And which («ai ofrives). Omit xal and.. The compound relative, whzch, classifies ; which are of those who know not, ete.
The depths of Satan (7a Ba9y rod Haravd). The reference is, most probably, to the Gnostic sect of the Ophites (d¢us @ ser- pent), or, in Hebrew, Naasenes (naash a serpent), serpent-wor- shippers, a sect the origin of which is unknown, but which existed as late as the sixth century; since, in 530, Justinian passed laws against it. “The veneration of the serpent was but the logical development of a theory, the germ of which is common to many of the Gnostic sects. Proceeding on the as- sumption that the creator of the world is to be regarded as an evil power, a thing in hostility to the supreme God, it follows as a natural consequence that the fall of man through disobedi- ence to the command of his maker must be regarded, not as a transgression against the will of the supreme God, but as an emancipation from the authority of an evil being. The serpent, therefore, who tempted mankind to sin, is no longer their de- stroyer but their benefactor. He is the symbol of intellect, by whose means the first human pair were raised to the knowledge of the existence of higher beings than their creator. This con- ception, consistently carried out, would have resulted in a direct inversion of the whole teaching of scripture; in calling evil good and good evil; in converting Satan into God and God into Satan. The majority of the Ophite sects, however, seem to have shrunk from this portentous blasphemy. While ac- knowledging the fall of man as, in some manner, a deliverance from evil and an exaltation of human nature, they hesitated to carry out their principle by investing the evil spirit with the attributes of deity. A kind of compromise was made between scripture and philosophy. The serpent was, notwithstanding his service to mankind, represented as a being of evil nature and an enemy to man, though his work was overruled to man’s good, and he himself was, beyond his intention, the instrument of a higher wisdom. But in one sect at least of the Ophites, the more logical and thoroughly blasphemous consequences of the first principles were exhibited openly and unblushingly ” (Mansel, “Gnostic Heresies”). The characteristic boast of the