'Apostles as Archons: The Fight for Authority and the Emergence of Gnosticism in the Tchacos Codex and Other Early Christian Literature', pp.243ff,
- April DeConick has a section about Theodotus the Valentinian, an eastern Valentinian prominent in the mid- to late- second century, which she starts by noting that Clement of Alexandria recorded him as teaching that
“the Apostles were substituted for the twelve signs of the Zodiac, for, just as birth is directed by them, so is rebirth by the Apostles (οἱ ἀπόστολοι μετετέθησαν τοῖς δεκαδύο ζῳδίοις, ὡς γὰρ ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνων ἡ γένεσις διοικεῖται, οὕτως ὑπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων ἡ ἀναγέννησις)” [Clem. Alex., Exc. 25.2].
Here we encounter the exact teaching that the [Sethian] author of the Gospel of Judas was trying to eradicate. Each [Valentinian] Apostle was a counterpoint for the stars that controlled Fate. Once baptized, the initiate was no longer dominated by the negative rule of the stars. Instead the positive Apostles controlled his or her fate.
Theodotus expounds on this, noting that Fate is the coming together of many opposing forces, which cannot be seen. It guides the course of the stars and even governs through them. In this way, the Zodiac and the planets have power over human beings and direct human births. The twelve signs of the Zodiac and the seven wandering stars sometimes rise in conjunction and sometimes in opposition. The human being shares in the qualities of the stars wrestling with each other in the skies [Clem. Exc. 69.1—71.2]. It is from this “battle of the Powers” that the Lord frees the newly converted Christian. The Lord gives the Christian peace from the Powers and Angels who are like “soldiers” and “brigands” fighting for and against God [Clem. Exc. 72.1-2].
How was this accomplished? A new strange star arose in the sky, which destroyed “the old astrological arrangement (τὴν παλαιὰν ἀστροθεσίαν)” of the stars and the planets. This new star “revolved on a new path of redemption (ὁ καινὰς ὁδοὺς καὶ σωτηρίους τρεπόμενος)” and corresponded to the Lord himself who “came down to earth to transfer from Fate to his providence those who believed in Christ” [Clem. Exc. 74.2].
This means that Fate through the stars continues to control unbelievers, but for those who realize that the birth of the Savior released them from Fate, baptism is in order [Clem. Exc. 75.1]. Baptism is called “death” because Christians are no longer under the rule of “evil archons (πονηραῖς ἀρχαῖς)” and it is called “life” because Christ is now the sole Lord [Clem. Exc. 76.1—77.1]. This is the context of the oft-quoted but misunderstood phrase: “Until baptism Fate is real, but after it the astrologists are no longer correct. It is not the washing alone that is liberating, but the knowledge of who we were, what we have become, where we were or where we have been put, where we hasten to go, from what we are redeemed, what birth is, what rebirth is” [Clem. Exc. 78.1-2].
Such language is reminiscent of Ignatius of Antioch who writes to the Ephesians about this same cosmic restructuring. He states that at Jesus’ birth “a star in the heaven shone more brightly than all the others.” This new star is described as the cosmic pole. Thus Ignatius goes on to say that “all the other stars with the sun and the moon gathered around that star in chorus.” So bright was the star that it left astrologers bewildered. So great was their bewilderment that they asked, “Where could this newcomer have come from, so different from the others?” The old “empire of evil” was overthrown, for God was now appearing in human form to bring a new order, life eternal. All creation, Ignatius explains, was thrown into chaos over this restructuring, which God put into place in order to destroy death.
What we have here is a commonly held Christian belief that the Christ event broke down the old cosmic structures and replaced them with new structures that allow for liberation. Quite literally, Jesus is a new star that the cosmos now revolves around. The Zodiacal signs are the twelve Apostles arrayed around him, replacing the evil Archons who have up until that time controlled human Fate. As such, Jesus replaces the old cosmic pole, becoming the new route for the soul and spirit to escape this world. The new pole corresponds to the Cross which Jesus uses to carry the saved “on his shoulders” into the Pleroma [Clem. Exc. 42.1—3]. Once the initiate undergoes baptism, Christ becomes their new path of salvation, saving both the Elect (the Valentinians) and the Called (the members of the Apostolic Church) by bearing them aloft [Clem. Exc. 53.1—2]. Christians literally are transferred from the lower regions of the earth up the cosmic pole to the Pleroma. Thus Ephesians 4:9–10 ... “He who ascended also descended. That he ascended, what does it imply but that he descended? He it is who descended into the lower parts of the earth and ascended above the heavens” [Clem. Exc. 43.5]. [pp.268-70]
DeConick then notes a differentiation between Valentinians and Sethians regarding ' Apostolic Christianity ' -
... Why did Theodotus teach that, for Christians at least, the evil Zodiacal Powers have been overcome and replaced with the good Apostles? The answer is simple. The Valentinians were not opposed to Apostolic Christianity, like the Sethian Christians appear to have been ...
DeConick then discusses differentiation between eastern and western Valentinianism as noted by and thus through Irenaeus -
When Irenaeus talks about the western Valentinians attached to Ptolemy’s teaching, he does not present us with the same correspondences that Theodotus has. Instead of the good twelve Apostles replacing the evil cosmic Zodiac, Irenaeus says that he knows of Valentinians who follow both Ptolemaeus’ and Marcus’ systems. They all align the Apostles with the twelve last emanations in the Pleroma, the Duodecad.
According to Irenaeus, the Valentinians say that the production of the Duodecad of aeons corresponds to the election of the twelve apostles [Iren. Adv haer.. 1.3.2]. The twelfth emanation, the suffering Sophia, corresponds with Judas the twelfth apostle, as does the woman who suffered from the twelve-year flow of blood, but for different reasons. That is, the correspondence with Judas has a different meaning from the correspondence with the hemorrhaging woman.
The Valentinians used Judas specifically to indicate the correspondence between his “apostasy” and that of the twelfth Aeon. Thus Irenaeus writes that they think that Sophia’s suffering points to Judas’ apostasy because both were associated with the number twelve. He reiterates this by saying that the Valentinians relate the suffering Sophia to the betrayal of Judas. Thus her suffering was her error, when she did what was forbidden. It is Sophia’s betrayal that results in her suffering which the Valentinians said corresponded to Judas’ betrayal of Jesus, a correspondence which Irenaeus cannot accept [Iren. Adv haer.. 2.20.2].
Why does this correspondence bother him? Because, he explains, the rest of stories about Sophia and Judas do not match. Sophia repents while Judas does not. So, Irenaeus concludes, Judas cannot be a type of Sophia. But the lack of correspondence on the issue of repentance did not appear to bother the Valentinians who thought another story corresponded to Sophia’s repentance. It was the woman who suffered with the flow of blood for twelve years, not Judas, who was used by the Valentinians as a correspondence of repentance, a correspondence that Origen confirms when he says that the Valentinians thought the hemorrhaging woman symbolized Prounicos, while never mentioning Judas [Origen c. Cel.. 2.35].
This point appears to have been well-known since Celsus [is said to] speak of it as well [Origen c. Cel.. 2.35]. The repentance of the wanton Sophia was correlated with the woman’s turn to touch Jesus’ garment and receive healing. Irenaeus explains that the Valentinians think that the woman who was sick for twelve years corresponds with Sophia who was stretching to touch the garment of the Son, the hem, to stay her dissolution. She was stopped by Horos, the power that went forth from the Son, healed by him and so she ceased to suffer any more [Iren. Adv haer.. 1.3.3; 2.20.1—2.21.1].
Irenaeus goes on to critique further the correspondence between Judas and Sophia. His words put me in mind of the tradition about Judas as the “thirteenth” apostle in the Gospel of Judas. In order to argue against the Valentinian teaching, he says that Judas is not the twelfth apostle, but was cast out of that seat and replaced by Matthias. Because he was expelled from the twelfth number, he cannot correspond with the twelfth Aeon Sophia, but is an extra apostle outside of the Pleroma. Although Irenaeus does not use the number thirteen to describe Judas, knowledge of this tradition appears to me to be the basis for his correction of this Valentinian doctrine. He goes on to argue that Sophia is the thirtieth aeon, not the twelfth, humoring himself further with the numbers game. He even goes so far as to suggest that Matthias and Judas might align with the upper and lower Sophias, but he disregards this idea because he says that Sophia is in actuality three: the restored aeon, her reasonable self, and her suffering self [Iren. Adv haer.. 2.20.4—5]. [pp.271-3]