Irenaeus of Lyons · a new plain-English translation from the original language
[Heading: That They Undo Their Own Argument.] 1. We have thus shown that they force even the parables and the acts of the Lord improperly and inconsistently onto their fabrication. For the suffering which they say befell the twelfth Aeon, they attempt to show was fulfilled by the Saviour's own passion through the twelfth apostle, and during the twelfth month of his ministry -- since they maintain he preached across a single year following his baptism. They further assert this is made evident in the woman afflicted with a flow of blood: she had suffered for twelve years, and by touching the fringe of the Saviour's garment obtained her cure from the power that issued out of the Saviour, a power they claim presided over her affliction. For that power, having endured by being drawn out and poured forth into limitless extension, to the point where it stood in peril of dissolving entirely into the surrounding substance, upon touching the first Tetrad -- which, they say, is signified by the fringe -- halted, and its passion was brought to an end.
Now this claim of theirs, that the passion of the twelfth Aeon is shown through Judas -- how can Judas be brought into a fitting comparison, seeing that he had been thrust out from the circle of the Twelve, and no place among them was ever given back to him? For the Aeon whose type they say Judas is, once his Enthymesis was separated from him, was himself restored, or recalled; but Judas was cast off and expelled, and someone else, Matthias, was installed to fill his position, in fulfillment of the scripture: 'and let another take his office of oversight.' They ought therefore to have said that the twelfth Aeon was cast out of the Pleroma, and another put forth or sent out in his place -- if indeed the matter is shown in Judas at all. Further, they say the Aeon himself is the one who suffered, but Judas is the one who betrayed. But it was Christ, in his suffering, who came to the passion, not Judas -- and they themselves admit this. How, then, could Judas -- who handed over the one destined to undergo suffering on behalf of our deliverance -- serve as the figure and likeness of the suffering Aeon? Nor is Christ's passion in any way like the Aeon's passion, nor accomplished in a similar manner. For the Aeon suffered a passion of dissolution and ruin, such that the very one who suffered was in danger of being destroyed; but our Lord Christ suffered a strong passion, one that did not befall him to his harm -- not only was he himself not endangered or corrupted, but he even strengthened corrupted man by his own might, and recalled him to incorruption. And the Aeon suffered his passion while seeking after the Father, and not succeeding in finding him; but the Lord suffered so that he might lead those who had strayed from the Father to knowledge, and bring them to him. And in the Aeon's case the passion arose from the search for the greatness of the Father, and was a passion of ruin; but for us the Lord's suffering, by conferring knowledge of the Father, bestowed salvation. And that one's passion, as they say, brought forth a feminine fruit -- weak, sickly, formless, and ineffectual; but this one's passion brought forth strength and power. For the Lord, ascending on high through his passion, led captivity captive, gave gifts to men, and granted to those who believe in him the ability to trample serpents and scorpions underfoot, together with every force belonging to the adversary, namely the prince of rebellion. And the Lord, through his passion, destroyed death and dissolved error, but manifested life, showed forth truth, and bestowed incorruption. Their Aeon, on the other hand, once he had suffered, produced ignorance and brought forth a formless substance, from which, according to them, all the material works proceeded -- death, corruption, error, and the like. Judas, then, the twelfth disciple, was not the type of the suffering Aeon; but neither was he the type of our Lord's passion, for in every point the two are shown to be unlike and unfitting to one another -- not only in what we have already said, but even in the matter of number itself. For Judas is called a betrayer with respect to the Apostles in the Gospel; but this Aeon is not the twelfth but the thirtieth -- for according to their scheme not merely twelve Aeons were put forth by the Father's will, nor was he put forth twelfth in order, since according to their reckoning he was emitted as thirtieth in rank. How then might Judas, who ranks twelfth, stand as the emblem and likeness of an Aeon occupying the thirtieth rank? And even granting that he is, the image would still not be like the truth that corresponds to him. For the Enthymesis, once separated from the Aeon, was afterward given form by Christ, and thereafter made prudent by the Saviour, and having wrought all things outside the Pleroma according to the image of those within it, is reported, in the end, to have been taken back into the Pleroma by them, and, following the pairings, joined to the Saviour who was constituted from all of them together. But Judas, once cast out, never returns to the number of the disciples -- otherwise another would never have been numbered in his place. And concerning him the Lord declared: woe to that man through whose act the Son of man is given up to death, and it would have been far better had that man never come into existence -- and he named him the son of perdition. And even if the Enthymesis is not separated from the Aeon, still the number twelve cannot be the type of the number thirty. For in this case Judas was cast out and Matthias ordained in his place; but in their scheme the Aeon was in danger of dissolution -- and they even separate the Enthymesis from the passion, making the Aeon be restored, the Enthymesis be given form, and the passion be separated from these as a distinct matter. There being, then, these three existing realities -- the Aeon, the Enthymesis, and the passion -- Judas and Matt[hias]--