4.
If, however, they say that these things are the images of the Enthymesis of that Aeon who fell into passion, then, first of all, they will act impiously against their Mother, by declaring her to be the first cause of evil and corruptible images. And then, again, how can those things which are manifold, and dissimilar, and contrary in their nature, be the images of one and the same Being? And if they say that the angels of the Pleroma are numerous, and that those things which are many are the images of these--not in this way either will the account they give be satisfactory. For, in the first place, they are then bound to point out differences among the angels of the Pleroma, which are mutually opposed to each other, even as the images existing below are of a contrary nature among themselves. And then, again, since there are many, yea, innumerable angels who surround the Creator, as all the prophets acknowledge,--[saying, for instance,] "Ten thousand times ten thousand stood beside Him, and many thousands of thousands ministered unto Him," 1 --then, according 2 to them, the angels of the Pleroma will have as images the angels of the Creator, and the entire creation remains in the image of the Pleroma, but so that the thirty Aeons no longer correspond to the manifold variety of the creation.
-
Dan. vii. 10, agreeing neither with the Greek nor Hebrew text. ↩
-
This clause is exceedingly obscure. Harvey remarks upon it as follows: "The reasoning of Irenaeus seems to be this: According to the Gnostic theory, the Aeons and angels of the Pleroma were homogeneous. They were also the archetypes of things created. But things created are heterogeneous: therefore either these Aeons are heterogeneous, which is contrary to theory; or things created are homogeneous, which is contrary to fact." ↩
