Adding Archons to OT; pious fraud?

[ELoWolfe]

I am finalizing my own Bible, for personal use. I have looked to see what scriptures the Valentinians used or may have used. Of the OT, the Torah is used but the Torah has veiled hints of the truth, not the entirety.

One of the "hidden truths" is the Archons, and their influence. It seems that the Valentinians were influenced by the Hypostasis of the Archons, but did not seem to use it as it is found to us today. Almost everything is there, though, so it is enough to warrant a read at the least.

But would it be pious fraud if instead of reading God, YHWH, LORD, Lord God, etc., using the names of the actual Archons? To a lesser extent this is already done, but just keeping the proper names and translations to the actual Archon and not "another name for God"? Like how we leave Sophia untranslated.

Also, I need the creation story as we know it, but the Valentinians do not seem to have scripture of it (but talk about it) like other groups. Hypostasis of the Archons is close, but I don't see anything that says Valentinians actually used it. Irenaeus tells us a myth, and I could use that (copy it and remove his voice), perhaps filling in the gaps using Hypostasis since it clearly influenced the myth, but this would essentially be making a new document, wouldn't it? I am trying to use the actual scriptures used, as best as possible, filling in gaps. Not creating new documents. But if it must be done that way...

Is there anything that says Hypostasis of the Archons itself was used by Valentinians?

 

[nazz]

I am finalizing my own Bible, for personal use. I have looked to see what scriptures the Valentinians used or may have used. Of the OT, the Torah is used but the Torah has veiled hints of the truth, not the entirety.

One of the "hidden truths" is the Archons, and their influence. It seems that the Valentinians were influenced by the Hypostasis of the Archons, but did not seem to use it as it is found to us today. Almost everything is there, though, so it is enough to warrant a read at the least.

But would it be pious fraud if instead of reading God, YHWH, LORD, Lord God, etc., using the names of the actual Archons? To a lesser extent this is already done, but just keeping the proper names and translations to the actual Archon and not "another name for God"? Like how we leave Sophia untranslated.

Also, I need the creation story as we know it, but the Valentinians do not seem to have scripture of it (but talk about it) like other groups. Hypostasis of the Archons is close, but I don't see anything that says Valentinians actually used it. Irenaeus tells us a myth, and I could use that (copy it and remove his voice), perhaps filling in the gaps using Hypostasis since it clearly influenced the myth, but this would essentially be making a new document, wouldn't it? I am trying to use the actual scriptures used, as best as possible, filling in gaps. Not creating new documents. But if it must be done that way...

Is there anything that says Hypostasis of the Archons itself was used by Valentinians?

From a quick search it seem the HotA is dated to the 3rd century so would not have used by Valentinus.

As for changing biblical names would everyone agree on the substitutions?

 

[ELoWolfe]

From a quick search it seem the HotA is dated to the 3rd century so would not have used by Valentinus.

As for changing biblical names would everyone agree on the substitutions?

Thank you, I don't know why I didn't think to look at the date. I only looked at the content.

Epiphanius quoted Irenaeus about the Valentinian myth, and I find it fascinating that there is mention of Eleleth and Sakla, both found in Hypostasis. Now while Epiphanius is 4th century, Irenaeus was late 2nd century, dying at the very beginning of the 3rd century. If it is an exact quote, then Eleleth and Sakla are older than Hypostasis (or else Hypostasis is dated wrong). There is also the myth of the 7 "angels" or heavens, which we also find in Hypostasis.

Curiouser and curiouser. Did Hypostasis come from this myth? Or is Epiphanius mistaken, perhaps claiming to quote Irenaeus about Hypostasis?

In relation to naming them though, I would have used the names found in the Origins of the World.

Yaldabaoth, Iao, Sabaoth, Astaphanos (Esaldaios?), Adonaios, Elaios & Horaios.

Now they would be fit in where their names existed. When the text reads YHWH, it would be Yaldabaoth (YHWH, however, may stay fit). Adonai and Sabaoth are both "names of God" so they're find as is (just don't translate them). Elaios is evidently El, and Esaldaios is El Shaddai.

So it would be something like that. Instead of claiming they're all "names of God," they would properly be the Elohim, the council of Gods (or Archons).

It was a thought.

 

[nazz]

Thank you, I don't know why I didn't think to look at the date. I only looked at the content.

Epiphanius quoted Irenaeus about the Valentinian myth, and I find it fascinating that there is mention of Eleleth and Sakla, both found in Hypostasis. Now while Epiphanius is 4th century, Irenaeus was late 2nd century, dying at the very beginning of the 3rd century. If it is an exact quote, then Eleleth and Sakla are older than Hypostasis (or else Hypostasis is dated wrong). There is also the myth of the 7 "angels" or heavens, which we also find in Hypostasis.

Curiouser and curiouser. Did Hypostasis come from this myth? Or is Epiphanius mistaken, perhaps claiming to quote Irenaeus about Hypostasis?

Not sure as I've not researched all that.

In relation to naming them though, I would have used the names found in the Origins of the World.

Yaldabaoth, Iao, Sabaoth, Astaphanos (Esaldaios?), Adonaios, Elaios & Horaios.

Now they would be fit in where their names existed. When the text reads YHWH, it would be Yaldabaoth (YHWH, however, may stay fit). Adonai and Sabaoth are both "names of God" so they're find as is (just don't translate them). Elaios is evidently El, and Esaldaios is El Shaddai.

So it would be something like that. Instead of claiming they're all "names of God," they would properly be the Elohim, the council of Gods (or Archons).

It was a thought.

But often when the Tetragrammaton is used I think it can refer to the true God.