Turner, The Gospel According to Philip, 255–256; cf. Schenke, ‘Das Evangelium nach Philippus’, 33; van Eijk, ‘The Gospel of Philip’, 104.

Turner, The Gospel According to Philip, 255–256; cf. Schenke, ‘Das Evangelium nach Philippus’, 33; van Eijk, ‘The Gospel of Philip’, 104.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Wilson, The Gospel of Philip, 188; cf. Janssens, ‘L’Évangile selon Philippe’, 132; Ménard, L’Évangile selon Philippe, 6; Buckley, ‘Conceptual Models’, 4168–4169; Thomassen, ‘How Valentinian is the Gospel of Philip?’, 279.

Wilson, The Gospel of Philip, 188; cf. Janssens, ‘L’Évangile selon Philippe’, 132; Ménard, L’Évangile selon Philippe, 6; Buckley, ‘Conceptual Models’, 4168–4169; Thomassen, ‘How Valentinian is the Gospel of Philip?’, 279.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Buckley, ‘Conceptual Models’, 4168; Pagels, ‘Ritual in the Gospel of Philip’, 280–281.

Buckley, ‘Conceptual Models’, 4168; Pagels, ‘Ritual in the Gospel of Philip’, 280–281.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 153–399; cf. Iricinschi, ‘If You Got It, Flaunt It’, 264: ‘the Gospel of Philip is still in need of a thorough analysis of its mechanisms of self-definition, strip[p]ed of any “gnostic”, “East-Valentinian”, or “heretical” academic preconceptions.’

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 153–399; cf. Iricinschi, ‘If You Got It, Flaunt It’, 264: ‘the Gospel of Philip is still in need of a thorough analysis of its mechanisms of self-definition, strip[p]ed of any “gnostic”, “East-Valentinian”, or “heretical” academic preconceptions.’)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

E.g. Philo, Spec. 1.66; Jos. Ant. 3.180–182; Clem. Alex. Strom. 2.1.1.2; 5.6.32–40. See Hofius, Der Vorhang, 4–27; Levenson, ‘The Jerusalem Temple’, 51–53; Janowski, ‘Die heilige Wohnung des Höchsten’; idem, ‘Der Tempel als Kosmos’; for later Jewish tradition, see Rowland and Morray-Jones, The Mystery of God, 328–330.

E.g. Philo, Spec. 1.66; Jos. Ant. 3.180–182; Clem. Alex. Strom. 2.1.1.2; 5.6.32–40. See Hofius, Der Vorhang, 4–27; Levenson, ‘The Jerusalem Temple’, 51–53; Janowski, ‘Die heilige Wohnung des Höchsten’; idem, ‘Der Tempel als Kosmos’; for later Jewish tradition, see Rowland and Morray-Jones, The Mystery of God, 328–330.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Philo, Mos. 2.109–135; Spec. 1.84–87; QE 2.51–124; Jos. Ant. 3.151–187; J.W. 5.184–237; Clem. Alex. Strom. 5.6.37–38. For analysis and comparison of these allegorical interpretations, see van den Hoek, Clement of Alexandria, 116–147.

Philo, Mos. 2.109–135; Spec. 1.84–87; QE 2.51–124; Jos. Ant. 3.151–187; J.W. 5.184–237; Clem. Alex. Strom. 5.6.37–38. For analysis and comparison of these allegorical interpretations, see van den Hoek, Clement of Alexandria, 116–147.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Philo, Somn. 2.189, 231 (trans. Colson and Whitaker, Philo: Volume V, 275).

Philo, Somn. 2.189, 231 (trans. Colson and Whitaker, Philo: Volume V, 275).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Attridge, Hebrews, 97–103; 244–266; Koester, The Dwelling of God, 26–40.

Attridge, Hebrews, 97–103; 244–266; Koester, The Dwelling of God, 26–40.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Stökl Ben Ezra, The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity, 237.

Stökl Ben Ezra, The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity, 237.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

See Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 404; van Os, ‘Baptism in the Bridal Chamber’, 189; for an alternative schematic, see Schmid, Die Eucharistie ist Jesus, 119. However, Schmid also suggests that, ‘vermutlich hat der Philippusevangelist keine konkrete Architektur vor Augen’.

See Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 404; van Os, ‘Baptism in the Bridal Chamber’, 189; for an alternative schematic, see Schmid, Die Eucharistie ist Jesus, 119. However, Schmid also suggests that, ‘vermutlich hat der Philippusevangelist keine konkrete Architektur vor Augen’.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 407.

Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 407.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 385–394; cf. Wolfson, ‘Becoming Invisible’, 116–120.

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 385–394; cf. Wolfson, ‘Becoming Invisible’, 116–120.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 338–341, 385–386; Lundhaug perceptively suggests that this is an allusion to Jewish matrilineage, whereby one’s Judaism is inherited from one’s mother alone. Cf. 77.19–20, which reads ⲧⲙⲁⲁⲩ ⲧⲉ ⲧⲁⲗⲏⲑⲉⲓⲁ ⲧⲅⲛⲱⲥⲓⲥ ⲇⲉ ⲡⲉ ⲡⲧⲱⲧ which translates literally as, ‘The Mother is Truth, knowledge is the mingling.’ Several commentators emend ⲧⲱⲧ to ⲡⲉⲓⲱⲧ (e.g. Isenberg and Layton, ‘The Gospel according to Philip’, 196; Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 64), and translate something like, ‘The Mother is Truth, the Father is knowledge’, which if correct would be an allusive parallel given that the initiates are said to have become free via ‘knowledge of the Truth’.

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 338–341, 385–386; Lundhaug perceptively suggests that this is an allusion to Jewish matrilineage, whereby one’s Judaism is inherited from one’s mother alone. Cf. 77.19–20, which reads ⲧⲙⲁⲁⲩ ⲧⲉ ⲧⲁⲗⲏⲑⲉⲓⲁ ⲧⲅⲛⲱⲥⲓⲥ ⲇⲉ ⲡⲉ ⲡⲧⲱⲧ which translates literally as, ‘The Mother is Truth, knowledge is the mingling.’ Several commentators emend ⲧⲱⲧ to ⲡⲉⲓⲱⲧ (e.g. Isenberg and Layton, ‘The Gospel according to Philip’, 196; Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 64), and translate something like, ‘The Mother is Truth, the Father is knowledge’, which if correct would be an allusive parallel given that the initiates are said to have become free via ‘knowledge of the Truth’.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Schmid, Die Eucharistie ist Jesus, 113–115.

Schmid, Die Eucharistie ist Jesus, 113–115.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Wilson, The Gospel of Philip, 179; Wilson makes the same observation, only characterises the distinction as being between ‘material men’, ‘the psychics’, and ‘the Gnostics’; cf. Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 492–493.

Wilson, The Gospel of Philip, 179; Wilson makes the same observation, only characterises the distinction as being between ‘material men’, ‘the psychics’, and ‘the Gnostics’; cf. Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 492–493.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

See Dunderberg, Beyond Gnosticism, 191–195.

See Dunderberg, Beyond Gnosticism, 191–195.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Thus Stroumsa, Hidden Wisdom, 32–38; Williams, ‘Secrecy, Revelation, and Late Antique Demiurgical Myths’, 35–37; Kaler, ‘Those Sneaky Valentinians’; Burns, ‘Ancient Esoteric Traditions’.

Thus Stroumsa, Hidden Wisdom, 32–38; Williams, ‘Secrecy, Revelation, and Late Antique Demiurgical Myths’, 35–37; Kaler, ‘Those Sneaky Valentinians’; Burns, ‘Ancient Esoteric Traditions’.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Dunderberg, Beyond Gnosticism, 193.

Dunderberg, Beyond Gnosticism, 193.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Trans. Pietersma and Wright (eds.), A New English Translation of the Septuagint, 304. See also Exod 25:16–21; 38.1–8; 1Kgs 8:7; 1Chr 28:18; 2Chr 5:7–8; Heb 9:4–5; see Haran, ‘The Ark and the Cherubim’.

Trans. Pietersma and Wright (eds.), A New English Translation of the Septuagint, 304. See also Exod 25:16–21; 38.1–8; 1Kgs 8:7; 1Chr 28:18; 2Chr 5:7–8; Heb 9:4–5; see Haran, ‘The Ark and the Cherubim’.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

DeConick, ‘The True Mysteries’, 256–257.

DeConick, ‘The True Mysteries’, 256–257.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Tertullian, Bapt. 8.17–25; Cyprian of Carthage, Unit. eccl. 6; Ep. 69.2; 74.11; 75.15; Augustine, Serm. 264.5; Catech. 20.32, 34; cf. Justin Martyr, Dial. 138.2–3; see Jensen, Living Water, 267–269. Ap. JohnBG 72.14–73.12 (= NHC III 37.16–38.5; NHC II 28.34–29.12; NHC IV 44.22–45.9) also equates Noah’s Ark with the Ark of the Covenant, making it the place of salvation for ‘the immoveable race’ (ⲧⲅⲉⲛⲉⲁ ⲉⲧⲉⲙⲁⲥⲕⲓⲙ), where the Flood is the work of the chief Archon.

Tertullian, Bapt. 8.17–25; Cyprian of Carthage, Unit. eccl. 6; Ep. 69.2; 74.11; 75.15; Augustine, Serm. 264.5; Catech. 20.32, 34; cf. Justin Martyr, Dial. 138.2–3; see Jensen, Living Water, 267–269. Ap. John BG 72.14–73.12 (= NHC III 37.16–38.5; NHC II 28.34–29.12; NHC IV 44.22–45.9) also equates Noah’s Ark with the Ark of the Covenant, making it the place of salvation for ‘the immoveable race’ (ⲧⲅⲉⲛⲉⲁ ⲉⲧⲉⲙⲁⲥⲕⲓⲙ), where the Flood is the work of the chief Archon.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Cf. Origen, Comm. Jo. 10.210–215; Origen describes the Valentinian Heracleon’s interpretation of John 2:13–16 in the following words: ‘he considers the holy of holies to be the temple, which the high priest alone may enter. He says, I think, that the pneumatics advance to that place. The forecourt of the temple, where the Levites too are found, he considers to be a symbol of the psychics who attain salvation outside the pleroma’ (trans. Heine, Commentary on the Gospel according to John, 302).

Cf. Origen, Comm. Jo. 10.210–215; Origen describes the Valentinian Heracleon’s interpretation of John 2:13–16 in the following words: ‘he considers the holy of holies to be the temple, which the high priest alone may enter. He says, I think, that the pneumatics advance to that place. The forecourt of the temple, where the Levites too are found, he considers to be a symbol of the psychics who attain salvation outside the pleroma’ (trans. Heine, Commentary on the Gospel according to John, 302).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Segelberg, ‘The Antiochene Background’; Isenberg and Layton, ‘The Gospel According to Philip’, 134; Siker, ‘Gnostic Views’, 288; Thomassen, Spiritual Seed, 350; Iricinschi, ‘If You Got It, Flaunt It’, 256–261; Schmid, Die Eucharistie ist Jesus, 14; cf. Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures, 325; Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 5, who prefer Edessa.

Segelberg, ‘The Antiochene Background’; Isenberg and Layton, ‘The Gospel According to Philip’, 134; Siker, ‘Gnostic Views’, 288; Thomassen, Spiritual Seed, 350; Iricinschi, ‘If You Got It, Flaunt It’, 256–261; Schmid, Die Eucharistie ist Jesus, 14; cf. Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures, 325; Schenke, Das Philippus-Evangelium, 5, who prefer Edessa.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Siker, ‘Gnostic Views’, 288.

Siker, ‘Gnostic Views’, 288.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 357–358.

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 357–358.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Isenberg and Layton, ‘The Gospel According to Philip’, 134; van Os, ‘Was the Gospel of Philip Written in Syria?’, 88; Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 361–362.

Isenberg and Layton, ‘The Gospel According to Philip’, 134; van Os, ‘Was the Gospel of Philip Written in Syria?’, 88; Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 361–362.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Thomassen, Spiritual Seed, 398–401; Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 359–361.

Thomassen, Spiritual Seed, 398–401; Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 359–361.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Bradshaw, ‘Baptismal Practice’, 92–98; Johnson, Liturgy in Early Christian Egypt, 15.

Bradshaw, ‘Baptismal Practice’, 92–98; Johnson, Liturgy in Early Christian Egypt, 15.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Thomassen, Spiritual Seed, 400–401.

Thomassen, Spiritual Seed, 400–401.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 360–361.

Lundhaug, Images of Rebirth, 360–361.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

Ibid., 392.