Simon Magus Invented the Four Gospel tradition?

[Stephan Huller]

Notice Pseudo-Tertullian

Dositheus (mentioned but no real info)
Simon Magus
Menander
Saturninus
Basilides
Nicolaus
Ophites
Cainites
Sethites
Carpocrates
Cerinthus
Ebion

[Stephan Huller]

The obvious question is why is Simon Magus deliberately inserted in the place formerly held by Dositheus in the syntagma? Another thing with noting is that other bits of information are added - sometimes different accounts of the same heresies.

1. two different accounts of Simon Magus
2. two different accounts of Basilides
3. two different accounts of Marcion (wholly different)

but Hegesippus's account of Carpocrates is consistent
both use Irenaeus's Against the Valentinians and Against the Marcosians but in different ways and according to different orderings.

It's very curious.

[perseusomega9]

Try making a column of Paul, apollos, cephas, chr(ie)st and connect lines

[Stephan Huller]

Here is another thing that is odd. I think it seriously challenges everything we think we know about the heresies. Everyone knows that Irenaeus has a list of heresies in Adv Haer Book 1. Many people know that he references an apostolic succession list in Book 3. But most people ignore the fact that he integrates the two a chapter later in Book Three with surprising results:

If any one were to preach to these men the inventions of the heretics, speaking to them in their own language, they would at once stop their ears, and flee as far off as possible, not enduring even to listen to the blasphemous address. Thus, by means of that ancient tradition of the apostles, they do not suffer their mind to conceive anything of the [doctrines suggested by the] portentous language of these teachers, among whom neither Church nor doctrine has ever been established.

3. For, prior to Valentinus, those who follow Valentinus had no existence; nor did those from Marcion exist before Marcion; nor, in short, had any of those malignant-minded people, whom I have above enumerated, any being previous to the initiators and inventors of their perversity. For Valentinus came to Rome in the time of Hyginus, flourished under Pius, and remained until Anicetus. Cerdon, too, Marcion's predecessor, himself arrived in the time of Hyginus, who was the ninth bishop. Coming frequently into the Church, and making public confession, he thus remained, one time teaching in secret, and then again making public confession; but at last, having been denounced for corrupt teaching, he was excommunicated(6) from the assembly of the brethren. Marcion, then, succeeding him, flourished under Anicetus, who held the tenth place of the episcopate. But the rest, who are called Gnostics, take rise from Menander, Simon's disciple, as I have shown; and each one of them appeared to be both the father and the high priest of that doctrine into which he has been initiated. But all these broke out into their apostasy much later, even during the intermediate period of the Church.

1. Since, therefore, the tradition from the apostles does thus exist in the Church, and is permanent among us, let us revert to the Scrip-rural proof furnished by those apostles who did also write the Gospel, in which they recorded the doctrine regarding God, pointing out that our Lord Jesus Christ is the truth,(7) and that no lie is in Him. As also David says, prophesying His birth from a virgin, and the resurrection from the dead, "Truth has sprung out of the earth."(8) The apostles, likewise, being disciples of the truth, are above all falsehood; for a lie has no fellowship with the truth, just as darkness has none with light, but the presence of the one shuts out that of the other. Our Lord, therefore, being the truth, did not speak lies; and whom He knew to have taken origin from a de-feet, He never would have acknowledged as God, even the God of all, the Supreme King, too, and His own Father, an imperfect being as a perfect one, an animal one as a spiritual, Him who was without the Pleroma as Him who was within it.

[Stephan Huller]

If you really look at the discussion it implies that the heretics succession list in Book One is actually meant to be taken as a chronological arrangement - i.e.

first came Valentinus in the reign of Hyginus 138 - 142 CE
then came Cerdo in the reign of Pius 142 - 157 CE
then came Marcion in the reign of Anicetus 157 - 168 CE
but that the Gnostics who followed Menander came even later 'in the intermediary period'

Irenaeus is usually thought to have written his works sometime after 177 CE. But how can that allow for an intermediary period after Marcion if Marcion only appeared 157 - 168 CE? Tertullian implies however that Marcion came even earlier:

But of this I am sure, that he is an Antoninian heretic, impious under Pius. Now from Tiberius to Antoninus there are a matter of a hundred and fifteen and a half years and half a month. This length of time do they posit between Christ and Marcion. Since therefore it was under Antoninus that, as I have proved, Marcion first brought this god on the scene, at once, if you are in your senses, the fact is clear. The dates themselves put it beyond argument that that which first came to light under Antoninus did not come to light under Tiberius: that is, that the god of Antoninus' reign was not the God of the reign of Tiberius, and therefore he who it is admitted was first reported to exist by Marcion, had not been revealed by Christ.

If we assume that Jesus was crucified c. 33 CE then 33 + 115.5 = 148 CE.
If Tertullian is here speaking about 'the first appearance' of each 28 CE + 115 = 143 CE

Either way it is difficult to reconcile this dating with:

Valentinus = Hyginus 138 - 142 CE
Cerdo = Pius 142 - 154 CE
Marcion = 157 - 168 CE
but that the Gnostics who followed Menander came even later 'in the intermediary period'

It would appear that Marcion came at the time of Pius. So the first question is - is there a fundamental different association with the various bishops on the Roman succession list?

The next question is - is the list of heretics originally meant to be chronological? In other words, did someone read it:

1. Valentinus
2. Cerdo
3. Marcion
4 Menander & the Gnostics.

Why does the author take it this way?

[Stephan Huller]

Indeed if we notice again in the Philosophumena Menander and Saturnilus are not connected with Simon in the narrative. I wonder whether they were originally attached to Dositheus. In book one however Simon is the head of the Simonians, Menander thinks something 'like Simon' but he is not explicitly said to be a followers of Simon but interestingly (1) Cerdo is said to have been an offshoot of Simon (2) Marcion is said to be an offshoot of Simon and the (3) gnostics are said to be offshoots of Simon - "Besides those, however, among these heretics who are Simonians, and of whom we have already spoken, a multitude of Gnostics have sprung up, and have been manifested like mushrooms growing out of the ground." All these elements were not in the original syntagma as we noted. Clearly the person who added 'Simon' to the list also added Cerdo, Marcion and the account of the gnostics but this was not original to the syntagma, it was a later addition. Note that the account of the Marcionites is WHOLLY different in the Philosophumena.

[Stephan Huller]

Also I noticed in the Philosophumena Simon and Valentinus appear side by side in Book 6. In Book 7 Menander and Saturnilus are introduced but are not specifically identified as disciples of Simon:

But one Saturnilus, who flourished about the same period with Basilides, but spent his time in Antioch, (a city) of Syria, propounded opinions akin to whatever (tenets) Menander (advanced). He asserts that there is one Father, unknown to all--He who had made angels, archangels, principalities, (and) powers; and that by certain angels, seven (in number), the world was made, and all things that are in it.

It is almost as if the original account of Menander has been lopped off.

[Stephan Huller]

So let's make lists of which heresies are associated with Simon in Adv Haer and Philosophumena:

Adv Haer: the section on Simon says "Now this Simon of Samaria, from whom all sorts of heresies derive their origin" Moreover there is a clear attempt to identify him

The section of Menander which follows doesn't make a strong connection with Simon - "The successor (διαδεξάμενος Eusebius 3.26.1 Latin successor) of this man was Menander, also a Samaritan by birth, and he, too, was a perfect adept in the practice of magic. He affirms that the primary Power continues unknown to all, but that he himself is the person who has been sent forth from the presence of the invisible beings as a saviour, for the deliverance of men. The world was made by angels, whom, like Simon, he maintains to have been produced by Ennoea. He gives, too, as he affirms, by means of that magic which he teaches, knowledge to this effect, that one may overcome those very angels that made the world; for his disciples obtain the resurrection by being baptized into him, and can die no more, but remain in the possession of immortal youth.

Eusebius notes that Justin goes further and says that Menander was a 'disciple' of Simon - "And Justin, in the passage in which he mentions Simon, gives an account of this man also, in the following words: “And we know that a certain Menander, who was also a Samaritan, from the village of Capparattea, was a disciple of Simon, and that he also, being driven by the demons, came to Antioch and deceived many by his magical art. And he persuaded his followers that they should not die. And there are still some of them that assert this.”

And then Cerdo and Marcion - "Cerdo was one who took his system from the followers of Simon, and came to live at Rome in the time of Hyginus, who held the ninth place in the episcopal succession from the apostles downwards. He taught that the God proclaimed by the law and the prophets was not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the former was known, but the latter unknown; while the one also was righteous, but the other benevolent. "

And again Marcion "At present, however, I have simply been led to mention him, that thou mightest know that all those who in any way corrupt the truth, and injuriously affect the preaching of the Church, are the disciples and successors of Simon Magus of Samaria. Although they do not confess the name of their master, in order all the more to seduce others, yet they do teach his doctrines. They set forth, indeed, the name of Christ Jesus as a sort of lure, but in various ways they introduce the impieties of Simon; and thus they destroy multitudes, wickedly disseminating their own doctrines by the use of a good name, and, through means of its sweetness and beauty, extending to their hearers the bitter and malignant poison of the serpent, the great author of apostasy?"

With Tatian the Encratites are said to be a mix of Marcion and Saturninus strangely:

Many offshoots of numerous heresies have already been formed from those heretics we have described. This arises from the fact that numbers of them--indeed, we may say all--desire themselves to be teachers, and to break off from the particular heresy in which they have been involved. Forming one set of doctrines out of a totally different system of opinions, and then again others from others, they insist upon teaching something new, declaring themselves the inventors of any sort of opinion which they may have been able to call into existence. To give an example: Springing from Saturninus and Marcion, those who are called Encratites (self-controlled) preached against marriage, thus setting aside the original creation of God, and indirectly blaming Him who made the male and female for the propagation of the human race. Some of those reckoned among them have also introduced abstinence from animal food, thus proving themselves ungrateful to God, who formed all things. They deny, too, the salvation of him who was first created. It is but lately, however, that this opinion has been invented among them. A certain man named Tatian first introduced the blasphemy. He was a hearer of Justin's, and as long as he continued with him he expressed no such views; but after his martyrdom he separated from the Church, and, excited and puffed up by the thought of being a teacher, as if he were superior to others, he composed his own peculiar type of doctrine. He invented a system of certain invisible AEons, like the followers of Valentinus; while, like Marcion and Saturninus, he declared that marriage was nothing else than corruption and fornication.(3) But his denial of Adam's salvation was an opinion due entirely to himself.

And again in the section immediately following 'others' are said to follow Basilides and Carpocrates "Others, again, following upon Basilides and Carpocrates, have introduced promiscuous intercourse and a plurality of wives, and are indifferent about eating meats sacrificed to idols, maintaining that God does not greatly regard such matters. But why continue? For it is an impracticable attempt to mention all those who, in one way or another, have fallen away from the truth."

This would strongly imply to me that the person who arranged the final form of the syntagma here edited this part about Tatian who was a near contemporary heretic (i.e. of the 'intermediary period').

Then regarding the Gnostics in what immediately follows Simon is invoked again "Besides those, however, among these heretics who are Simonians, and of whom we have already spoken, a multitude of Gnostics have sprung up, and have been manifested like mushrooms growing out of the ground. I now proceed to describe the principal opinions held by them."

Philosophumena

Simon appears at the beginning of Book Six. In the middle Valentinus is introduced but no connection with Simon is made "But since it seems to us that we have sufficiently explained Simon's tissue of legends, let us see what also Valentinus asserts." Indeed whereas Simon is likened to Empedocles, Valentinus is immediately connected with different philosophers. "The heresy of Valentinus is certainly, then, connected with the Pythagorean and Platonic theory."

No connection with Menander, Saturnilus nor Marcion in the section which comes thereafter. Instead the only heretic connected with Simon is Cerdo in the subsequent section where Marcion is also referenced again:

"But one Cerdon himself also, taking occasion in like manner from these (heretics) and Simon, affirms that the God preached by Moses and the prophets was not Father of Jesus Christ. For (he contends) that this (Father) had been known, whereas that the Father of Christ was unknown, and that the former was just, but the latter good. And Marcion corroborated the tenet of this (heretic) in the work which he attempted to write, and which he styled Antitheses."

[Stephan Huller]

It would strongly seem that the person who arranged the 'lectures' of Irenaeus in their current arrangement also put forward the idea that all heretics go back to Simon. Notice at the beginning of Book 2:

I have also related how they think and teach that creation at large was formed after the image of their invisible Pleroma, and what they hold respecting the Demiurge, declaring at the same time the doctrine of Simon Magus of Samaria, their progenitor, and of all those who succeeded him. I mentioned, too, the multitude of those Gnostics who are sprung from him, and noticed(2) the points of difference between them, their several doctrines, and the order of their succession, while I set forth all those heresies which have been originated by them. I showed, moreover, that all these heretics, taking their rise from Simon, have introduced impious and irreligious doctrines into this life

Then in chapter 9 of the same book - "This God, then, being acknowledged, as I have said, and receiving testimony from all to the fact of His existence, that Father whom they conjure into existence is beyond doubt untenable, and has no witnesses [to his existence]. Simon Magus was the first who said that he himself was God over all, and that the world was formed by his angels. Then those who succeeded him, as I have shown in the first book,(5) by their several opinions, still further depraved [his teaching] through their impious and irreligious doctrines against the Creator. These [heretics now referred to],(6) being the disciples of those mentioned, render such as assent to them worse than the heathen. For the former "serve the creature rather than the Creator,"(7) and "those which are not gods,"(8) notwithstanding that they ascribe the first place in Deity to that God who was the Maker of this universe. But the latter maintain that He, [i.e., the Creator of this world,] is the fruit of a defect, and describe Him as being of an animal nature, and as not knowing that Power which is above Him, while He also exclaims, "I am God, and besides Me there is no other God."

Near the end of Book 2 - "Those, then, who are of the school of Valentinus being overthrown, the whole multitude of heretics are, in fact, also subverted. For all the arguments I have advanced against their Pleroma, and with respect to those things which are beyond it, showing how the Father of all is shut up and circumscribed by that which is beyond Him (if, indeed, there be anything beyond Him), and how there is an absolute necessity [on their theory] to conceive of many Fathers, and many Pleromas, and many creations of worlds, beginning with one set and ending with another, as existing on every side; and that all [the beings referred to] continue in their own domains, and do not curiously intermeddle with others, since, indeed, no common interest nor any fellowship exists between them; and that there is no other God of all, but that that name belongs only to the Almighty;--[all these arguments, I say,] will in like manner apply against those who are of the school of Marcion, and Simon, and Meander, or whatever others there may be who, like them, cut off that creation with which we are connected from the Father. "

and again a little later "Moreover, those also will be thus confuted who belong to Simon and Carpocrates, and if there be any others who are said to perform miracles--who do not perform what they do either through the power of God, or in connection with the truth, nor for the well-being of men, but for the sake of destroying and misleading mankind, by means of magical deceptions, and with universal deceit, thus entailing greater harm than good on those who believe them, with respect to the point on which they lead them astray."

and again "Again, while they assert that they possess souls from the same sphere as Jesus, and that they are like to Him, sometimes even maintaining that they are superior; while [they affirm that they were] produced, like Him, for the performance of works tending to the benefit and establishment of mankind, they are found doing nothing of the same or a like kind [with His actions], nor what can in any respect be brought into comparison with them. And if they have in truth accomplished anything [remarkable] by means of magic, they strive [in this way] deceitfully to lead foolish people astray, since they confer no real benefit or blessing on those over whom they declare that they exert] supernatural] power; but, bringing forward mere boys(1) [as the subjects on whom they practise], and deceiving their sight, while they exhibit phantasms that instantly cease, and do not endure even a moment of time,(2) they are proved to be like, not Jesus our Lord, but Simon the magician. It is certain,(3) too, from the fact that the Lord rose from the dead on the third day, and manifested Himself to His disciples, and was in their sight received up into heaven, that, inasmuch as these men die, and do not rise again, nor manifest themselves to any, they are proved as possessing souls in no respect similar to that of Jesus. "

and finally "Nor does she perform anything by means of angelic invocations,(8) or by incantations, or by any other wicked curious art; but, directing her prayers to the Lord, who made all things, in a pure, sincere, and straightforward spirit, and calling upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, she has been accustomed to work(9) miracles for the advantage of mankind, and not to lead them into error. If, therefore, the name of our Lord Jesus Christ even now confers benefits [upon men], and cures thoroughly and effectively all who anywhere believe on Him, but not that of Simon, or Menander, or Carpocrates, or of any other man whatever, it is manifest that. when He was made man, He held fellowship with His own creation, and(10) did all things truly through the power of God, according to the will of the Father of all, as the prophets had foretold. But what these things were, shall be described in dealing with the proofs to be found in the prophetical writings"

Book 3 in the introduction "THOU hast indeed enjoined upon me, my very dear friend, that I should bring to light the Valentinian doctrines, concealed, as their votaries imagine; that I should exhibit their diversity, and compose a treatise in refutation of them. therefore have undertaken--showing that they spring from Simon, the father of all heretics--to exhibit both their doctrines and successions, and to set forth arguments against them all. Wherefore, since the conviction of these men and their exposure is in many points but one work, I have sent unto thee [certain] books, of which the first comprises the opinions of all these men, and exhibits their customs, and the character of their behaviour. In the second, again, their perverse teachings are cast down and overthrown, and, such as they really are, laid bare and open to view. But in this, the third book I shall adduce proofs from the Scriptures, so that I may come behind in nothing of what thou hast enjoined; yea, that over and above what thou didst reckon upon, thou mayest receive from me the means of combating and vanquishing those who, in whatever manner, are propagating falsehood."

And again as we already saw "But the rest, who are called Gnostics, take rise from Menander, Simon's disciple, as I have shown; and each one of them appeared to be both the father and the high priest of that doctrine into which he has been initiated. But all these broke out into their apostasy much later, even during the intermediate period of the Church."

Again "For all those who are of a perverse mind, having been set against the Mosaic legislation, judging it to be dissimilar and contrary to the doctrine of the Gospel, have not applied themselves to investigate the causes of the difference of each covenant. Since, therefore, they have been deserted by the paternal love, and puffed up by Satan, being brought over to the doctrine of Simon Magus, they have apostatized in their opinions from Him who is God, and imagined that they have themselves discovered more than the apostles, by finding out another god; and [maintained] that the apostles preached the Gospel still somewhat under the influence of Jewish opinions, but that they themselves are purer [in doctrine], and more intelligent, than the apostles. Wherefore also Marcion and his followers have betaken themselves to mutilating the Scriptures, not acknowledging some books at all; and, curtailing the Gospel according to Luke and the Epistles of Paul, they assert that these are alone authentic, which they have themselves thus shortened."

Book Four "But this [Father] is the Maker of heaven and earth, as is shown from His words; and not he, the false father, who has been invented by Marcion, or by Valentinus, or by Basilides, or by Carpocrates, or by Simon, or by the rest of the "Gnostics," falsely so called. For none of these was the Son of God; but Christ Jesus our Lord [was], against whom they set their teaching in opposition, and have the daring to preach an unknown God. "

And finally one more in Book Four "[This spiritual man] shall also judge the vain speeches of the perverse Gnostics, by showing that they are the disciples of Simon Magus. "

[Stephan Huller]

My assumption would be that:

1. Irenaeus gave a number of lectures and this forms the basis to the material in Adv Haer. But that:
2. a later editor first arranged the syntagma in Book One out of Irenaeus's notes and Justin's syntagma