[423]. Rather a suspect name for a hymn writer.
[424]. Ephrem Syrus’ own date is given as 370 A.D., in Dict. Christian Biog. s.h.n.
[425]. See n. 3, p. [117] supra.
[426]. Irenaeus, Bk I. c. 5, § 1, p. 98, Harvey.
[427]. See n. 2, p. [118] supra.
[428]. This may have been due either to their Egyptian extraction, or to the necessity of putting the matter in a way that would be intelligible to their Egyptian disciples. Cf. Naville, Old Egyptian Faith, 1909, where he says that the Egyptian way of expressing abstract ideas is by metaphors. Their ancestors, the Egyptians of the early Dynasties, when they wanted to describe how gods of both sexes came forth from one single male deity, did so by means of a very coarse image. See Budge, Papyrus of Nesi-Amsu, Archaeologia, vol. LII. (1890), pp. 440, 441. Cf. same author, Hieratic Papyri in B.M.
[429]. Courdaveaux, R.H.R. Jan.-Fev. 1892, p. 293 and n. 7. Mgr Duchesne, op. cit. pp. 244, 245, agrees that Clement looked upon the Son as a creature only. Nor does there seem much difference between Valentinus’ view of the relation between the Demiurge and the Unknown Father, and Clement’s remarks about the Son whom he calls timeless and unbegotten and says that it is from Him that we must learn the “remote cause the Father of the Universe”: Strom. Bk VII. c. 1. Cf. Justin Martyr, c. Trypho. c. 56.
[430]. R.H.R. Jan.-Fev. 1891, p. 27. Tertullian’s own heresy was of course Montanism. Harnack, Hist. of Dogma, Eng. ed., II. pp. 257, 258, says indeed that Hippolytus’ own views of the Trinity coincide with those of Valentinus and are a relic of polytheism.
[431]. Hippolytus, op. cit. Bk VI. c. 29, pp. 280, 281, Cruice.
[432]. 2 John iv. 16. So Ἀγάπη “Love” is made the summit of the universe in the Ophite Diagram. See Chap. VIII supra.