. It represents emanations or aspects of reality rather than a single Godhead existing simultaneously as three persons.

#### Monogenes as an Androgynous Emanation

The concept of Monogenes being composed of male Mind and female Truth underscores the complexity and nuance of Valentinian emanation. This androgyny is not merely symbolic but conveys the fullness and completeness of the divine emanation in its intermediate role. Mind and Truth represent complementary principles that together constitute the perfect, balanced emanation from the Father.

By emphasizing that Monogenes is a derivative emanation, Valentinians reject the orthodox understanding of the Son’s eternal equality with the Father. Instead, they present the Son as an expression of the Father’s fullness, yet ontologically dependent and created. This allows the Valentinians to maintain the absolute transcendence of the Father while explaining the presence of a divine mediator who relates to creation.

#### Conclusion

Valentinian theology represents a distinctive early Christian alternative to the doctrine of the Trinity. Rooted in the rejection of co-equal persons within the Godhead, it embraces a hierarchical emanationist worldview in which the divine reality unfolds progressively from the ineffable Father through intermediate emanations like Monogenes, who is himself an androgynous hypostasis of Mind and Truth. This system aligns with earlier unitarian and adoptionist groups and was explicitly rejected by orthodox Christianity, which saw Valentinian emanationism as heretical.

Understanding the Valentinian Trinity as emanation rather than consubstantial persons clarifies the profound theological divergence between Gnostic and orthodox Christian theologies. It also reveals how Valentinianism sought to reconcile the transcendence of the Father with the presence of divine mediators without compromising the absolute oneness of the ultimate God.

---

Valentinus

Bentley Layton has sketched out a relationship between the various gnostic movements in his introduction to The Gnostic Scriptures (SCM Press, London, 1987). In this model, "Classical Gnosticism" and "The School of Thomas" antedated and influenced the development of Valentinus, who was to found his own school of Gnosticism in both Alexandria and Rome, whom Layton called "the great [Gnostic] reformer" and "the focal point" of Gnostic development. While in Alexandria, where he was born, Valentinus probably would have had contact with the Gnostic teacher Basilides, and may have been influenced by him.

Valentinianism flourished after the middle of the 2nd century AD. This movement was named after its founder Valentinus (c. 100 – 180 AD). The school is also known to have been extremely popular: several varieties of their central myth are known, and we know of "reports from outsiders from which the intellectual liveliness of the group is evident." It is known that Valentinus' students elaborated on his teachings and materials (though the exact extent of their changes remains unknown), for example, in the version of the Valentinian myth brought to us through Ptolemy.

Valentinianism might be described as the most elaborate and philosophically "dense" form of the Syrian-Egyptian schools of Gnosticism, though it should be acknowledged that this in no way debarred other schools from attracting followers. Basilides' own school was popular also, and survived in Egypt until the 4th century.

Simone Petrement, in A Separate God, in arguing for a Christian origin of Gnosticism, places Valentinus after Basilides, but before the Sethians. It is her assertion that Valentinus represented a moderation of the anti-Judaism of the earlier Hellenized teachers; the demiurge, widely regarded as a mythological depiction of the Old Testament God of the Hebrews, is depicted as more ignorant than evil


Valentinian works are named in reference to the Bishop and teacher Valentinius. Circa 153 AD, Valentinius developed a complex cosmology outside of the Sethian tradition. At one point he was close to being appointed the Bishop of Rome of what is now the Roman Catholic Church. Works attributed to his school are listed below, and fragmentary pieces directly linked to him are noted with an asterisk:

• The Divine Word Present in the Infant (Fragment A) *
• On the Three Natures (Fragment B) *
• Adam's Faculty of Speech (Fragment C) *
• To Agathopous: Jesus' Digestive System (Fragment D) *
• Annihilation of the Realm of Death (Fragment F) *
• On Friends: The Source of Common Wisdom (Fragment G) *
• Epistle on Attachments (Fragment H) *
• Summer Harvest*
• The Gospel of Truth*
• Ptolemy's Version of the Gnostic Myth
• Prayer of the Apostle Paul
• Ptolemy's Epistle to Flora
• Treatise on the Resurrection (Epistle to Rheginus)
• Gospel of Philip

Gnostic Teaching On the Soul The Nag Hammadi Library

Christian Gnostic teaching of the Soul The Nag Hammadi Library

What is the Soul?

In the Bible there are two words for Soul the Hebrew term נפש‎ nefesh and the Greek word ψυχή, psuché both words mean to breath

The Soul refers to the breathing frame (respiratory system) the seat of which is in the blood Lev 17:11

Genesis 9:4 Only flesh with its soul—its blood—YOU must not eat

Lev 17:11 For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for YOU to make atonement for YOUR souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul [in it]

The statement of this verse is literally true, for the bloodstream is the bearer of life throughout the body: a teaching of the Bible which science has confirmed.
Blood was prohibited as an article of diet because it represented the life of the body which should be given up to God exclusively, as it is by self-sacrifice.

Both Humans and Animals are souls

Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul

Genesis 1:24 And God went on to say: “Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth according to its kind.” And it came to be so.

Genesis 1:30 And to every wild beast of the earth and to every flying creature of the heavens and to everything moving upon the earth in which there is life as a soul I have given all green vegetation for food.” And it came to be so

Genesis 2:19 Now Jehovah God was forming from the ground every wild beast of the field and every flying creature of the heavens, and he began bringing them to the man to see what he would call each one; and whatever the man would call it, each living soul, that was its name

All living creatures are living souls both "Man and beasts... they have all ONE spirit (Ecclesiastes 3:19-21)

Young's Literal Translation

For an event is to the sons of man, and an event is to the beasts, even one event is to them; as the death of this, so is the death of that; and one spirit is to all, and the advantage of man above the beast is nothing, for the whole is vanity.

The Bible also speaks about dead souls

“Soul” in the New Testament

The word translated “Soul” in the NT is the Greek word “Psuche”, which occurs 106 times and is translated variously “Soul” (58 times), “life” 40 times, mind 3 times.

The word is used 45 times in contexts where it is evident that it is subject to death. For example:

James 5:20 “.. he which converteth a sinner … saveth a soul from death”

Acts 3:23 “.. every soul that will not hear that prophet shall be destroyed..”

1cor 15:44 It is sown a body of the soul (literally in Greek - a soulical body) , it is raised a body of the spirit; if there is a body of the soul, there is also of the spirit:—
45 Thus, also, it is written—The first man, Adam, became, a living soul, the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.
46 Howbeit, not first, is the [body] of the spirit, but that, of the soul,—afterwards, that of the spirit. (Rotherham's Emphasized Bible)

The body of the soul is the natural body

A soul is a physical body.

Genesis 2:7 And Yahweh Elohim proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground [he made the body] and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life [he put a spirit in the body], and the man came to be a living soul [body + spirit = living soul] (Genesis 2).

Spirit is a character, a personality. It is 'you'.

The soul is therefore the life carrying vehicle. Now the life, your life, you, is the spirit. We are spirits, our characters are spirits.

The soul (body) is the vehicle for the spirit.

The spirit is your character, it is 'you'. Things get confusing when one realises that spirit also represents your character as well as being the spirit of the Deity. 

A living human is a spirit within a physical body

Human Person = Spirit + Physical Body = Soul (human)
Corpse = Physical Body with no Spirit = Dead Soul (human)

psuchikos Psychical psychic – "soulful", Matter-dwelling spirits

The soul belongs to the “material” realm and is part of the flesh. Leviticus 17:11

The body is the whole being. In death, there is no separation of body and soul. The soul is as mortal as the body.

The Soul in Early Church teaching

Then I answered, "I am not so miserable a fellow, Trypho, as to say one thing and think another. I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise. Moreover, I pointed out to you that some who are called Christians, but are godless, impious heretics, teach doctrines that are in every way blasphemous, atheistical, and foolish. But that you may know that I do not say this before you alone, I shall draw up a statement, so far as I can, of all the arguments which have passed between us; in which I shall record myself as admitting the very same things which I admit to you. For I choose to follow not men or men's doctrines, but God and the doctrines [delivered] by Him. For if you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who do not admit this [truth], and venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; who say there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to heaven; do not imagine that they are Christians, even as one, if he would rightly consider it, would not admit that the Sadducees, or similar sects of Genist , Meristae,Gelilaeans, Hellenists, Pharisees, Baptists, are Jews (do not hear me impatiently when I tell you what I think), but are[only] called Jews and children of Abraham, worshipping God with the lips, as God Himself declared, but the heart was far from Him. But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare. (Justin Martyr: Dialogue with Trypho Chapter 80)

The “traditional view” today, the view most common among Conservative and Protestant Christians, is not in fact the view held by most of the Fathers of the Church.

The concept of the immortality of the soul comes from Greek philosophy it is not an idea found in Jewish-Christian scriptures known as the Holy Bible

Christian Gnostic understanding of the soul

According to April D. DeConick in her book The Gnostic New Age "most Gnostics thought that the psyche, or soul, was mortal." page 11

According to most Gnostics, the soul is not immortal, as Plato thought. Rather, it is mortal, just like the physical body, and will not endure. (The Gnostic New Age P. 212 April D. DeConick

The Soul is Female

Wise men of old gave the soul a feminine name. Indeed she is female in her nature as well. She even has her womb. (The Exegesis on the Soul)

The text from the Nag Hammadi Library The Exegesis on the Soul says "Wise men of old gave the soul a feminine name."

This is true because the word soul is a Feminine Noun, in Hebrew, Greek and Coptic.

Next the text says "Indeed she is female in her nature as well. She even has her womb."

If we compare this with the Letter of James from the Bible we can see that nothing good is born of the soul:

James 3:15 This wisdom is not one, from above, coming down, but is earthly, born of the soul, demoniacal! (Rotherham's Emphasized Bible)

Philo: Now the female offspring of the soul are wickedness and passion, by which we are made effeminate in every one of our pursuits; but a healthy state of the passions and virtue is male, by which we are excited and invigorated.

The Psychic Aeon 

Next the psychic aeon. It is a small one, which is mixed with bodies, by begetting in the souls (and) defiling (them). For the first defilement of the creation found strength. And it begot every work: many works of wrath, anger, envy, malice, hatred, slander, contempt and war, lying and evil counsels, sorrows and pleasures, basenesses and defilements, falsehoods and diseases, evil judgments that they decree according to their desires. (The Concept of Our Great Power, The Nag Hammadi Library)

The soul-endowed aeon is the human race after the flood. This aeon will remain in place until the final consummation

The defilement of the soul is by begetting negative emotions see James 3:15 as quoted above and Psalm 7:14

Psalm 7:14, ESV: Behold, the wicked man conceives evil and is pregnant with mischief and gives birth to lies

The Origin of the Soul

Do the Gnostic texts speak about the the origin of the soul?

Yes the gospel of Philip and the Extracts from the Works of Theodotus describe the creation of the soul:

50 “Taking dust from the earth”: not of the land but a portion of matter but of varied constitution and colour, he fashioned a soul, earthly and material, irrational and consubstantial with that of the beasts. (Extracts from the Works of Theodotus)

The soul of Adam came into being by means of a breath, the partner of his soul is the spirit, and the spirit given to him is his mother. (Gospel of Philip).

Is there a distinction between soul and spirit?

Yes like the Bible the Gnostic texts or apocryphal gospels make a distinction between soul and spirit

Then Peter answered, “Look, three times you have told us, ‘Be filled,’ but we are filled.”
The savior answered and said, “For this reason I have told you, ‘Be filled,’ that you may not lack. Those who lack will not be saved. To be filled is good and to lack is bad. Yet since it is also good for you to lack but bad for you to be filled, whoever is filled also lacks. One who lacks is not filled in the way another who lacks is filled, but whoever is filled is brought to an appropriate end. So you should lack when you can fill yourselves and be filled when you lack, that you may be able to fill yourselves more. Be filled with spirit but lack in reason, for reason is of the soul. It is soul.” (The Apocryphon of James)

The Soul is the body

According to the Extracts from the Works of Theodotus found in the works of Clement of Alexandria, the "soul is a body" (Extract 14) it was created from "dust from the earth" with which "he fashioned a soul, earthly and material" (Extract 50) Therefore according to Valentinian Christians he soul is a natural or physical body:

14 The demons are said to be incorporeal, not because they have no bodies (for they have even shape and are, therefore, capable of feeling punishment), but they are said to be incorporeal because, in comparison with the spiritual bodies which are saved, they are a shade. And the angels are bodies; at any rate they are seen. Why even the soul is a body, for the Apostle says, "It is sown a body of soul, it is raised a body of spirit." (1cor 15:44) And how can the souls which are being punished be sensible of it, if they are not bodies? Certainly he says, "Fear him who, after death, is able to cast soul and body into hell." () Now that which is visible is not purged by fire, but is dissolved into dust. (Extracts from the Works of Theodotus)

Here the Extracts from the Works of Theodotus is quoting from 1 Corinthians 15:44 this is to show the soul is a body notice it says "is a body" not "has a body"

Also the Extracts from the Works of Theodotus shows that the soul can be destroyed in Gehenna

The Psychic One

Psychic from the Greek psuchikos: natural, of the soul or mind
Original Word: ψυχικός, ή, όν
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: psuchikos
Phonetic Spelling: (psoo-khee-kos')
Definition: natural, of the soul or mind
Usage: animal, natural, sensuous.

And the natural man doth not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for to him they are foolishness, and he is not able to know them, because spiritually they are discerned; (1 Corinthians 2:14,)

Natural.--That is, literally, that part of our nature which we call "mind,"

People who have not been initiated are called by Paul “psychics,” people who have only their own psyches or souls but not yet God’s Spirit. Because God’s Spirit has not united with their own spirits, these people are unable to receive gnosis (1 Corinthians 2:14, 15:34).

In the Sethian book the Apocryphon of John, we learn that the soul parts are given by each of the planetary rulers, including the soul’s bone, sinew, flesh, marrow, blood, skin, and hair. Each of these soul parts is aligned with a psychic capacity [Mind], such as goodness, intention, piety, tyranny, domination, envy, or wisdom (Apocryphon of John, Nag Hammadi codices [NHC] II.1 11.23–12.25, 15.14–24; compare with Apocryphon of John in Berlin Codex 2 48.11–50.2). (The Gnostic New Age, April D. DeConick)

59 First, then, he put on a seed from the Mother, not being separated but containing it by power, and it is given form little by little through knowledge. And when he came into Space Jesus found Christ, whom it was foretold that he would put on, whom the Prophets and the Law announced as an image of the Saviour. But even this psychic Christ whom he put on, was invisible, and it was necessary for him when he came into the world to be seen here, to be held, to be a citizen, and to hold on to a sensible body. A body, therefore, was spun for him out of invisible psychic substance, and arrived in the world of sense with power from a divine preparation. (Extracts from the Works of Theodotus)

60 Therefore, “Holy Spirit shall come upon thee” refers to the formation of the Lord's body, “and a Power of the Most High shall overshadow thee” indicates the formation of God with which he imprinted the body in the Virgin. (Extracts from the Works of Theodotus)

Theodotus understood the incarnation to be a kind of ensoulment of God’s mind in matter, when the Logos descended into the flesh at Jesus’ birth and became Jesus’ psyche or soul. So Theodotus understood that Jesus came into being not through the water baptism only, but through the blood of birth too (1 John 5:6;)

Remember the soul of the flesh is in the blood Levit 17:11

The Soul is Temporary

Some Gnostic texts text speak about the death of the soul

- For he knows the desire, and also what it is that the flesh needs! - (Or do you think) that it is not this (flesh) that desires the soul? For without the soul, the body does not sin, just as the soul is not saved without the spirit. But if the soul is saved (when it is) without evil, and the spirit is also saved, then the body becomes free from sin. For it is the spirit that raises the soul, but the body that kills it; that is, it is it (the soul) which kills itself. (The Apocryphon of James)

Here the soul is equivalent in value or interdependent with the flesh and the body the soul needs to be saved from death as the text says “it is it (the soul) which kills itself”

The Treatise of the Resurrection:
"From the savior we radiate beams, and we are held in his arms until our own sunset, our death in this life. We are drawn to heaven by him, like beams, by the sun, and nothing holds us down. This is the resurrection of the spirit, which swallows up the soul and the flesh."

Tripartite Tractate:
"They became flesh and soul, that is, eternally which (things) hold them and with corruptible things they die. "

The Gospel of Philip:
"Adam’s soul came from a breath. The soul’s companion is spirit, and the spirit given to him is his mother. His soul was [taken] from him and replaced with [spirit]. "

Apocalypse of Peter:
`For evil cannot produce good fruit. For the place from which each of them is produces that which is like itself; for not every soul is of the truth, nor of immortality. For every soul of these ages has death assigned to it in our view, because it is always a slave, since it is created for its desires and their eternal destruction, in which they are and from which they are. They love the creatures of the matter which came forth with them.`

In this text there are mortal souls of this age and immortal souls in the age to come

Apoc of Adam

`But we have done every deed of the powers senselessly. We have boasted in the transgression of all our works. We have cried against the God of truth because all his works [...] is eternal. These are against our spirits. For now we have known that our souls will die the death.`

Here the soul needs to be redeem from death if the soul is immortal how can it die?

Heracleon was a Valentinian Gnostic in his Commentary on the Gospel of John he rejects the doctrine of the immortal soul

Fragment 40, on John 4:46-53 (In John 4:46, “So he came again to Cana in Galilee, where he had made the water wine. And at Capernaum there was an official whose child was ill.) The official was the Craftsman, for he himself ruled like a king over those under him. Because his domain is small and transitory, he was called an “official,” like a petty princeling who is set over a small kingdom by the universal king. The “child” “in Capernaun” is one who is in the lower part of the Middle (i.e. of animate substance), which lies near the sea, that is, which is linked with matter. The child’s proper person was sick, that is, in a condition not in accordance with the child’s proper nature, in ignorance and sins. (In John 4:47, “When he heard that Jesus had come from Judea to Galilee, he went and begged him to come down and heal his child , for it was at the point of death.”) The words “from Judea to Galilee” mean ‘from the Judea above.’. . . By the words “it was at the point of death,” the teaching of those who claim that the soul is immortal is refuted. In agreement with this is the statement that “the body and soul are destoyed in Hell.” (Matthew 10:28) The soul is not immortal, but is possessed only of a disposition towards salvation, for it is the perishable which puts on imperishability and the mortal which puts on immortality when “its death is swallowed up in victory.” (1 Corinthians 15:54) [Heracleon: Fragments from his Commentary on the Gospel of John]

both canonical and gnostic text support the teaching that the soul is temporary.

The true doctrine of immortality.

What is the resurrection? It is the revelation of those who have risen. If you remember reading in the gospel that Elijah appeared and Moses with him, do not suppose that the resurrection is an illusion. It is no illusion. It is truth. It is more proper to say that the world is illusion, rather than the resurrection that is because of our lord the savior, Jesus the Christ.

And I also disagree with others who say that the flesh will not arise. Both views are wrong. You say that the flesh will not arise? Then tell me what will arise, so we may salute you. You say it is the spirit in the flesh, and also the light in the flesh? But what is in the flesh is the word, and what you are talking about is nothing other than flesh. It is necessary to arise in this sort of flesh, since everything exists in it.

Orthodox Church Service vs Valentinian Church Service

Orthodox Church Service vs Valentinian Church Service

The Biblical view: 

“All you are brothers,” Jesus had said to his disciples. “Your Leader is one, the Christ.” (Matt. 23:8, 10) So there was no clergy class within Christian congregations of the first century.  As to organization, each congregation was supervised by a body of overseers, or spiritual elders. All the elders had equal authority, and not one of them was authorized to ‘lord it over’ the flock in their care. (Acts 20:17; Phil. 1:1; 1 Pet. 5:2, 3) However, as the apostasy unfolded, things began to change—quickly.

Clergy and Laity

Among the earliest deviations was a separation between the terms “overseer” (Gr., episkopos sometimes translated Bishop) and “elder” (Gr., presbyteros ), so that they were no longer used to refer to the same position of responsibility. Just a decade or so after the death of the apostle John, Ignatius, “bishop” of Antioch, in his letter to the Smyrnaeans, wrote: “See that you all follow the bishop [overseer], as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery [body of elders] as if it were the Apostles.” Ignatius thus advocated that each congregation be supervised by one bishop, or overseer, who was to be recognized as distinct from, and having greater authority than, the presbyters.

The English word “priest” derives from presbyteros (“elder”) as follows: from Middle English pre(e)st, from Old English preost, from Vulgar Latin prester, contracted from Late Latin presbyter, from Greek pre·sby´te·ros.
So the orthodox Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, defines the church in terms of the bishop, who represents that system:

Let no one do anything pertaining to the church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop, or by the person whom he appoints . . . Wherever the bishop offers [the eucharist], let the congregation be present, just as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic church. Ignatius, Smyrneans 8.1-2.

Lest any "heretic" suggest that Christ may be present even when the bishop is absent, Ignatius sets him straight:

It is not legitimate either to baptize or to hold an agape [eucharist, breaking or bread a meal] without the bishop . . . To join with the bishop is to join the church; to separate oneself from the bishop is to separate oneself not only from the church, but from God himself. Ignatius, Smyrneans 8.1-2.

Apart from the church hierarchy, he insists, "there is nothing that can be called a church."Trallians 3.1.

The groundwork was thus laid for a clergy class gradually to emerge. About a century later, Cyprian, “bishop” of Carthage, North Africa, was a strong advocate of authority of the bishops—as a group separate from the presbyters (later known as priests), the deacons, and the laity. But he did not favor the primacy of one bishop over the others.


As bishops and presbyters ascended the hierarchical ladder, they left below it the rest of the believers in the congregation. This resulted in a separation between clergy (those taking the lead) and laity (the passive body of believers). 

In time the bishop of Rome, claiming to be a successor of Peter, was thought of as the supreme bishop and pope

Valentinian Church Service

The community would meet on Sundays (whether before sunrise or in the evening—or both—we do not know). 

Valentinian initiates took turns performing the various liturgical tasks ensuring a high degree of participation by the membership. According to Tertullian, "Today one man is bishop and tomorrow another; the person who is a deacon today, tomorrow is a reader; the one who is a priest is a layman tomorrow. For even on the laity they impose the functions of priesthood." ( Tertullian Against the Valentinians 1) He goes on to relate that even women could take the role of bishop, much to his horror.

Only the elementary Valentinian teachings were available at such public meetings. Initiates were expected to discern the newcomer's level of spiritual development and act accordingly. This discussed in the parable of appropriate diets in the Gospel of Philip: "Bodily forms will not deceive them, rather they consider the condition of each person's soul and they speak to that person accordingly. In the world there are many animals that have human form. If the disciples of God recognize that they are hogs, they feed them acorns; if cattle, barley chaff and fodder; if dogs, bones; if slaves, a first course; if children, a complete meal" (Gospel of Philip 81:3-13 cf. Hebrews 5:12-14). If a person was considered to be at a material level of development (i.e. "an animal") they received the nothing more than the teaching available at the public meeting ("acorns", "chaff" and "bones").

If the person was considered to be at an animate level (i.e. "a slave") they would be invited to private classes. In these classes they recived elementary teachings ( "a first course") in order to determine if were worthy of further instruction. Valentinians saw most Christians as fitting into this category. Pupils assigned to this category had the potential to move on to the next level. If the person had progressed to the highest spiritual level and become a "child," they were invited to join an advanced class where they would receive the complete teaching. According to Tertullian, complete instruction could last as long as five years and involved rigorous self-discipline. It should be noted that all who received the private instruction were bound by the "duty of Silence" not to disclose it to non-initiates (cf. Tertullian Against the Valentinians 1).

Full initiates acted as the person's spiritual guide towards the ultimate goal of gnosis. Eventual initiation was dependent on evidence of gnosis. To become an initiate one had to "no longer believe from human testimony but from the Truth itself." (Fragments of Herakleon 39). To this end, much of the training at the advanced stage of instruction would have likely focused on meditation techniques. One the person had completed the training and demonstrated evidence of gnosis, they would be initiated by receiving the Valentinian baptism. 

Spirituals and psychics worshipped together for the first part of the service, which comprised a confession, a collection and the singing of a “hymn of the humble,” and praying for redemption. Perhaps both groups listened together to a sermon. Baptism of new members may have taken place at this point. The second part of the service was for the spirituals only, i.e., the baptized. It included the singing of psalms from Valentinus’ psalm-book. The congregation sang in an enthusiastic mode, seeking communion with the transcendent aeons.

After that, a senior member of the congregation delivered a sermon. Then followed a Eucharistic meal, with bread and wine mixed with water, or just water. The elements were consecrated by means of an invocation for the presence of spiritual power and eaten as a prefiguration of the eschatological wedding feast of the bridal chamber. During the meal, individual church members stood up to prophesy, conveying messages from the aeonic world, perhaps speaking in tongues.

The ritual sequence as a whole shows a certain family resemblance to second century Christian Sunday worship as described in Justin, 1 Apology 67, though the enthusiastic aspects are clearly more prominent than in Justin’s account. Our general knowledge about the structure of Christian services during this period is in any case very scant. In a broad perspective, the Valentinian version of regular Christian worship, with its communal style of psalm singing and its general character as a service of the word, seems to owe more to Jewish and Christian traditions of congregation ritual than to the conventional forms of Greco-Roman cult.

Eucharist in the Gospel of Philip

Eucharist in the Gospel of Philip

The Eucharist and Jesus

The eucharist is Jesus. In Syriac it is called pharisatha, which means, “that which is spread out.” For Jesus came to crucify the world.

Eucharist and Baptism

The cup of prayer contains wine and water, for it represents the blood for which thanksgiving is offered. It is full of the holy spirit, and it belongs to the completely perfect human. When we drink it, we take to ourselves the perfect human.

The living water is a body, and we must put on the living human. Thus, when one is about to go down into the water, one strips in order to put on the living human.

The Holy Person
The holy person is completely holy, including the person’s body. The holy person who takes up bread consecrates it, and does the same with the cup or anything else the person takes up and consecrates. So how would the person not consecrate the body also? 

The Breaking of Bread (Acts 2:42) is also known as “the Lord’s Supper, the Eucharist, and the communion meal.

From the Gospel of Philip it can be gathered that the meal consisted of bread and wine mixed with water.

82 And the bread and the oil are sanctified by the power of the Name, and they are not the same as they appeared to be when they were received, but they have been transformed by power into spiritual power. Thus, the water, also, both in exorcism and baptism, not only keeps off evil, but gives sanctification as well (Extracts from the Works of Theodotus 82)

According to the Extracts from the Works of Theodotus 82.1, the bread was “sanctified by the power of the Name.”

The same applies to “the bread and the oil”: they are transformed into a spiritual power by the power of the Name of God

The Valentinians celebrated the Eucharist with bread and a cup.  The Gospel of Philip in particular shows that Valentinians could speak without difficulty about partaking of the flesh and the blood of the Savior in the Eucharist, because they gave a symbolic meaning to these words: thus, for instance, the “flesh” is the Logos and the “blood” is the Holy Spirit. 

The author of the Gospel of Philip manages to find allusions in the Eucharistic bread both to the crucifixion (the “spreading out”: 63:21–24) and to the incarnation (“bread from heaven”: 55:6–14), and that the Eucharistic prayer in 58:10–14 is an invocation of the union with the angels, in other words of the bridal chamber.In the latter case it seems that the reference to the union with the angels served to stage the Eucharist as an image of the wedding feast associated with the bridal chamber

As a meal, the significance of the Eucharist was, as we have seen, exclusively symbolic; the enjoyment of food and drink was hardly a goal in itself.

bread The substance of the omnipresent Christ body. There is substance in words of Truth, and this substance is appropriated by prayer and meditation on Truth.

wine/blood the sustenance for spirit, mind, 

So it is also [75] with bread, the cup, and oil, though there are mysteries higher than these. (The Gospel of Philip)

Valentinus' Vision of the Word

I saw a newborn child, and questioned it to find out who it was. And the child answered me saying, "I am the Word


Fragments From Lost Writings of Valentinus from: Bentley Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures (Doubleday, 1987), pp. 223-49.

This saying from Valentinus reminds me of the saying from the Gospel of Thomas

Saying 4 Jesus said, "A person advanced in days will not hesitate to question a little child seven days old about the place of life. And that person will live. For many that are first will be last, and they will become one."

22) Jesus saw some little ones nursing. He said to his disciples, "These little ones who are nursing resemble is those who enter the kingdom."

The Gospel of Philip Jesus Tricked Everyone

Jesus tricked everyone, for he did not appear as he was, but he appeared so that he could be seen. He appeared to everyone. He [appeared] to the great as great, he [appeared] to the small as small, he [appeared [58] to the] angels as an angel and to humans as a human. For this reason his word was hidden from everyone. Some looked at him and thought they saw themselves. But when he appeared to his disciples in glory upon the mountain, he was not small. He became great. Or rather, he made the disciples great, so they could see him in his greatness.

The Tripartite Tractate: 

Rather, he exists by himself. As for the parts in which he exists in his own manner and form and greatness, it is possible for <them> to see him and speak about that which they know of him, since they wear him while he wears them, because it is possible for them to comprehend him. He, however, is as he is, incomparable. In order that the Father might receive honor from each one and reveal himself, even in his ineffability, hidden, and invisible, they marvel at him mentally. Therefore, the greatness of his loftiness consists in the fact that they speak about him and see him. He becomes manifest, so that he may be hymned because of the abundance of his sweetness, with the grace of <...>. And just as the admirations of the silences are eternal generations and they are mental offspring, so too the dispositions of the word are spiritual emanations. Both of them admirations and dispositions, since they belong to a word, are seeds and thoughts of his offspring, and roots which live forever, appearing to be offspring which have come forth from themselves, being minds and spiritual offspring to the glory of the Father.

Heracleon on the Devil

John 8:44 Revised Standard Version (RSV)

44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Heracleon: Fragments from his
Commentary on the Gospel of John

http://gnosis.org/library/fragh.htm

Fragment 20, on John 4:21 (In John it says, “Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.’”) The mountain represents the Devil, or his world, since the Devil was one part of the whole of matter, but the world is the total mountain of evil, a deserted dwelling place of beasts, to which all who lived before the law and all Gentiles render worship. But Jerusalem represents the creation or the Creator whom the Jews worship. . . The mountain is the creation which the Gentiles worship, but Jerusalem is the creator whom the Jews serve. You then who are spiritual should worship neither the creation nor the Craftsman, but the Father of Truth. And he (Jesus) accepts her (the Samaritan woman) as one of the already faithful, and to be counted with those who worship in truth. 

In the Bible mountains represent kingdoms or empires

For Heracleon the mountain represents the totality of the material order of things (the devil and the world) worshipped by those who existed before the introduction of the Law of Moses in particular the gentiles

Fragment 44, on John 8:43-44a (In John 8:43-44a, “Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your wish is to do your father's desires.”) The reason why they were unable to hear Jesus’ words and understand what he said is provided in the words, “You are of your father the Devil.” He says, ‘Why are you unable to hear my word? Because you are of your father the Devil’ meaning you are of the substance of the Devil. Thus he makes clear their nature, after convincing them in advance that they are neither the children of Abraham otherwise they would not have hated him, nor children of God because they did not love him.



For Heracleon the inability of the pharisees to hear the divine word of Christ john 8:43 is rooted in their possession of the diabolic nature children of the devil neither the children of Abraham nor the children of God but rather the children of the devil possess a nature that is utterly different than the "psychics" and "pneumatics"

the Hylics hylics, also called somatics (from Gk σώμα (sōma) "body"), this refers to the thinking of the flesh or the carnal mind "it represents that physical principle of the animal nature, which is the cause of all its diseases, death, and resolution into dust. It is that in the flesh "which has the power of death" and it is called sin, because the development, or fixation, of this evil in the flesh, was the result of transgression. Inasmuch as this evil principle pervades every part of the flesh, the animal nature is styled "sinful flesh," that is, "flesh full of sin"; so that sin, in the sacred style, came to stand for the substance called man. In human flesh "dwells no good thing" (Rom. 7:17,18); and all the evil a man does is the result of this principle dwelling in him. Operating upon the brain, it excites the "propensities", and these set the "intellect" and "sentiments" to work. The propensities are blind, and so are the intellect and sentiments in a purely natural state; when therefore, the latter operate under the sole impulse of the propensities, "the understanding is darkened through ignorance, because of the blindness of the heart" (Eph. 4:18). The nature of the lower animals is as full of this physical evil principle as the nature of man; though it cannot be styled sin with the same expressiveness; because it does not possess them as the result of their own transgression; the name, however, does not alter the nature of the thing. Elpis Israel



Fragment 45, on John 8:44a Those to whom the word came were of the substance of the Devil. 

Heracleon makes an important distinction between those who are children of the devil by nature and substance and those who make themselves the devil's servants by choice. 

Origen As if the substance of the devil were different than the substance of other rational beings 

So what is the devil's nature or substance?

The diabolical nature is flesh:

Man in his physical constitution is imperfect; and this imperfection is traceable to the physical organization of his flesh, being based on the principle of decay and reproduction from the blood; which, acted upon by the air, becomes the life of his flesh. All the phenomena which pertain to this arrangement of things are summed up in the simple word sin; which is, therefore, not an individual abstraction, but a concretion of relations in all animal bodies; and the source of all their physical infirmities. Now, the apostle says, that the flesh thinks, that is, the brain, as all who think are well assured from their own consciousness. If, then, this thinking organ be commanded not to do what is natural for it to do under blind impulse, will it not naturally disobey? Now this disobedience is wrong, because what God commands to be done is right, and only right; so that "by his law is the knowledge of sin"; and this law requiring an obedience which is not natural, flesh is sure to think in opposition to it. The philosophy of superstition is -- religion in harmony with the thinking of the flesh; while true religion is religion in accordance with the thoughts of God as expressed in His law. Hence, it need excite no astonishment that religion and superstition are so hostile and that all the world should uphold the latter; while so few are to be found who are identified with the religion of God. They are as opposite as flesh and spirit.
Sin in the flesh is hereditary; and entailed upon mankind as the consequence of Adam's violation of the Eden law. The "original sin" was such as I have shown in previous pages. Adam and Eve committed it; and their posterity are suffering the consequence of it.

Fragment 46, on John 8:44a The verse “You are of your father the Devil” is to be understood as meaning ‘of the same substance as the Devil.’ On “and your wish is to do your father’s desires”: The Devil has no will, but only desires. . . This was said not to those who are by nature children of the Devil, but to the animate people who have become children of the Devil by intent. Some who are of this nature may also be called children of God by intent. Because they have loved the desires of the Devil and performed them, they become children of the Devil, though they were not such by nature. The word “children” may be understood in three ways: first, by nature; secondly, by inclination; thirdly, by merit. (A child) by nature means (the child) is begotten by someone who is himself begotten, and is properly called “child.” (A child) by inclination is when one who does the will of another person by his own inclination is called the child of the one whose will he does. (A child) by merit is when some are known as children of hell, or of darkness and lawlessness, and the offspring of snakes and vipers. For these do no produce anything by their own nature; they are destructive and consume those that are cast into them; but, since they did their works, they are called their children. . . He now calls them children of the Devil, not because the Devil produces any of them, but because by doing the works of the Devil they became like him.

Heraccleon suggests that individuals can become children of the devil and possess the diabolical nature in three ways by natural birth (we are all hylics by nature) 
by will that is after being enlightened those who choose to follow the desires of the devil 

by worth that is the enemies of God those described in the bible as children of gehenna or offspring of serpents 

The 2nd and 3rd are sons of the devil by adoption

the error and ignorance of the devil is rooted in his inherent nature which is the opposite of the truth

Hilgenfeld, Volkmar, and DeConick consider that the Evangelist shows that he embraced the opinion of the Valentinians and some earlier Gnostic sects that the father of the devil was the Demiurge or God of the Jews. But this idea was unknown to Heracleon, who here interprets the father of the devil as his essentially evil nature; to which Origen objects that if the devil be evil by the necessity of his nature, he ought rather to be pitied than blamed

The Divine Face 2nd Enoch 22 and 39

The Divine Face 2 Enoch 22 and 39

The Second Apocalypse of Enoch is a pseudepigraphic text which describes the ascent of Enoch through ten heavens in the tenth heaven Enoch sees the appearance of god a description of the divine face is given in chapter 22

Chapter 22

In the tenth heaven the archangel Michael led Enoch to before the Lord’s face

1On the tenth heaven, which is called Aravoth,I saw the view of the face of the Lord, like iron made burning hot in a fire and brought out, and it emits sparks and is incandescent. Thus even I saw the face of the Lord. But the face of the Lord is not to be talked about, it is so very marvelous and supremely awesome and supremely frightening. 
2 And who am I to give an account of the incomprehensible being of the Lord, and of his face, so extremely strange and indescribable? And how many are his commands, and his multiple voice, and the Lord's throne, supremely great and not made by hands, and the choir stalls all around him, the cherubim and the seraphim armies, and their never-silent singing. 
3 Who can give an account of his beautiful appearance, never changing and indescribable, and his great glory? 4 And I fell down flat and did obeisance to the Lord  (2 Enoch 22:1-4, the longer recension).^[8]

the face of yahweh is like iron this would symbolise his corporeal substance or divine nature 

the fire would also be  the nautre of yahweh because God is spirit and

 it emits sparks  this symbolises the emanations of the spirit 

For Yahweh thy God is a consuming fire" — A consuming fire will eat up all that it attacks. Yahweh is such to His enemies. See Deut. 9:3. When Israel was gathered at the mount, "the sight of the glory of Yahweh was like devouring fire" (Exod. 24:17).

Yahweh makes his ministers a flame of fire

the description of Yahweh's corporeality

In chapter 39 Enoch reports this theophanic experience to his sons during his short visit to the earth, adding some new details. Although both portrayals demonstrate a number of terminological affinities, the second account explicitly connects the divine face with the Lord's anthropomorphic "extend." The following account is drawn from the shorter recension of 2 Enoch:

Chapter 39
Enoch’s pitiful admonition to his sons with weeping and great lamentation, as he spoke to them

And now, my children it is not from my lips that I am reporting to you today, but from the lips of the Lord who has sent me to you. As for you, you hear my words, out of my lips, a human being created equal to yourselves; but I have heard the words from the fiery lips of the Lord. For the lips of the Lord are a furnace of fire, and his words are the fiery flames which come out. You, my children, you see my face, a human being created just like yourselves; I am one who has seen the face of the Lord,like iron made burning hot by a fire, emitting sparks. For you gaze into my eyes, a human being created just like yourselves; but I have gazed into the eyes of the Lord, like the rays of the shining sun and terrifying the eyes of a human being. You, my children, you see my right hand beckoning you, a human being created identical to yourselves; but I have seen the right hand of the Lord, beckoning me, who fills heaven. You see the extent of my body, the same as your own; but I have seen the extent of the Lord, without measure and without analogy, who has no end... To stand before the King, who will be able to endure the infinite terror or of the great burning (2 Enoch 39:3-8)

this describes God's physical corporeal body

Chapter 44
Enoch instructs his sons, that they revile not the face of man, small or great
1The Lord with his hands having created man, in the likeness of his own face, the Lord made him small and great.
2Whoever reviles the ruler’s face, and abhors the Lord’s face, has despised the Lord's face, and he who vents anger on any man without injury, the Lord’s great anger will cut him down, he who spits on the face of man reproachfully, will be cut down at the Lord’s great judgment.

3Blessed is the man who does not direct his heart with malice against any man, and helps the injured and condemned, and raises the broken down, and shall do charity to the needy, because on the day of the great judgment every weight, every measure and every makeweight will be as in the market, that is to say they are hung on scales and stand in the market, and every one shall learn his own measure, and according to his measure shall take his reward. 

The inner realization of the divine presence, of having met God face to face, and of having succeeded through prayer in attaining the divine favor and blessing that have been sought (turned toward God, face of God, within the presence of God, vision of God, recognition of God, beholden of God). At Peniel Jacob's name was changed to Israel because, as it was explained to him, "thou has striven with God and with men, and hast prevailed," had power with, margin (Gen. 32:28).

To see a vision of God's face is to experience the inner realization of the divine presence, of having met God face to face, and of having succeeded through prayer in obtaining the divine favour and blessing that have been sought within the presence of God.

Extracts from the Works of Theodotus

 10 But not even the world of spirit and of intellect, nor the arch angels and the First-Created, no, nor even he himself is shapeless and formless and without figure, and incorporeal; but he also has his own shape and body corresponding to his preeminence over all spiritual beings, as also those who were first created have bodies corresponding to their preeminence over the beings subordinate to them. For, in general, that which has come into being is not unsubstantial, but they have form and body, though unlike the bodies in this world. Those which are here are male and female and differ from each other, but there he who is the Only-Begotten and inherently intellectual has been provided with his own form and with his own nature which is exceedingly pure and sovereign and directly enjoys the power of the Father; and the First-Created even though numerically distinct and susceptible of separate distinction and definition, nevertheless, are shown by the similarity of their state to have unity, equality and similarity. For among the Seven there is neither inferiority nor superiority and no advance is left for them, since they have received perfection from the beginning, at the time of the first creation from God through the Son. And he is said to be “inapproachable Light” as” Only-Begotten,” and “First-Born,” “the things which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, and which have not entered into the heart of man,” – and such a one shall not be found either among the First-Created or among men, – but they “always behold the face of the Father” and the face of the Father is the Son, through whom the Father is known. Yet that which sees and is seen cannot be formless or incorporeal. But they see not with an eye of sense, but with the eye of mind, such as the Father provided.

12 Therefore the First-Created behold both the Son and each other and the inferior orders of being, as also the archangels behold the First-Created. But the Son is the beginning of the vision of the Father, being called the “face” of the Father. And the angels, who are intellectual fire and intellectual spirits, have purified natures, but the greatest advance from intellectual fire, completely purified, is intellectual light, “into which things the angels desire to look,” as Peter says. Now the Son is still purer than this: “light unapproachable” and “a power of God” and, according to the Apostle, “we were redeemed by precious and blameless and spotless blood.” And his “garments gleamed as the light, and his face as the sun,” which it is not easy even to look at.

15 “And as we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall bear also the image of the heavenly,” that is of the spiritual, as we advance towards perfection. Again he says “image” in the sense of spiritual bodies. And again, “For now we see in a mirror, confusedly, but then face to face”; for immediately we begin to have knowledge. . . there is not even “face” – form and shape and body. Now shape is perceived by shape, and face by face and recognition is made effectual by shapes and substances.