The Qur’an and the Gospel of Thomas

Seeking, Understanding and Self-Knowledge: The Qur’an and the Gospel of Thomas

Introduction

The Quran and the Gospel of Thomas, preserved among the Nag Hammadi writings, offer valuable material for exploring the relationship between spiritual understanding, contemplation, self-knowledge and the pursuit of truth. Although these texts emerge from different religious traditions, both contain teachings that encourage human beings to look beyond superficial appearances, exercise understanding and consider the deeper significance of existence.

Three passages provide a particularly interesting starting point for comparison: Qur’an 3:190–191, Qur’an 39:18 and the sayings attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas. The Qur’an describes people who contemplate creation, remember God and listen carefully before following what is best. The Gospel of Thomas emphasises the interpretation of sayings, persistent seeking, self-knowledge and the discovery of a kingdom that is both within and outside the individual.

These similarities do not establish that the two works teach identical doctrines. Instead, they provide a foundation for a comparative philosophy in which contemplation, discernment and the search for spiritual truth become central themes.

The purpose of this synthesis is to examine how these passages can be interpreted alongside one another while respecting their distinct theological perspectives.

1. The Qur’an: Contemplating Creation

Qur’an 3:190–191 presents contemplation as an important characteristic of people who possess understanding.

Qur’an 3:190:

Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day are signs for those of understanding.

Qur’an 3:191:

Who remember Allah while standing or sitting or [lying] on their sides and give thought to the creation of the heavens and the earth, [saying], "Our Lord, You did not create this aimlessly; exalted are You [above such a thing]; then protect us from the punishment of the Fire."

Translation: Sahih International.

These verses connect three activities: remembering God, contemplating creation and recognising that existence is not meaningless.

The heavens, the earth and the alternation of night and day are presented as signs that invite reflection. Their significance is not exhausted by simply observing that they exist. Rather, they encourage the thoughtful person to consider the order of creation and what that order reveals about its Creator.

The Arabic expression ulul-albab, translated here as "those of understanding", refers to people characterised by sound understanding or intellect. The passage therefore places intellectual reflection within a religious framework.

Contemplation is not merely the accumulation of information. It involves considering the meaning of what is observed and allowing that reflection to influence one's understanding of existence.

Verse 191 also connects contemplation with remembrance. The thoughtful person remembers God in different bodily positions and reflects on the creation of the heavens and the earth. Reflection and devotion are therefore presented together rather than as competing activities.

This provides a starting point for comparison with the Gospel of Thomas. Both texts can be read as encouraging a movement beyond passive observation towards a more profound understanding of reality.

There is, however, a significant difference in emphasis. The Qur’an directs contemplation towards recognition of God's creative power and purpose. The Gospel of Thomas frequently presents Jesus' sayings as riddles or paradoxes that require interpretation. These approaches can be compared without assuming that they lead to precisely the same theological conclusions.

2. Listening and Discerning What Is Best

Qur’an 39:18 introduces another important principle: the ability to listen carefully and exercise discernment.

Qur’an 39:18:

Who listen to speech and follow the best of it. Those are the ones Allah has guided, and those are people of understanding.

Translation: Sahih International.

This verse describes people who listen to what is said and follow what is best. Understanding involves more than receiving information. It also requires evaluation and a decision about how to respond.

The passage can be understood as an encouragement to listen attentively, consider what is heard and distinguish beneficial guidance from what is mistaken or unworthy of acceptance.

This principle is especially relevant to comparative religious study. Reading a sacred text should not require abandoning critical thought. A reader can examine a teaching, consider its meaning, compare it with other teachings and determine how it relates to a broader understanding of truth.

The verse nevertheless places discernment within the Qur’an's own theological framework: those who follow what is best are described as people whom God has guided.

When compared with the Gospel of Thomas, this passage raises an important question: how does a person move from hearing a teaching to understanding it?

The Gospel of Thomas repeatedly suggests that a saying must be interpreted rather than merely memorised. Its reader is invited to search for meaning, examine assumptions and consider what a teaching might disclose.

The two texts therefore provide a basis for discussing attentive listening and thoughtful interpretation, although their understandings of revelation and spiritual guidance are not identical.

3. The Gospel of Thomas: Understanding the Sayings

The Gospel of Thomas begins by presenting itself as a collection of hidden sayings attributed to the living Jesus.

Prologue:

These are the hidden sayings that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas wrote down.

Saying 1:

And he said, "Whoever discovers the meaning of these sayings won't taste death."

Translation: Mark M. Mattison.

The opening establishes interpretation as a central theme. The reader is not simply given a continuous account of Jesus' life. Instead, the text presents sayings whose meanings must be discovered.

Saying 1 connects this discovery with the promise of not tasting death. This language should be interpreted carefully. The text does not provide a straightforward explanation of whether the promise refers to physical immortality, spiritual transformation or another understanding of death. Its precise meaning remains a subject of interpretation.

Within a comparative theological framework, the saying can be read as emphasising the transformative significance of understanding.

This creates an interesting contrast with Qur’an 3:190–191. Both passages value understanding, but they express it differently. The Qur’an directs the reader towards contemplation of creation and remembrance of God, while the Gospel of Thomas places particular emphasis on discovering the meaning of Jesus' sayings.

A synthesis can bring these approaches into conversation: contemplation encourages a person to recognise the significance of existence, while interpretation encourages the person to investigate the meaning of spiritual teachings.

Neither activity should be reduced to the passive acceptance of words without reflection.

4. Persistent Seeking and the Discovery of Truth

One of the best-known passages in the Gospel of Thomas appears in Saying 2.

Saying 2:

Jesus said, "Whoever seeks shouldn't stop until they find. When they find, they will be troubled. When they're troubled, they will be […] amazed, and reign over the All."

Translation: Mark M. Mattison.

The saying describes a process: seeking, finding, disturbance and amazement.

The seeker is instructed not to stop at the first difficulty. The pursuit of understanding must continue until something is discovered. Yet discovery does not necessarily produce immediate comfort. The seeker may become troubled before reaching a new understanding.

This is an important feature of the saying. Genuine inquiry can challenge assumptions that previously seemed unquestionable. A person may discover that an established interpretation is incomplete, that a familiar belief requires reconsideration or that a difficult question cannot be answered as simply as expected.

The resulting disturbance need not be understood as an end in itself. Within the saying's sequence, it precedes amazement and a new relationship to the world.

The phrase "reign over the All" is also open to interpretation. It may express a form of spiritual authority, liberation or transformed understanding, but the saying does not provide a complete philosophical explanation.

Qur’an 39:18 offers a useful comparison because it describes people who listen and follow what is best. Both passages encourage a process of discernment rather than intellectual passivity.

There is nevertheless a difference. Qur’an 39:18 explicitly associates this practice with God's guidance. Saying 2 describes the seeker's experience through a sequence of discovery and transformation.

Together, the passages can inspire a method of inquiry in which a person listens carefully, investigates difficult questions, considers possible answers and remains willing to revise an interpretation when better understanding emerges.

5. Self-Knowledge and the Kingdom

Saying 3 of the Gospel of Thomas develops the relationship between understanding and self-knowledge.

Saying 3:

Jesus said, "If your leaders tell you, 'Look, the kingdom is in heaven,' then the birds of heaven will precede you. If they tell you, 'It's in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is within you and outside of you.

"When you know yourselves, then you'll be known, and you'll realize that you're the children of the living Father. But if you don't know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty."

Translation: Mark M. Mattison.

This saying challenges an exclusively external understanding of the kingdom. Its imagery suggests that the seeker should not assume that spiritual reality can be found only by looking towards a distant place.

Instead, the saying places emphasis on recognising what is within oneself while also acknowledging what is outside oneself.

The relationship between inner and outer reality is particularly significant. The kingdom is described as both within and outside the individual. The text therefore does not simply reduce spiritual reality to private feelings or subjective experience.

Self-knowledge becomes a means of recognising one's relationship to a greater reality.

The statement about knowing oneself and being known is equally important. Knowledge is presented as reciprocal: the individual's discovery of self-knowledge is connected with being known and recognising an identity associated with the living Father.

In a synthesis with the Qur’an, this passage can be compared with the practice of contemplation described in 3:190–191. Both invite a person to move beyond superficial awareness. The Qur’an directs attention towards creation and its signs, while Saying 3 directs attention towards the kingdom, self-knowledge and the relationship between inner and outer reality.

However, the theological differences must remain clear. The Qur’an does not identify the kingdom as a divine reality residing within human beings in the precise terms used by Saying 3. Nor does the Qur’an's understanding of humanity's relationship with God simply correspond to the Gospel of Thomas' language about children of the living Father.

The comparison is therefore best understood as a philosophical dialogue about awareness, understanding and the recognition of spiritual significance.

6. What Is Hidden and What Is Revealed?

Saying 5 continues the theme of discovery.

Saying 5:

Jesus said, "Know what's in front of your face, and what's hidden from you will be revealed to you, because there's nothing hidden that won't be revealed."

Translation: Mark M. Mattison.

The saying connects attention to what is immediately present with the eventual disclosure of what is hidden.

Its meaning can be explored through the distinction between observation and understanding. A person may encounter something every day without fully appreciating its significance. Careful attention can reveal connections that were previously overlooked.

This interpretation complements Qur’an 3:190–191, where the creation of the heavens and earth and the alternation of night and day become signs for people of understanding.

The natural world is not merely scenery. It becomes the subject of reflection.

The difference is that the Qur’an explicitly identifies these phenomena as signs, whereas Saying 5 emphasises the relationship between recognising what is present and discovering what is concealed.

Both passages can therefore be used to develop a discipline of attention: look carefully, reflect on what is observed, ask what it means and avoid assuming that the first impression exhausts the subject.

This does not mean that every hidden meaning is necessarily available through private interpretation. Responsible reading requires attention to context, language and the limits of one's knowledge.

7. Examining the Present Moment

Saying 91 of the Gospel of Thomas offers another relevant observation.

Saying 91:

They said to him, "Tell us who you are so that we may believe in you."

He said to them: "You examine the face of heaven and earth, but you have not come to know the one who is in your presence, and you do not know how to examine the present moment."

Translation: Stephen J. Patterson and James M. Robinson.

This saying contrasts examining the visible world with recognising the significance of the person who stands before the questioners. It also refers to the difficulty of examining the present moment.

The passage can be interpreted as a criticism of observation that remains disconnected from understanding. People may examine the world yet overlook what is immediately relevant to their own lives.

This can be compared with the Qur’an's account of contemplation. In Qur’an 3:190–191, observation of creation should lead to reflection and recognition of divine purpose. In Saying 91, observation alone is insufficient if the observer fails to recognise the significance of what is present.

Both texts can therefore be read as challenging superficial perception.

However, the identity of the person whom the disciples fail to recognise is connected with the Gospel of Thomas' own portrayal of Jesus. It should not automatically be interpreted as identical to the Qur’an's understanding of Jesus.

The broader philosophical lesson is that seeing is not necessarily the same as understanding. Knowledge requires attention, interpretation and an awareness of the assumptions through which reality is perceived.

8. Seeking Must Continue

The Gospel of Thomas returns to the theme of seeking in Saying 92.

Saying 92:

Jesus said, "Seek and you will find. In the past, however, I did not tell you the things about which you asked me then. Now I am willing to tell you, but you do not seek them."

Translation: adapted from the public-domain translation by Mark M. Mattison.

This saying emphasises the importance of active inquiry. The disciples have previously asked questions, but when further teaching becomes available, they are no longer seeking it.

The passage suggests that receiving knowledge depends partly on the willingness to pursue it. Asking questions is not enough if curiosity disappears when the opportunity for deeper understanding arrives.

This theme complements Qur’an 39:18, where people listen and follow what is best. Listening is presented as part of a process that requires a response.

The two passages can be brought together through the principle that knowledge demands participation. A person must listen, consider, investigate and act upon what is understood.

Nevertheless, the texts frame this process differently. Qur’an 39:18 describes discernment as a characteristic of those guided by God, whereas Saying 92 portrays the problem through the disciples' failure to continue seeking.

9. A Unified Philosophy of Understanding

The passages examined above suggest five principles that can form the basis of a comparative philosophy.

First, contemplation. Qur’an 3:190–191 encourages reflection on the heavens, the earth and the alternation of night and day. The visible world becomes an invitation to consider existence and divine purpose.

Second, discernment. Qur’an 39:18 praises those who listen and follow what is best. Understanding requires the ability to evaluate what is heard rather than simply repeat it.

Third, interpretation. The opening of the Gospel of Thomas and Saying 1 emphasise discovering the meaning of Jesus' sayings. Spiritual teaching requires thoughtful engagement with language and context.

Fourth, self-knowledge. Saying 3 connects knowing oneself with recognising one's relationship to the living Father. The saying makes inward examination an important aspect of spiritual understanding.

Fifth, persistent inquiry. Sayings 2 and 92 encourage seeking and warn against abandoning the pursuit of knowledge. Discovery can be difficult, but the search should not end prematurely.

These principles are related, but they should not be confused with a claim that the Qur’an and the Gospel of Thomas teach one identical system of salvation. Their similarities provide a basis for comparative interpretation, while their differences remain essential to an accurate reading.

Conclusion

Qur’an 3:190–191, Qur’an 39:18 and the Gospel of Thomas offer complementary starting points for examining the relationship between spiritual knowledge and human understanding.

The Qur’an presents contemplation of creation as a sign of understanding and connects attentive listening with divine guidance. The Gospel of Thomas emphasises interpreting sayings, persistent seeking, self-knowledge and the discovery of what lies beyond superficial perception.

Read alongside one another, these passages suggest that the pursuit of wisdom involves more than the passive reception of information. It requires attention, reflection, discernment and a willingness to examine one's assumptions.

The comparison also reveals important differences. The Qur’an directs contemplation towards the one God and the purpose of creation, while the Gospel of Thomas frequently expresses its teachings through enigmatic sayings about the kingdom, knowledge and spiritual transformation.

A responsible synthesis should preserve these distinctions while exploring the questions the texts share: What does it mean to understand? How should a person respond to spiritual teaching? What is the relationship between the visible world and deeper meaning? And how can seeking knowledge transform the way a person understands existence?

The central principle emerging from this comparison is that wisdom involves learning to observe carefully, listen attentively, interpret thoughtfully and pursue understanding with persistence. The Qur’an and the Gospel of Thomas articulate this pursuit through different theological languages, providing a rich basis for comparative study without requiring their teachings to be treated as identical.

Early Christian Teaching on the Saved Savior / Redeemed Redeemer

 Early Christian Teaching on the Saved Savior / Redeemed Redeemer

 

Exploring Shared Identity, Incarnation, and the Archetype of Redemption

 

 

 

Introduction

 

One of the most profound and often overlooked themes in early Christian literature—including both orthodox and Gnostic texts from the first centuries—is the concept of the Redeemed Redeemer: the idea that the Savior himself entered into the human condition, stood in solidarity with those he came to save, and himself experienced the need for redemption before becoming the source of redemption for all humanity. This teaching centres on a radical shared identity: the Savior was not a distant deity merely appearing as human, but truly took upon himself our flesh, our nature, our struggles, and even our mortality. He was one of us, so that through him we might become like him. As the Odes of Solomon beautifully expresses: "those who are saved in Him Who was saved" (Ode 8:21).

 

This document examines early Christian sources—Nag Hammadi texts, the Odes of Solomon, and biblical parallels—to set forth this teaching, preserving all quoted material in full, and demonstrating the consistent witness across diverse early traditions that the Savior shared our identity, needed redemption as part of his human journey, and thus became the archetype and source of our redemption.

 

 

 

I. Identity: Does the Savior Share Identity with the Saved?

 

The foundational question before us is this: was Jesus truly one of those he came to save? Or was he a divine being who only seemed to be human, untouched by our condition? The answer from multiple early Christian sources is unambiguous: he fully shared our identity, our flesh, and our human nature.

 

The Nag Hammadi Text of Melchizedek – Refuting Docetism

 

The passage from the Melchizedek text is one of the most striking affirmations of the genuine humanity of Jesus found anywhere in early Christian literature, directly addressing and refuting the docetic heresy—the teaching that Christ only seemed to have a physical body and that his suffering and death were not real.

 

"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,  he came to suffering, (that) he did not rise from the dead,  he arose from the dead."

— Nag Hammadi Library, Melchizedek, p. 600

 

This passage is a powerful corrective to those who would deny the physical reality of Jesus's life, death, and resurrection. It confirms that:

 

- He was begotten—born into human lineage

- He ate and drank—participated in ordinary human life

- He was circumcised—identifying himself with the covenant people and human custom

- He came in the flesh—truly possessed a human body

- He suffered—his suffering was not an illusion

- He rose from the dead—his resurrection was literal and real

 

The text explicitly states that those who claim otherwise are in error. In affirming that Jesus was circumcised, came in the flesh, suffered, and died, it declares plainly: he shared identity with the saved. He was one of us.

 

The Gospel of Philip – Birth, Parentage, and True Humanity

 

The Gospel of Philip offers further insight into the genuine humanity of Jesus and his connection to human birth:

 

"Some said Mary became pregnant by the holy spirit. They are wrong and do not know what they are saying. When did a woman ever get pregnant by a woman? Mary is the virgin whom none of the powers defiled. This is greatly repugnant to the Hebrews, who are the apostles and apostolic persons. This virgin whom none of the powers defiled [wishes that] the powers would defile themselves. The master [would] not have said, 'My [father who is] in heaven,' if [he] did not also have another father. He would simply have said, '[My father].'"

— Gospel of Philip

 

While the Christological nuances here are debated, the text affirms that Jesus had a genuine human birth and stood in real human lineage. He was not simply a spirit appearing on earth; he was born of a woman, entering into the human family just as we do.

 

The Gospel of Thomas – "I Appeared to Them in the Flesh"

 

The saying from the Gospel of Thomas reinforces this visible, tangible humanity:

 

Saying 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."

— Gospel of Thomas, Saying 28

 

The phrase "I appeared to them in the flesh" is translated by Layton as "I was shown forth incarnate." The word incarnate means "having a bodily form"—from the Latin in- (in) and caro (flesh). Jesus is saying plainly: I stood among you in a real body of flesh.

 

Moreover, he says: "my soul was afflicted for the sons of men." He experienced genuine human emotion, sorrow, and concern. He was not detached from our condition; he felt it.

 

Gospel of Thomas Saying 101 – Two Natures, Two Births

 

Saying 101 deepens our understanding of what it meant for Jesus to take our nature upon himself:

 

Saying 101:

"Jesus said, 'Those who do not hate their [father] and their mother as I do cannot be [disciples] of me. And those who [do not] love their [father and] their mother as I do cannot be [disciples of] me. For my birth mother gave me [death, or falsehood.] But my true [mother] gave me life.'"

— Gospel of Thomas, Saying 101 (April DeConick translation)

 

The translator notes that "death or falsehood" is an equivalent expression for human nature—the fallen, mortal condition we all inherit. Jesus acknowledges that through his human birth, he entered into the same mortal condition that belongs to all humanity. As one early commentator expressed it:

 

"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)."

 

Here is the heart of the matter: sin and mortality are bound up with our human nature. Jesus took that nature—with all its weakness, mortality, and inherent tendency toward corruption—upon himself. He did not come in a different kind of flesh; he came in our flesh. And because he took our flesh, he too stood in need of deliverance from death and the power of sin.

 

 

 

II. The Redeemed Savior: Jesus Needed Redemption

 

If Jesus truly shared our mortal human nature, it follows that he too needed to be redeemed from it. This is the distinctive and profound insight found across several early Christian sources: the Savior first received redemption before he could bestow it. He is the Redeemed Redeemer.

 

The Tripartite Tractate – The Son Himself Needed Redemption

 

This passage from the Nag Hammadi library is perhaps the clearest statement of the Redeemed Redeemer doctrine:

 

"Not only do humans need redemption, but also the angels, too... 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."

— Tripartite Tractate

 

The logic is breathtaking:

 

- ✅ Humans need redemption

- ✅ Angels need redemption

- ✅ Even the Son himself needed redemption—because he had become man

 

He entered our condition completely. He fought the same battle against sin and mortality that we fight. He overcame not by escaping our nature, but by conquering within it. Having himself been redeemed—passing through death and emerging immortal—he then became the source of redemption for all who are united with him.

 

The Interpretation of Knowledge – He Relinquished Majesty for Our Sake

 

This text describes the Savior’s condescension and the cost of his identification with us:

 

"The man ... this is the name. The [...] he emitted himself and he relinquished his majesty, taking scorn in exchange for the name. For our sakes he endured the scorn. He appeared as flesh, and came as a provider. 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 his humiliation as he dwelled in these humble places. 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."

— Interpretation of Knowledge

 

Notice the final phrase: "through the one who was reproached and the one who was redeemed we receive grace." The text pointedly describes him as "the one who was redeemed." He was redeemed, so that in him we might be redeemed.

 

Nag Hammadi Melchizedek p. 601 – Included in the Living Offering

 

The Melchizedek text continues with a vision of Christ as High Priest who included himself in the sacrifice:

 

"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."

— Nag Hammadi Library, Melchizedek, p. 601

 

He did not stand outside the offering; he included himself within it. He offered his own life—first for himself, to conquer death in his own flesh, and then for us. As one commentary explains:

 

"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."

 

Christ’s offering was both:

 

1. For himself—defeating sin and death in his own mortal flesh

2. For us—securing redemption for all who are joined to him

 

"Here this passage teaches that Christ the high priest offered his own body for his own redemption. He offered himself for himself and his brothers—his offspring—in the living offering that is his life as a living sacrifice."

 

The Gospel of Philip – "He Who Was Redeemed, in Turn Redeemed Others"

 

This passage is the definitive summary of the Redeemed Redeemer concept:

 

"Jesus revealed himself [at the] Jordan River as the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven. He who was begotten before everything, was begotten anew. He who was once anointed, was anointed anew. He who was redeemed, in turn redeemed others."

— Gospel of Philip

 

The parallel structure is unmistakable:

 

- He was begotten anew → so we might be born again

- He was anointed anew → so we might receive the Spirit

- He was redeemed → so he could redeem us

 

"This shows that some Gnostic groups understood that Jesus first needed redemption for himself before he could redeem those for whom he came to die for. Jesus is thus the redeemed redeemer coming in our sinful nature. The Savior himself was in need of redemption."

 

 

 

III. From Mortal Flesh to Immortal Flesh: The Two States of Christ’s Body

 

The Gospel of Philip further clarifies what redemption meant for Jesus—a transformation from mortal human flesh to immortal, spiritual flesh:

 

"The Lord was conceived (born again) from what is imperishable, from God. The [Lord arose] from among the dead. But [He did not come into being as he was. Rather [his body] was [completely] perfect. It was of flesh, and this [flesh is indeed] true flesh.¹ [Yet our flesh] is not true, but rather a mirror-image of the true [flesh]. (¹Jn 1:14, 20:27, II-Jn 7; NHS p. 174, Gospel of Philip)"

 

This text makes a crucial distinction:

 

Before Resurrection After Resurrection 

"Our flesh" — mortal, perishable, shadow of the true "True flesh" — imperishable, glorified, from God 

Subject to death and corruption Immortal and incorruptible 

A mirror-image / type The reality and substance 

 

"So before his resurrection from the dead Jesus had human flesh or human nature which is called in the text 'our flesh is not true flesh' but after he arose from among the dead he had a new body imperishable, from God."

 

This is the redemption he achieved: he took our mortal nature, lived a perfect life in it, died, and then was raised—transforming that mortal flesh into immortal, true flesh. He did not discard our humanity; he perfected it. As Romans 5:14 says of Adam: "who is a type of the one who was to come." Adam was the type; Christ is the true reality.

 

 

 

IV. The Odes of Solomon – "Him Who Was Saved"

 

The Odes of Solomon are among the most ancient Christian hymns, and they bear witness to this same understanding in deeply poetic form. These texts speak repeatedly of the Savior as one who himself was saved.

 

Ode 8 – "Those Who Are Saved in Him Who Was Saved"

 

"20) Pray and increase, and abide in the love of the Lord; 21) And the beloved ones in the Beloved, and those who are protected in Him Who liveth, and those who are saved in Him Who was saved. 22) And ye shall be found incorrupt in all ages, on account of the Name of your Father."

— Ode of Solomon 8:20–21

 

The phrasing could not be more direct: "Him Who Was Saved." Our salvation rests in the One who himself entered death and was brought safely through it. He is not a distant Saviour observing from above; he is the One who walked the valley of death and returned victorious.

 

Ode 17 – The Redeemed Redeemer Speaks

 

This extraordinary passage presents the voice of the Redeemer himself, describing his own experience of salvation and then his mission to save others:

 

"Then I was crowned by my God, and my crown was living. And I was justified by my Lord, for my salvation is incorruptible. I have been freed from vanities, and am not condemned. My chains were cut off by His hands, I received the face and likeness of a new person, and I walked in Him and was saved. And the thought of truth led me, and I went after it and wandered not. And all who saw me were amazed, and I seemed to them like a stranger. And He who knew and exalted me, is the Most High in all His perfection. And He glorified me by His kindness, and raised my understanding to the height of truth. And from there He gave me the way of His steps, and I opened the doors which were closed. And I shattered the bars of iron, for my own shackles had grown hot and melted before me. And nothing appeared closed to me, because I was the opening of everything. And I went towards all my bound ones in order to loose them; that I might not leave anyone bound or binding. And I gave my knowledge generously, and my resurrection through my love. And I sowed my fruits in hearts, and transformed them through myself. Then they received my blessing and lived, and they were gathered to me and were saved; Because they became my members, and I was their Head. Glory to You, our Head, O Lord Messiah. Hallelujah."

— Ode of Solomon 17

 

The progression is clear and powerful:

 

1. "I was justified... I was freed... I walked in Him and was saved" — the Redeemer himself experienced salvation

2. "My chains were cut off... my own shackles had grown hot and melted" — he broke the power of death and bondage within himself

3. "I went towards all my bound ones in order to loose them" — having been liberated, he now liberates others

4. "They became my members, and I was their Head" — we are joined to him, sharing in the victory he first won

 

Ode 42 – "You Are Our Savior"

 

"17 And open for us the door by which we may come out to You; for we perceive that our death does not touch You. 18 May we also be saved with You, because You are our Savior. 19 Then I heard their voice, and placed their faith in my heart. 20 And I placed my name upon their head, because they are free and they are mine. Hallelujah."

— Ode of Solomon 42:17–20

 

We are saved with him. He goes before us as the pioneer—our forerunner who has passed through death and opened the way for us.

 

 

 

V. Synthesis and Biblical Parallels

 

The witness of these early Christian texts—from Nag Hammadi to the Odes of Solomon—converges on a single, magnificent truth: Christ did not merely come to save us from outside our condition; he entered into our condition, experienced its full weight, overcame from within, and in so doing became the Author of salvation.

 

This teaching resonates profoundly with the canonical scriptures:

 

- Hebrews 2:10–11, 14–18: "In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God... should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering. Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family... Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death... Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted."

- Hebrews 5:7–9: "During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears... and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him."

- Romans 8:3: "God did what the law was powerless to do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh."

- Philippians 2:7–9: "Who, being in very nature God... made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death— even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place..."

 

The pattern is identical across all these texts: Humiliation → Suffering → Death → Resurrection/Exaltation → Ability to Save. Christ could not have saved us without first conquering death and sin within his own humanity. He is the Redeemed Redeemer—the one who was saved, so that we might be saved in him.

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

The early Christian witness—preserved in the Melchizedek text, the Gospel of Philip, the Gospel of Thomas, the Tripartite Tractate, the Interpretation of Knowledge, and the Odes of Solomon—speaks with one voice: Jesus shared our identity completely. He was born of a woman, circumcised, ate and drank, suffered, died, and rose again. In taking our mortal nature, he stood in need of redemption. By conquering death in his own flesh, he was himself redeemed. And because he was the firstfruits of the new creation, he became the source of redemption for all humanity.

 

He is the Savior who was saved.

He is the Redeemer who was redeemed.

And because he passed through the waters of death and emerged victorious, he says to every generation: "Where I am, there you may be also."

 

"Through the one who was reproached and the one who was redeemed we receive grace."

— Interpretation of Knowledge

 

 

 

Early Christian teaching on the saved savior or Redeemed Redeemer

The first thing I think we should look at is identity does the savior of the Gnostic text have a shared identity with the saved

The Nag Hammadi Library text of Melchizedek:

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. NHS p. 600

This is a remarkable passage, which speaks out about the false doctrine of doceticism (docetic heretics those who will deny the physical reality of Jesus's nature) 
and confirms orthodox teaching on life death and resurrection of Jesus. 

It also shows that Jesus had a shred identity with the saved he was circumcised he came in the flesh

ome said Mary became pregnant by the holy spirit. They are wrong and do not know what they are saying. When did a woman ever get pregnant by a woman?

Mary is the virgin whom none of the powers defiled. This is greatly repugnant to the Hebrews, who are the apostles and apostolic persons. This virgin whom none of the powers defiled [wishes that] the powers would defile themselves. The master [would] not have said, “My [father who is] in heaven,” if [he] did not also have another father. He would simply have said, “[My father].” gospel of Philip 

The Gospel of Thomas saying 28

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

Here Jesus came in the Flesh his soul was afflicted for the children of men.  
"I appeared to them in the flesh" is translated by LAYTON to read "I was shown forth incarnate" 

Incarnate means “having a bodily form.” ... The prefix in- means “in” and caro means “flesh,” so incarnate means “in the flesh.”

We should compare this saying with saying 101 to find out the meaning of the word flesh Jesus has 2 mother's his birth mother after the flesh and his true mother the holy spirit

The Gospel of Thomas saying 101

Jesus said, "Those who do not hate their [father] and their mother as I do cannot be [disciples] of me. And those who [do not] love their [father and] their mother as I do cannot be [disciples of] me. For my birth mother gave me [death, or falsehood.] But my true [mother] gave me life." April Deconick translation

The words death or falsehood come from the April Deconick translation.Jesus's birth mother could only give him death or falsehood which we understand to be our sinful nature. 

Here in saying 101 death or or falsehood is an equivalent expression for human nature. So here again in the Gospel of Thomas we have Jesus the Savior identitied with those he came to save by birth and natural nature the flesh

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)

Sin, is an equivalent expression for human nature.

Jesus needed to be saved from human nature or sinful flesh

The Redemption of Jesus is the Archetype for Redemption 

In the Tripartite Tractate, the Son (Jesus) is in need of redemption, because he had become a man. It is the heavenly Word which ‘descended upon him’ that offered him ‘redemption’: “Not only do humans need redemption, but also the angels, too... 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.” (Tripartite Tractate)

The interpretation of Knowledge::

The man ... (11 lines missing)... this is the name. The [...] he emitted himself and he relinquished his majesty, taking scorn in exchange for  the name. for our sakes he endured the scorn. He appeared as flesh, and came as a provider.  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 his humiliation as he dwelled in these humble places. 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 Nag Hammadi Library text of Melchizedek:

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 NHS p. 601

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.

Here this passage teaches that Christ the high  priest offered his own body for his own redemption He offered himself for himself and his brothers his offspring in the living offering that is his life as a living sacrifice

Now we come to the Gospel of Philip

The Gospel of Philip:

Jesus revealed himself [at the] Jordan River as the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven. He who was begotten before everything, was begotten anew. He who was once anointed, was anointed anew. He who was redeemed, in turn redeemed others.

This shows that the some gnostic groups understood that Jesus first needed redemption for himself before he could redeem those for whom he came to die for. Jesus is thus the redeemed redeemer coming in our sinful nature. The Savor himself was in need of redemption.

78. The Lord was conceived (born again) from what is imperishable, from God. The [Lord arose] from among the dead. But [He did not come into being as he was. Rather [his body] was [completely] perfect. It was of flesh, and this [flesh is indeed] true flesh.¹ [Yet our flesh] is not true, but rather a mirror-image of the true [flesh]. (¹Jn 1:14, 20:27, II-Jn 7; NHS p. 174 gospel of Philip 

This passage shows that the spiritual body is corporeal (tangible) and it has flesh and this flesh is true flesh, which is called spiritual flesh thus spiritual body but our flesh is only a shadow of the true like Adam who was only a type of him who was to come (Romans 5:14)

So before his resurrection from the dead Jesus had human flesh or human nature which is called in the text "our flesh is not true flesh" but after he arose from among the dead he had a new body imperishable, from God 



the Odes of Solomon 

Ode 8

20) Pray and increase, and abide in the love of the Lord;
21) And the beloved ones in the Beloved, and those who are protected in Him Who liveth, and those who are saved in Him Who was saved.
22) And ye shall be found incorrupt in all ages, on account of the Name of your Father.

address of the Redeemed Redeemer with a Christological doxology

Ode 17


Then I was crowned by my God, and my crown was living.
And I was justified by my Lord, for my salvation is incorruptible.
I have been freed from vanities, and am not condemned.
My chains were cut off by His hands, I received the face and likeness of a new person, and I walked in Him and was saved.
And the thought of truth led me, and I went after it and wandered not.
And all who saw me were amazed, and I seemed to them like a stranger.
And He who knew and exalted me, is the Most High in all His perfection.
And He glorified me by His kindness, and raised my understanding to the height of truth.
And from there He gave me the way of His steps, and I opened the doors which were closed.
And I shattered the bars of iron, for my own shackles had grown hot and melted before me.
And nothing appeared closed to me, because I was the opening of everything.
And I went towards all my bound ones in order to loose them; that I might not leave anyone bound or binding.
And I gave my knowledge generously, and my resurrection through my love.
And I sowed my fruits in hearts, and transformed them through myself.
Then they received my blessing and lived, and they were gathered to me and were saved;
Because they became my members, and I was their Head.
Glory to You, our Head, O Lord Messiah.
Hallelujah.

Ode 42

17 And open for us the door by which we may come out to You; for we perceive that our death does not touch You.
18 May we also be saved with You, because You are our Savior.
19 Then I heard their voice, and placed their faith in my heart.
20 And I placed my name upon their head, because they are free and they are mine.
Hallelujah.

Mind emanation

 In this study we will look at the aspects of the Mind of God which are referred to as the emanation of the aeons. First we will have an opening reading from 1cor 2:16

1Cor 2:16  For who hath come to know the mind of the Lord, that shall instruct him? But, we, have, the mind of Christ.

First the scriptures teach that all things are out of God: 

1Cor 8:6 there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, on account of whom all things are, and we because of him. (NWT)

All things being out of Deity, they were not made out of nothing. The sun, moon and stars, together with all things pertaining to each, were made out of something, and that something was the radiant flowing out of His substance, or active force, which pervades all things. By his active force, all created things are connected with the creator of the universe, which is light that no man can approach unto, so that not even a sparrow falls to the ground without the Father, who is not far from every one of us.

Here in 1Cor 8:6 we see the doctrine of emanation

emanate--"To issue forth from a source" (Webster). 

In many Gnostic systems, aeons and other beings are emanated as an outpouring from the divine source, rather than created or begotten. The emanation usually refers to a primordial cosmogony which flows from the Father.  

This process of emanation first begins within the mind of the Father it is the silent thought which effusion from him. it is best understood like this the logos was "with God" in that it emanated from him 

The concept of emanation is that from the One (the Monad) sometimes referred to as the Depth issue forth all things. The first stage in the process, the Divine Mind, thinks, and thus from it emanate the reason (logos) and wisdom (Sophia). These are called aeons which are aspects or attributes of the Deity. There are 30 aeons altogether which make up the fullness (pleroma). The pleroma is the sum total of the aeons and emanations of the Deity. The divine pleroma is thus the full manifestation of the glory of the transcendent Deity. In Valentinian texts. With thought, depth constitutes the first Valentinian pairs called syzygies these are androgynous aspects of the mind of the Deity. 

God existed before he created the Heavens and the earth. God exists outside of time and space in the Bythos or depth.

First of all the Pleroma did not always exist it was produced and formed by the Eternal Spirit this we call the emanation.

"He created the holy Pleroma in this way" (The Untitled Text in the Bruce Codex)

The word Pleroma means "fullness". It refers to all existence beyond visible universe. In other words it is the world of the Aeons, the heavens or spiritual universe. Bythos is the spiritual source of everything which emanates the pleroma,

The Pleroma is both the abode of and the essential nature of the True Ultimate Deity or Bythos. 

However there is another understanding to the Pleroma as well as being the dwellings place of the Aeons and the divine nature of the Deity it is also a state of consciousness. 

The Peroma is the total structure of the mind of the Deity. The emanations of the Aeons first happens within the consciousness of the Monad (The One) or the Deity. The emanation of the Aeons is the expanding of the Mind of the Deity. 

The Pleroma is the sum total of the divine attributes

The aeons are attributes of the Deity there are 30 divine attributes altogether each attribute is referred to as an aeon or an eternal these attributes emanate from the mind of the Deity.

In Jewish Mysticism known as kabbalah the Sefirot means emanations, which are the 10 attributes/emanations through which Ein Sof (The Infinite One) reveals Himself and continuously creates both the physical realm and the chain of higher spiritual realms.

To summaries this section the Pleroma is both a spatial and metaphysical

The Divine Mind

A spiritual understanding of God, the Divine Mind or logos, is the key to understanding the scriptures. In the account of creation as told by Moses, creation is brought forth by "God said"--Mind thought or logos.

John 1:1 Aramaic Bible in Plain English
In the origin The Word had been existing and That Word had been existing with God and That Word was himself God.

The Greek word "logos" which is translated in the English as "word" can also be translated as reason. (See 1Peter 3:15)

1Peter 3:15  But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason <3056> of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: 

The term “word” in the Bible most frequently translates the Hebrew and Greek words davar´ and logos. These words in the majority of cases refer to an entire thought, saying, or statement rather than simply to an individual term or unit of speech. (In Greek a ‘single word’ is expressed by rhēma (ῥῆμα 4487) [Mt 27:14], though it, too, can mean a saying or spoken matter.) 

Logos signifies the outward form of inward thought or reason, or the spoken word as illustrative of thought, wisdom and doctrine. in the very beginning, God's purpose, wisdom or revelation had been in evidence. It was "with God" in that it emanated from him; it "was God" in that it represented.

Brain and Mind

The logos is the reasoning intelligence of the divine mind or spirit:

Isaiah 40:13  Who has known the mind of the Lord? and who has been his counsellor, to instruct him?  (Greek Septuagint Version)

Isaiah 40:13  Who hath directed the Spirit of Yahweh, and, [as] his counsellor, hath taught him?

Here we can see that the Hebrew text as the word "spirit" and the Greek translation known as the Septuagint uses the word "mind". This shows that the word spirit is used sometimes in the bible as a synonym for the mind or heart. The spirit comprises both heart and mind. 

Spirit and Mind are synonymous; therefore we know God--Spirit--as Mind, the one Mind, or Intelligence, of the universe.

But was the Deity reason and speech only? In other words, an abstraction independent of substance; or, as some affirm, "without body or parts"? To preserve us from such a supposition, John informs us that "the Logos was with the Theos," Here was companionship and identity - "the Logos was with the Theos, and Theos was the Logos." Never was there a conceivable point of time, or eternity, when the one existed without the other. "Yahweh possessed me," saith the Logos, "in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from olahm (the hidden period) from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: while as yet he had not made the earth, nor the open places, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When he prepared the heavens I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the deep; when he established the clouds above; when he strengthened the fountains of the deep; when he gave to the sea his decree that the water should not pass his commandment; when he appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by him as one brought up with him (the Logos was with the Theos): and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth, and my delights with the sons of men" (Prov. 8:22).

Theos is the Brain, Logos is the Thought or Reasoning of the Spirit or Mind. Therefore the Logos is the mind of God. 

No Logos, then there would be no Theos; and without Theos, the Logos could have no existence. This may be illustrated by the relation of reason, or intelligence and speech, to brain, as affirmed in the proposition, No brain, -- no thought, reason, nor intelligence. Call the brain Theos; and thought, reason, and understanding intelligently expressed, Logos; and the relation and dependence of Theos and Logos, in John's use of the terms, may readily be conceived. Brain-flesh is substance, or the hypostasis, that underlies thought; so Theos is substance which constitutes the substratum of Logos. Theos is the substance called Spirit; as it is written, "Theos is Spirit;" and he who uttered these words is declared to be himself both substance and spirit. (Dr. John Thomas Eureka Volume 1 Of Deity Before Manifestation in Flesh.)

Thus the logos is the reasoning mind of God. Now reason has another name Sophia or the wisdom of God.

Here was the offspring of Yahweh, of whom it is said : " She is more precious than rubies. Length of days is in her right hand; in her left hand, riches and honor: a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her: and happy is every one that retaineth her." Here is an existence previous to the existence of the earth and all that it contains. " By me," says Wisdom, " Yahweh formed the earth." " I am understanding ;" and "by understanding he established the heavens."

As a comment upon this, it may be remarked that in Job it is written : " By his SPIRIT he garnished the heavens;" or in the words of David, " By the WORD of Yahweh were the heavens made ; and all the host of them by the Spirit of his mouth." For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast. From these premises, then, it is evident that Wisdom, the Word, and the Spirit, are but different terms, expressive of the same thing; so that the phrases, "the Spirit of Wisdom," and "the Spirit of Counsel and of Might" are combinations expressive of the relations of the Spirit in certain cases

The apostle John, in speaking of this, saith, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was made not any thing which exists. In him was life, and the life was the light of men." This appears to me to be a very intelligible account of the matter. The Word, Wisdom, Spirit, God, all one and the same; for He, being the fountain and origin, is as the emanation from himself.

The Word, Wisdom, Spirit are not separate beings or persons but personifications of the Father.

Wisdom of Solomon 7:26 The New Revised Standard Version 

26 For she is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness.

Our attention is called to the 1st chapter of Genesis: "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."

The Father sees himself in the light of the water (compare Genesis 1:2 with John 1:4)  The Father is self-reflective self-consciousness.

God is spirit and the logos was God therefore we have Brain (Theos or God), Mind (spirit) and thought/reason (logos) The Word of Spirit is the Father's thought or plan. Spirit-Mind forms within itself the Thought or Reason that was expressed in Creation. This is the “Word,” that was and is with God.

Valentinian interpretation of John chapter 1

John 1:1 Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 
1 ¶  Originally, was, the Word, and, the Word, was, with God; and, the Word, was, God.
2  The same, was originally, with God.
3  All things, through him, came into existence, and, without him, came into existence, not even one thing: that which hath come into existence,
4  in him, was, life, and, the life, was, the light of men.--

This information will help us to understand the Valentinian interpretation of john chapter 1

Extracts from the Works of Theodotus:

7 Therefore, the Father, being unknown, wished to be known to the Aeons, 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.” But the Spirit of Love has been mingled with the Spirit of Knowledge, as the Father with the Son, and Thought with Truth, having proceeded from Truth as Knowledge from Thought.

Note the Only-Begotten is the father's own thought also called the the spirit of Knowledge

The Father could be known through the two Spirits proceeding from him, which were mingled together. These spirits are the Spirit of knowledge (πνεῦμα γνώσεως) and the Spirit of love (πνεῦμα ἀγάπης).

Now since the word "logos" means the entire thought it would be logical to conclude that this reasoning had within its self, foreknowledge, forethought, insight or gnosis, this is referred to as the spirit of knowledge also contained within the reasoning is life grace light which is the spirit of love

In Extracts from the Works of Theodotus 6-7, the principal Tetrad (a group or set of four aeons,) consisted of the Mind, the Truth, the Logos, and the Life but the Father was not counted as a member of the Pleroma. 

The Extracts from the Works of Theodotus goes on to say: 

8 But we maintain that the essential Logos is God in God, who is also said to be “in the bosom of the Father,” continuous, undivided, one God.

God came forth, the Son, Mind of the All. This means that even his thought takes its existence from the root of the all, since he had him in mind (Valentinian Exposition from the Nag Hammadi Library)

The All preexisted within the Father, and the son who is the Father's Thought and Will, revealed it

Ptolemy's Commentary On The Gospel of John Prologue

Now since he is speaking of the first origination, he does well to begin the teaching at the beginning, i.e with the Son and the Word. He speaks as follows: "The Word was in the beginning, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. It was in the beginning, with God." [Jn 1:1] First, he distinguishes three things: God; beginning; Word. Then he unites them: this is to show forth both the emanation of the latter two,( i.e. the Son and the Word), and their union with one another, and simultaneously with the Father. 

For the beginning was in the Father and from the Father; and the Word was in the beginning and from the beginning. Well did he say, "The Word was in the beginning", for it was in the Son. "And the Word was with God." So was the beginning. "And the word was God"; reasonably so, for what is engendered from God is God. This shows the order of emanation. "The entirety was made through it, and without it was not anything made." [Jn 1:3] For the Word became the cause of the forming and origination of all the aeons that came after it. (Ptolemy's Commentary On The Gospel of John Prologue)

The phrase “The Word was in the beginning” was not a temporal expression, but it “shows the order of emanation” (See Ptolemy's Commentary On The Gospel of John Prologue)

Since the term logos signifies an inward thought it would be logical to conclude that logos is Sige or silence in the Valentinian system. 

Silence has a partner or companion (syzygies, pair) with the Depth (Bythos)

The Depth is another aspects or attributes of the Father or the Deity

Thus the logos is the silent thought of the Deity.  

The Deity was reasoning with himself this reasoning lead to the rest of the Emanations or attributes coming forth from the divine mind. The Deity was always self aware and had self knowledge

There is one life force: the creative all-embracing life, even the logos which is God. This life is eternal and without limit, from before time to everlasting.

The things made, or externalized, are from the one and inseparable Mind and thought or God and logos, the self-existent and ever active, the cause of all that appears.

The Divine Mind or logos the ever-present, all-knowing Mind; the Absolute, the unlimited. present everywhere at the same time, all-wise, all-loving, all-powerful Spirit.

There is but one Mind, and that Mind cannot be separated or divided. All that we can say of the one Mind is that it is absolute.

1 Corinthians 2:16 for, "Who has known the mind of Yahweh so as to instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ

The Divine Mind, the creative power or Spirit in action. The Divine Mind first conceives the idea, then brings its external form to fulfilment. Believers, acting in accordance with the Divine Mind, place themselves under this same creative law and thus brings the divine ideas into manifestation.

The first Emanation is Logos, the masculine Father Principle of the Divine Mind that thinks and plans the molds for all expression through form. Mind builds form.

The second Emanation is Love, the feminine Mother Principle of the Divine Mind Love Substance that nourishes and sustains the molds formed by Mind. Love fills Form.

The Logos is Light, Life and Action.

The Logos is the Christ Principle, Holy Breath, Holy Spirit. This is the beginning of the first Day of Manifestation.

As the Emanations completed their second circuit,
 The Deity begot Lesser Gods, the Elohim, who plan the rest of manifestation or the rest of creation.
The Deity is spirit as well as Logos, wisdom and life this is Sophia