Atlantis Online
March 29, 2024, 12:57:59 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Satellite images 'show Atlantis'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3766863.stm
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

The Gnostics and Their Remains

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 16   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Gnostics and Their Remains  (Read 4595 times)
0 Members and 87 Guests are viewing this topic.
Demiurge
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 3262


δημιουργός (dēmiourgós, latinized demiurgus δήμιος


« Reply #75 on: March 12, 2009, 01:09:20 pm »

BASILIDES.
Hippolytus, in accordance with his theses that all these "heresies" were mere plagiarisms from the more ancient philosophical systems, declares that Basilides stole the entire of his scheme from Aristotle, and proceeds to establish his charge by the following comparative analysis of the two.

"Aristotle divides all substance into the Genus, the Species,

p. 71

and the Individual. The Genus is, as it were, a heap composed of many and different seeds, from which heap all the Species are taken; and the genus is the sufficient cause to all things that exist. For example, 'Animal' is used absolutely, not signifying any particular animal. 'Animal' does not signify a horse, an ox, or a man, but simply 'animal.' From this abstract 'animal' all the species of animals universally derive their origin, and this 'animal' without species is the origin of all animals generated according to their species, and not any one thing of things generated. Thus, Man is an animal, deriving his origin from the 'animal,' and Horse is an animal in the same manner. Similarly all other animals are derived from that 'animal,' who yet in itself is none of them. If therefore that 'animal' is none of these, then, according to Aristotle, the substance of all things that are proceeds out of things that are non-existent, inasmuch as the 'animal,' out of which they all proceed individually, is not one thing (or 'is nothing at all'). And this, being Nothing, is the origin of all that be.

"Now substance being divided into three classes--the genus, the species, and the individual--we have defined the genus as 'animal,' 'man' as the species picked out of the heap of animals, but as yet undiscriminated, and not separated into the form of a particular being. But when I define by a special name, like Socrates, or Diogenes, a man taken from the species (missing word?--JBH) the genus, then that being is termed the 'individual.' Thus the genus is divided into species, the species into individual.; but the individual once being defined by name cannot be divided any further. This is what Aristotle calls justly and properly 'Substance,' that which cannot be predicated 'of the subject,' nor 'in the subject.' By the term 'of the subject' he means such an idea as 'animal,' which can be predicated of all the subject animals individually--as a horse, an ox, a man--all being called by the same name, 'animal.' Hence, what can be predicated 'of the subject' is that which applies to many and different species indiscriminately. 'In the subject' means that which cannot be predicated without the previous existence of something else wherein it may exist, as 'white,' 'black,'

p. 72

Report Spam   Logged

"And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, 'I am God and there is no other God beside me,' for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come."- Yaltabaoth
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 16   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy