Editing Yaldabaoth

{{Short description|Malevolent creator in Gnosticism}}
[[File:Lion-faced deity.jpg|thumb|A lion-faced, [[Snakes in mythology|serpentine]] [[deity]] found on a Gnostic gem in [[Bernard de Montfaucon]]'s ''L'antiquité expliquée et représentée en figures'', a depiction of Yaldabaoth.]]
{{Gnosticism}}

'''Yaldabaoth''', otherwise known as '''Jaldabaoth''' or '''Ialdabaoth'''{{Efn|Spelling differs based on assumptions of the name deriving from a [[Semitic language]] in which the first letter represents a [[Yodh]] and should encode a voiced palatal approximant sound ([[International Phonetic Alphabet|IPA]]: {{IPAblink|j|audio=Palatal approximant.ogg}}); German-speaking scholars (such as [[Gershom Scholem|Scholem]] and {{Ill|Alfred Adam (theologian)|lt=Adam|de}}) favoured the spelling of "Jaldabaoth" based on German orthography even when writing in English, while English-speaking authors more commonly use "Yaldabaoth".}} ({{IPAc-en|ˌ|j|ɑː|l|d|ə|ˈ|b|eɪ|ɒ|θ}};  {{langx|grc-x-koine|Ιαλδαβαώθ|translit=Ialdabaóth}}; {{langx|la|Ialdabaoth}};<ref>{{Cite book |last=Bullard |first=Roger |url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/913095002 |title=Hypostasis of the Archons. |date=1970 |publisher=De Gruyter |isbn=3-11-085235-7 |pages=34 |oclc=913095002}}</ref> {{langx|cop|ⲒⲀⲖⲦⲀⲂⲀⲰⲐ|translit=}} ''Ialtabaôth''), is a [[Dystheism|malevolent God]] and [[demiurge]] (creator of the material world) according to various [[Gnosticism|Gnostic sects]], represented sometimes as a [[Zoomorphism|theriomorphic]], lion-headed [[Snakes in mythology|serpent]].<ref name="Litwa 2016">{{cite book |author-last=Litwa |author-first=M. David |title=Desiring Divinity: Self-deification in Early Jewish and Christian Mythmaking |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2016 |isbn=9780199967728 |location=Oxford and New York |pages=47–65 |chapter=Part I: The Self-deifying Rebel – 'I Am God and There is No Other!': The Boast of Yaldabaoth |doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190467166.003.0004 |lccn=2015051032 |oclc=966607824 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HwcBDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA47 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240929180154/https://books.google.pl/books?id=HwcBDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA47&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false |archive-date=2024-09-29 |url-status=live |orig-date=2015}}</ref><ref name="Fischer-Mueller 1990">{{cite journal |last=Fischer-Mueller |first=E. Aydeet |date=January 1990 |title=Yaldabaoth: The Gnostic Female Principle in Its Fallenness |journal=[[Novum Testamentum]] |volume=32 |issue=1 |publisher=[[Brill Publishers]] |location=[[Leiden]] and [[Boston]] |pages=79–95 |doi=10.1163/156853690X00205 |eissn=1568-5365 |issn=0048-1009 |jstor=1560677}}</ref><ref name="Arendzen4">{{Catholic Encyclopedia |wstitle=Demiurge |volume=4 |first=John Peter |last=Arendzen}}</ref> He is identified as a [[false god]] who keeps souls trapped in physical bodies, imprisoned in the material universe.<ref name="Litwa 2016"/><ref name="Fischer-Mueller 1990"/><ref name="Arendzen4"/>

== Etymology ==
The etymology of the name ''Yaldabaoth'' has been subject to many speculative theories. Until 1974, etymologies deriving from the unattested [[Aramaic]]: בהותא, <small>romanized:</small> ''bāhūṯā'', supposedly meaning "[[Chaos (cosmogony)|chaos]]", represented the majority opinion. After an analysis by the Jewish historian of religion [[Gershom Scholem]] published in 1974,<ref name="Scholem 1974">{{cite journal |author-last=Scholem |author-first=Gershom |author-link=Gershom Scholem |year=1974 |title=Jaldabaoth Reconsidered |url=https://www.academia.edu/44508763 |journal=Mélanges d'histoire des religions offerts à Henri-Charles Puech |location=[[Paris]] |publisher=[[Collège de France]]/Presses Universitaires de France |pages=405–421 |via=[[Academia.edu]]}}</ref> this etymology no longer enjoyed any notable endorsement. His analysis showed the unattested Aramaic term to have been fabulated and attested only in a single corrupted text from 1859, with its listed translation having been transposed from the reading of an earlier etymology, whose explanation seemingly equated "[[darkness]]" and "chaos" when translating an unattested supposed plural form of {{Langx|he|בוהו|translit=bōhu|lit=}}.<ref name="Scholem 1974"/><ref name="Black 1983">{{cite book |author-last=Black |author-first=Matthew |title=The New Testament and Gnosis: Essays in honour of Robert McL. Wilson |year=1983 |chapter=An Aramaic Etymology for Jaldabaoth? |chapter-url=http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781474266277.ch-005 |location=London and New York |publisher=[[Bloomsbury Academic]] |pages=69–72 |doi=10.5040/9781474266277.ch-005 |isbn=978-1-4742-6627-7}}</ref>

The first etymology was advanced in 1575 by [[François Feuardent|Feuardentius]], supposedly translating it from [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]] to mean {{Langx|la|a patribus genitus|lit=the child of fathers}}.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Irenaeus |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9hhGAAAAcAAJ&dq=%22patribus+genitus%22&pg=PA230 |title=Adversus haereses |date=1857 |publisher=Typis Academicis |editor-last=Harvey |editor-first=William Wigan |volume=V |pages=230 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Scholem |first=Gershom |date=1974 |title=Jaldabaoth Reconsidered |url=https://www.academia.edu/44508763 |journal=Melanges de'histoire des religions offerts a Henri-Charles Puech |location=Paris |publisher=Presses Universitaires de France |pages=407 |quote=[...] Franciscus Feuardentius, the editor of the 1575 edition of Irenaeus, who explained Jaldabaoth as identical with Jaldaboth "The child of the fathers" (a patribus genius) which certainly does not make sense, since Jaldabaoth has no line of several forefathers, but only an andro-gynous mother, the Sophia.}}</ref> A theory proposed by [[Jacques Matter|Matter]] in 1828 identified the name as descending from {{Langx|he|ילדא|lit=child|translit=yāldā}} and from {{Langx|he|בהות|translit=bahot}}, a supposed plural form of {{Langx|he|בוהו|translit=bōhu|lit=emptiness, darkness}}. Matter however interpreted it to mean 'chaos', thus translating ''Yaldaboath'' as "child of darkness [...] an element of chaos".<ref name="Matter">{{cite book |last=Matter |first=Jacques |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KXgPAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA198 |title=Histoire critique du Gnosticisime, et De son influence sur les Sectes religieuses et philosophiques des six premiers siècles de l'ère chrétienne |publisher=F. G. Levrault |year=1828 |isbn=9780274873562 |edition=2nd |volume=2 |location=[[Strasbourg]] |page=198 |language=fr |quote=1. ילדא בהות, ''fils des ténébres''; בהות, pluriel de בוהו; les fils de [[Sophia (Gnosticism)|Sophia]] avait, en effet, un élément de [[Chaos (cosmogony)|chaos]]; il devait être analogue à la matière qu'il était appelé à former.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Scholem |first=Gershom |date=1974 |title=Jaldabaoth Reconsidered |url=https://www.academia.edu/44508763 |journal=Melanges de'histoire des religions offerts a Henri-Charles Puech |location=Paris |publisher=Presses Universitaires de France |quote=Matter was careful enough to speak only of an element of chaos in Jaldabaoth's nature, for which some justification could be made out of [[Irenaeus]]' description of the vicissitudes of his mother Sophia. But he cared little about philological exactness. The Hebrew ''bohu'' admits of no plural, no less than the Phoenician equivalent βααυ mentioned by [[Philo of Byblos]].}}</ref> 

This etymology was popular due to its perceived literary merits.{{Efn|For example it was repeated in 1831 in a textbook by [[Johann Karl Ludwig Gieseler|Gieseler]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Gieseler |first=Johann Karl Ludwig |title=Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte |publisher=Adolph Marcus |year=1831 |edition=3rd |volume=I |location=Bonn |pages=157 |language=de}}</ref>}} It inspired [[Adolf Bernhard Christoph Hilgenfeld|Adolf Hilgenfeld]] to keep Matter's proposed 'chaos' translation, while fabulating a more plausible sounding, but unattested second noun: [[Aramaic]]: בהותא, <small>romanized:</small> ''bāhūthā'', deriving the name from [[Aramaic]]: ילדא בהותא, <small>romanized:</small> ''yaldā bāhūthā''  supposedly meaning <small>'</small>child of chaos' in 1884. This became the late 19th, early 20th-century majority opinion, which was endorsed by [[Hans-Martin Schenke|Schenke]], [[:de:Alexander Böhlig|Böhlig]], and [[Pahor Labib|Labib]]. The latter two also cited a supposed attestation for [[Aramaic]]: בהותא, <small>romanized:</small> ''bāhūthā'', <small>[[Literal translation|lit]].</small> 'chaos'.{{Efn|Which they thought to be cognate with {{Langx|he|בוהו|translit=bōhu}}.}}<ref name="Black-1983">{{Citation |last=Black |first=Matthew |title=The New Testament and Gnosis : Essays in honour of RobertMcL.Wilson |chapter=An Aramaic Etymology for Jaldabaoth? |chapter-url=http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781474266277.ch-005 |year=1983 |pages=69–72 |publisher=Bloomsbury Academic |doi=10.5040/9781474266277.ch-005 |isbn=978-1-4742-6627-7 |access-date=2023-01-19}}</ref> This supposed attestation stemmed from a [[Targum]] and was merely a corrupted reading of [[Aramaic]]: כהותא, <small>romanized:</small> ''kāhūthā'', <small>[[Literal translation|lit]].</small> 'strife' published in a 1859 Bible. This pseudo-variant was translated in [[Joseph Jastrow|Jastrow]]'s popular Aramaic dictionary as 'confusion'.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Jastrow |first=Marcus |url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:A_Dictionary_of_the_Targumim,_the_Talmud_Babli_and_Yerushalmi,_and_the_Midrashic_Literature,_Volume_1_(1903).djvu/159 |title=A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature |date=1903 |publisher=W.C.: LUZAC & Co.; G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS |isbn= |location=London, New York |pages=142 |oclc= |quote=בהותא‎ ‎f. (בהי) confusion. Targ. Prov. XXVI, 21 ed. Wil. (Ms. ‎בחותא; oth. ed. ‎כהותא).}}</ref>

Helped by these events, Hilgenfeld's etymology remained the majority opinion until a 1974 analysis by [[Gershom Scholem|Scholem]] explained its origin. Consequently most scholars retracted their endorsement (for example [[Gilles Quispel]] did so by lamenting humorously that due its literary merits he believes the originator of the name Yaldabaoth had made the same erroneous association between baoth and tohuwabohu as the former majority opinion).<ref> {{Citation |last=Quispel |first=Gilles |title=The Demiurge in the Apocryphon of John |date=1978-07-27 |url=https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789004437197/BP000002.xml |work=Nag Hammadi and Gnosis |pages=22 |editor-last=Wilson |publisher=BRILL |doi=10.1163/9789004437197_002 |isbn=978-90-04-43719-7 |quote=Gershom Scholem, the third genius in this field, more specifically the genius of precision, has taught us that some of us were wrong when they believed that Jaldabaoth means "son of chaos", because the Aramaic word ''bahutha'' in the sense of chaos only existed in the imagination of the author of a well-known dictionary. This is a pity because this name would suit the demiurge risen from chaos to a nicety. And perhaps the author of the "Untitled Document" did not know Aramaic and also supposed as we did once, that baoth had something to do with ''tohuwabohu'', one of the few Hebrew words that everybody knows. |access-date=2023-01-19|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Additionally, Scholem argued that based on the earliest textual data, which termed Yaldabaoth "the King of Chaos", he was the progenitor of chaos, not its progeny.<ref name="Scholem-1974" />

Scholem's own theory rendered the name as ''Yald' Abaoth.'' ''Yald''' being [[Aramaic]]: ילדא, <small>romanized</small>: ''yaldā''{{Efn|With its final vowel functioning like a [[Liaison (French)|liaison]].}} but translated as 'begetter', not 'child' and ''Abaoth'' being a term attested in [[Magic (supernatural)|magic]] texts, descending from {{Langx|he|צבאות|lit=[[Sabaoth]], armies|translit=Tzevaot}}, one of the [[names of God in Judaism]]. Thus he rendered ''Yald' Abaoth'' as 'begetter of Sabaoth'.<ref name="Scholem-1974">{{Cite journal |last=Scholem |first=Gershom |date=1974 |title=Jaldabaoth Reconsidered |url=https://www.academia.edu/44508763 |journal=Melanges d'histoire des religions offerts a Henri-Charles Piiech |location=Paris |publisher=Presses Universitaires de France |pages=405–421}}</ref> [[Matthew Black|Black]] objects to this, because Sabaoth is the name of [[Sabaoth (Gnosticism)|one of Yaldaboth's sons]] in some Gnostic texts. Instead he suggests the second noun to be [[Judeo-Aramaic languages|Jewish Aramaic]]: בהתייה, <small>romanized</small>: ''behūṯā'', <small>[[Literal translation|lit]].</small> 'shame'. Which is cognate with {{Langx|he|בושה|translit=bōšeṯ}}, a term used to replace the name [[Baal|Ba'al]] in the [[Hebrew Bible]]. Thus Blacks' proposal renders [[Aramaic]]: ילדא בהתייה, <small>romanized</small>: ''yaldā'' ''behūṯā'', <small>[[Literal translation|lit]].</small> 'son of shame/[[Baal|Ba'al]]'.<ref name="Black-1983" /> 

In his proposed 1967 etymology [[:de:Alfred Adam (Theologe)|Alfred Adam]] already diverged from the then majority opinion and translated [[Aramaic]]: ילדא, <small>romanized</small>: ''yaldā'' similarly to Scholem, as {{Langx|de|Erzeugung|lit=bringing forth}}. He believed the name's second part to derive from {{Langx|syr|ܐܒܗܘܬܗ‏|lit=fatherhood|translit=ˀabbāhūṯā}}. This he interpreted however to describe more broadly 'the power of generation'; thus suggesting the name to mean 'the bringing forth of the power of generation'.<ref>{{Citation |title=Ist die Gnosis in aramäischen Weisheitsschulen entstanden? |date=1967-01-01 |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/9789004378032_020 |work=The Origins of Gnosticism / Le origini dello gnosticismo |pages=291–301 |publisher=BRILL |doi=10.1163/9789004378032_020 |isbn=9789004378032 |access-date=2023-01-19 |last1=Adam |first1=A. |url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref name="Black-1983" />

== Historical origins ==
{{Multiple image
| image1            = Greco-Roman Set.jpg
| caption1          = The donkey-headed [[Set (deity)|Seth]] depicted in the [[Greek Magical Papyri]]
| total_width       = 300
| caption2          = [[Alexamenos graffito|Alexamenos]] graffito depicting a crucified Jesus as a donkey-headed god
| image2            = AlexGraffito.svg
}}
After the [[Assyrian conquest of Egypt]] during the 7th century BCE, Seth was considered an evil deity by the Egyptians and not commonly worshipped, in large part due to his role as the god of foreigners.<ref>{{Cite book |last=te Velde |first=Herman |url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/65030234 |title=Seth, God of Confusion: A Study of his Role in Egyptian Mythology and Religion |date=1967 |publisher=Brill |isbn=978-90-04-05402-8 |series=Probleme der Ägyptologie |volume=XI |pages=139–140 |oclc=65030234 |quote=In the course of the last millennium B.C. the Egyptians experienced disagreeable contacts with Asiatics. Around 670 B.C. the Assyrians conquered Egypt: Esarhaddon burned Memphis and Ashurbanipal plundered Thebes. The Egyptian sources are taciturn as to these humiliations, but it is probable that at this time the former self-assured goodwill of the Egyptians broke down and turned to hatred of foreigners, with desolating effects for the cult of Seth. In the 26th dynasty a certain Neshor calls upon his gods to be gracious, "as you have saved me from the distress of soldiers, Syrians, Greeks, Asiatics and others." This is very different from the interested and superior attitude of the Egyptians towards foreigners in the [New Kingdom]. Texts and images referring to Seth are scarce after the 20th dynasty, compared with the time before. After the Assyrian period there are hardly any indications of Seth-worship. It would seem that after the conquest of Egypt by foreigners, particularly Assyrians and Persians, the Egyptians in general no longer believed that positive forces for the maintenance of the cosmos might be drawn from the divine foreigner[...].}}</ref> From at least 200 BCE onward, a tradition developed in the Graeco-Egyptian [[Ptolemaic Kingdom]] which identified [[Yahweh]], the God of the Jews, with the [[Ancient Egyptian religion|Egyptian god]] [[Set (deity)|Seth]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=We see this tradition recounted by several writers. Around 200 BCE, a man called Mnaseas (an Alexandrian originally from what is now southern Turkey), told a story of an Idumean (southern Palestinian) who entered the Judean temple and tore off the golden head of a pack ass from the inner sanctuary. This head was evidently attached to a body, whether human or donkey. The reader would have understood that the Jews (secretly) worshiped Yahweh as a donkey in the Jerusalem temple, since gold was characteristically used for cult statues of gods. Egyptians knew only one other deity in ass-like form: Seth.}}</ref> Diverging from previous [[Set animal|zoologically multiplicitous depictions]], Seth's appearance during the Hellenistic period onwards was depicted as resembling a man with a donkey's head.<ref>{{Cite book |last=te Velde |first=Herman |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/9789004676688 |title=Seth, God of Confusion |publisher=Brill |year=1977 |isbn=90-04-05402-2 |editor-last=Helck |editor-first=Wolfgang |series=Probleme der Ägyptologie |volume=VI |location=Leiden |pages=14–15 |doi=10.1163/9789004676688 |translator-last=van Baaren-Pape |translator-first=Gertrude Echtgenote |quote=Since the above was written, there has appeared an important article by B. H. Stricker, ''Asinarii I, OMRO NR'' 46 (1965), p. 52-75. In Stricker's opinion there can be no reasonable doubt that the Seth-animal represents an ass. Apart from the late data of the Graeco-Roman period, his arguments are the unusual script of the word ꜥꜣ (ass) with the Seth-animal as determinative, already mentioned above, and Daressy's description of the šꜣ-animal on the sarcophagus of Nesamon as having an ass's head: G. Daressy, ''L'animal séthien à tête d'âne, ASAE'' 20 (1920), p. 165-166. These arguments only prove, it seems to me, that the ass was one of the Typhonic animals, as the pig was for instance. From the fact that the šꜣ-animal may have a pig as determinative, while šꜣ is indeed a common word for pig, I conclude that the pig, like the ass, is a Typhonic animal. On the socle Behague the Seth-animal or šꜣ-animal has a jackal as determinative (A. Klasens, ''A magical statue base (socle Behague) in the Museum of Antiquities at Leiden'', Leiden, 1952, (= ''OMRO NR'' 33), p. 41, h 14). The Seth-animal does not seem to be exclusively an ass, but a mythical animal that if necessary or desired can be connected with various zoologically definable animals. In Graeco-Roman times there is a reluctance, connected with the ending of the official cult of Seth, to depict this mythological animal itself. The earlier multiplicity of approach with zoologically definable animals is also restricted, and the Seth-animal is unilaterally replaced by the ass. Yet the author of the ''Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden'' XIX, 27 still knows "the griffin in whose hand is Osiris" (F. L. Griffiths and H. Thompson, ''The demotic Magical Papyrus of London and Leiden'', I, London 1904, p. 127). The tradition, therefore, that the Seth-animal was not merely an ass but a mythical animal, was carried on until the end.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=Important for our purposes, Seth was frequently described as having the form or skin of a donkey. From ancient times, he appeared in Egyptian art as a human figure with the head (or mask) of a creature showing long, cropped ears and a drooping snout. The Greeks, at least, identified this creature with a donkey, and the donkey was portrayed—along with the pig—as Seth’s sacred animal}}</ref> The Greek practice of [[interpretatio graeca]], ascribing the gods of another people's pantheon to corresponding ones in one's own, had been adopted by the Egyptians after their [[Hellenization|Hellenisation]]; during the process of which they had identified Seth with [[Typhon]], a snake-monster, which roars like a lion.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=Since the fifth century BCE (and probably earlier), there was a Greek cultural practice of identifying foreign gods now dubbed ''[[interpretatio Graeca]]''. In short, Greeks would identify two different gods from two different cultures based on shared traits. For instance, the Egyptian god Thoth was identified with the Greek Hermes because both were considered clever. [...] When it came to Seth, the Greeks had long identified him with Typhon, lord of chaos. Typhon was more of a monster than a god. [...] Another Greek poet described him as “enemy of gods.[...] Hellenized Egyptians capitalized on this cultural practice of translation by viewing the Jewish god Yahweh as a form of Seth.}}</ref> 

The story of [[the Exodus]], featured in the [[Hebrew Bible]], speaks of the Jews as a nation betrayed and subjugated by the [[Pharaohs in the Bible#In_the_Book_of_Exodus|Pharaoh]], for whom Yahweh subjects Egyptians to [[Plagues of Egypt|ten plagues]] — destroying their country, defiling the [[Nile]], and killing all their first-born sons. Jewish migration within the Hellenised Ptolemaic Kingdom to Greek-speaking Egyptian cities such as [[Alexandria]] led to the creation of the [[Septuagint]], a translation of the Hebrew Bible into [[Koine Greek]].<ref name="Ross2021">{{cite web |last=Ross |first=William A. |date=15 November 2021 |title=The Most Important Bible Translation You've Never Heard Of |url=https://textandcanon.org/the-most-important-bible-translation-youve-never-heard-of/ |access-date=25 December 2022 |work=Articles |publisher=Text & Canon Institute of the [[Phoenix Seminary]] |location=Scottsdale, Arizona}}</ref> Furthermore, the story of the Exodus was [[Theatrical adaptation|adapted]] by [[Ezekiel the Tragedian]] into the {{Langx|grc|ἐξαγωγή|translit=Exagōgḗ}}, a Greek play performed in Alexandria and seen by Egyptians and Jews. Egyptian receptions of the Exodus story were widely negative, because it insulted their gods and praised their suffering. Thus it inspired Egyptian works retelling the story, but changing its details to mock the Jews and exalt Egypt and its gods.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=The case of Ezekiel is important because he adapted the story for the stage. Theater was enjoyed, not just by Jews, but by Egyptians, Greeks, and by the many peoples of mixed cultural heritage in Egypt. If Ezekiel’s play was staged (as its form indicates), it was probably presented to a wide audience.[...] Egyptian priests, including famous historians like Manetho and Chaeremon, would have been horrified by the Exodus myth’s rhetorical violence wielded against Egypt, its people, and its gods. The Egyptian gods were depicted as powerless to defend themselves against the relentless attacks of a foreign deity, a being who showed open favoritism to his own people while unleashing the equivalent of biological warfare against the Egyptian populace. Beginning in the first century BCE, Hellenized Egyptian literati punched back to refute and reverse elements of the Exodus story using the resources of their own millennia-long cultural memory. In their retellings, the Egyptians were not plagued; it was the Hebrews who were afflicted with leprosy and boils. Instead of the Egyptians drowned in the Red Sea, it was the Hebrews drowned in lakes on leaden rafts. Instead of the Hebrews bursting out of Egypt weighted with gold, they were disgorged into the desert—the realm of Seth—and left there to wander with nothing. The flight of a liberated people was retooled as an expulsion of a diseased and doomed tribe.}}</ref>

In this context some Egyptians discerned similarities between Yahweh's in-narrative actions and attributes and those of Seth (such as being associated with foreigners, deserts, and storms), in addition to a phonetic resemblance between {{Langx|grc-x-koine|Ἰαω|lit=|translit=Iaō}}, Yahweh's name as used by [[Hellenistic Judaism|hellenised Jews]], and {{Langx|cop|ⲓⲱ|lit=donkey|translit=Iō}}, then considered as the animal of Seth.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=From the Greco-Egyptian perspective, Yahweh and Seth shared several traits: they were both gods of foreigners, of the desert, and of frightening storms. They both sent calamities. Indeed, Egyptians could not help but notice that some of the plagues unleashed by Yahweh resembled disasters customarily inflicted by Seth: darkness, eclipse, and pestilence. Red was the distinctive hue of Seth, and Yahweh turned the Nile crimson before ordering the Hebrews to paint their lintels with blood. Mount Sinai, the desert crag from which Yahweh revealed his Law, quaked as it was enveloped in thunder, lightning, and fire—all phenomena associated with Seth. Finally, the Greek word for Yahweh (Iaō)—with a perverse twist of the tongue—sounded like the native Egyptian word for donkey (eiō or simply iō). These factors, even if judged artificial today, were more than enough for Hellenized Egyptians to portray Yahweh as a form of Seth.}}</ref> From this arose a popular response to the Jewish accusation that Egyptians were merely worshipping beasts, namely that, in truth, the Jews themselves worshipped a beast, a donkey or a donkey-headed man, ie Seth.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=For centuries, Jews had scorned the religion of Egypt as the worship of dumb beasts. One way for learned Egyptians to fight back was to depict the Jewish deity as himself the most vile and ridiculous beast. If Yahweh was a form of Seth, then he could be portrayed in Seth’s ass-like shape. Thus there arose the tradition that the Jews (secretly) worshiped Yahweh as a donkey or as a man standing upright with an ass’s head.}}</ref>

Accusations of [[onolatry]] against the Jews, spread from the Egyptian milieu, with its understanding of the donkey's Seth-related importance, to the rest of the [[Greco-Roman world|Graeco-Roman]] world, which was largely ignorant of this context. In the most famous variations of narratives alleging Jewish onolatry [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]], a [[Seleucid Empire|Seleucid]] king famous for raiding the [[Temple in Jerusalem|Jerusalem Temple]], supposedly discovered that its [[Holy of Holies|Holiest of Holies]] was not empty, but instead contained a donkey idol, and Tacitus (early second century CE) claimed that the Jews dedicated in their holiest shrine a statue of a wild ass.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=Over a hundred years later, two respected scholars [...] passed on a tradition that the Jews venerated their deity in the form of a golden donkey head. According to their versions (whose differences we cannot precisely discern), it was the Macedonian king—archenemy of the Jews—Antiochus IV Epiphanes who discovered the donkey head when he ransacked the Jewish temple around 167 BCE. [...] Variants of this story fusing the form of Seth and Yahweh spread like a cancer. [...] Tacitus, who wrote (early in the second century CE) that the Jews dedicated in their holiest shrine a statue of a wild ass. We gather that the tradition of the Jews (secretly) worshiping their god in donkey form was widely known by the early second century CE. Whoever originally invented the tales of the statue(s) was probably a person of Egyptian cultural heritage attempting to depict Yahweh as a form of Seth. But the image had gone viral and could be learned in Syria, Rhodes, Greece, Egypt, Rome—and evidently the places in between.}}</ref>{{Efn|A Gnostic reception of this account can be found in the [[Phibionite]] text ''Birth of Mary'' in it Zechariah son of Berachiah, father of [[John the Baptist]], enters the Holiest of Holies as a pious priest but to his surprise finds a being in the form of donkey there. He runs out from the temple and wants to shout to crowd whom they had been worshipping, but cannot as the donkey deity froze his tongue. Despite the donkey god's best efforts to keep Zechariah silent he eventually manages to address the crowd, revealing their god to be shaped like a donkey. In response to which they kill him on the steps of the temple.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=As in Luke, Zechariah entered the temple, beheld a vision, and was made dumb. As he was releasing a cloud of incense from his censor, he beheld, to his surprise, a person standing in the Holy of Holies. This mysterious being lurking in the smoke was no Gabriel, however, but a being with the face or form of a donkey (onou morphēn). This was the creature who silently—and secretly—received the devoted worship of the Jewish people. The stunned Zechariah stormed out of the temple intending to shout to the bystanders: “Woe to you! Whom are you worshiping?!” He would have done so, had not the ass deity—much like Gabriel—stopped up his mouth. But the powers of the donkey god were evidently frail, because Zechariah managed to soften his stony tongue and relate to the Jews the horror he beheld inside. The people were aghast—not (or not only) to learn of the perverse shape of their deity—but that Zechariah the high priest would say things so disturbing as to strike at the root of their religious worship. And so—as if Zechariah himself were some sacrificial bull or goat—they cut him down then and there at the foot of the temple altar}}</ref>}} After the emergence of [[Christianity]] the same charge was also repeated against its devotees. Most famously so in the earliest known depiction of the [[crucifixion of Jesus]], the [[Alexamenos graffito]], where a Christian by the name of Alexamenos is shown worshipping a donkey-headed crucified god.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=an unknown graffiti artist carved into the plaster of a palace chamber in Rome a donkey-headed deity dangling from a cross (see Figure 1.3). At the foot of the cross stands a stumpy, loutish figure with hand raised in adoration. The caption, written in Greek, reads: “Alexamenos worships god.” Alexamenos—a slavish buffoon given his posture and dress—is evidently a Christian worshiping the crucified Christ. It just so happens that Christ has the head of an ass. [...] It is possible that a Roman slave or schoolboy who worked in the palace was familiar with a being like Onocoetes, a Christian amulet, or the donkey worship mentioned by Minucius. It is also possible, however, that whoever scratched the crucified donkey into the plaster was familiar with alternative Christian traditions that portrayed the creator or one of his minions as a donkey-headed demon. He would then be invoking the idea of “like father, like son”: donkey-headed father god gives birth to donkey-headed son (Jesus).}}</ref><ref name="Viladesau">{{cite book |last=Viladesau |first=Richard |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3FRi1eU4BYEC&q=alexamenos&pg=PA46 |title=The Word in and Out of Season |publisher=Paulist Press |year=1992 |isbn=978-0-8091-3626-1 |page=46}}</ref>

According to Litwa, this tradition forms the basis for the development of [[Gnosticism|Gnostic]] beliefs about Yaldabaoth.{{Efn|Accordingly, the [[Borborites|Phibionites]] believed Yaldabaoth to have a donkey-like appearance.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=Sabaoth, sometimes identified with Yaldabaoth, was identical to the Judean creator. After the souls of the redeemed depart from this world, they make their way past every ruler. The last and most difficult ruler to evade is the creator, who cannot be passed apart from the attainment of full knowledge (gnosis). These Christians believed that Sabaoth had either the shape of a donkey or of a pig.}}</ref> The [[Apocryphon of John|Secret Book of John]] describes Yaldabaoth as a shape-shifting Typhon-like being, looking like a snake with a lion's head, but whose donkey-headed child Eloaios gives witness to his other more donkey-like forms.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=One copy of the shorter version of the Secret Book reports that the chief creator Yaldabaoth “had the face of a snake and the face of a lion.” In the longer version, he is described as “a lion-faced serpent.”91 These traits were reminiscent of Seth-Typhon’s snake heads and lionlike roar—not to mention his eyes, “flashing like fires of lightning.[...] When it comes to donkey features, however, one must attend to Yaldabaoth’s offspring. These include the seven planetary rulers. The second of these, called Eloaios, had the face of a donkey. In one manuscript, Eloaios’s donkey face is explicitly called “the face of Typhon.” The notion of “like father, like son” seems to be implied. Eloaios activated the typhonic potential embedded in the chief creator, Yaldabaoth. “Evidence for this view is Yaldabaoth’s shape-shifting character. As a being expressing chaos, he had a “crowd of faces”—innumerable appearances that he could manifest at will. Whenever he desired, apparently, Yaldabaoth could manifest donkey features. Eloaios was the child of the creator, and his donkey visage realized one of Yaldabaoth’s many forms.”}}</ref>}}<ref>{{Cite book |last=Litwa |first=M. David |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1243261365 |title=The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea |date=2021 |isbn=978-0-19-756643-5 |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter=The Donkey Deity |oclc=1243261365 |quote=Seth-Yahweh was a donkey-shaped god of evil established in pre-Christian cultural memory and adapted by alternative Christian groups to express a hostility toward the Judean creator that had been voiced for centuries. This means that so-called Phibionite, Sethian, and Ophite Christians did not have to invent Yahweh as an evil character out of whole cloth. The wicked creator was already available, and his symbolic value was cashed out in new mythmaking practices that could be aimed not (or not only) at Jews but also at other Christian opponents who had adopted the Jewish creator as their chief deity.}}</ref>

== Role in Gnosticism ==
{{Main|Gnosticism}}
{{Further|Diversity in early Christian theology|Gnostic texts}}

[[Gnosticism]] originated during the late 1st century CE in non-rabbinical [[Judaism|Jewish]] and [[Early Christianity|early Christian]] sects.<ref name="Magris 2005">{{cite encyclopedia |last=Magris |first=Aldo |year=2005 |title=Gnosticism: Gnosticism from its origins to the Middle Ages (further considerations) |editor-last=Jones |editor-first=Lindsay |encyclopedia=Macmillan Encyclopedia of Religion |edition=2nd |location=[[New York City|New York]] |publisher=[[Macmillan Inc.]] |pages=3515–3516 |isbn=978-0028657332 |oclc=56057973}}</ref> In the [[History of early Christianity|formation of Christianity]], various [[sectarian]] groups, labeled "gnostics" by their opponents, emphasised spiritual knowledge (''[[gnosis]]'') of the divine spark within, over [[faith]] (''pistis'') in the teachings and traditions of the various communities of Christians.<ref name="May 2008">{{cite book |author-last=May |author-first=Gerhard |title=The Cambridge History of Christianity, Volume 1: Origins to Constantine |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |year=2008 |isbn=9781139054836 |editor1-last=Mitchell |editor1-first=Margaret M. |editor1-link=Margaret M. Mitchell |location=[[Cambridge]] |pages=434–451, 452–456 |chapter=Part V: The Shaping of Christian Theology - Monotheism and creation |doi=10.1017/CHOL9780521812399.026 |editor2-last=Young |editor2-first=Frances M. |editor2-link=Frances Young |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6UTfmw_zStsC&pg=PA434 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240929180709/https://books.google.pl/books?id=6UTfmw_zStsC&pg=PA434&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false |archive-date=2024-09-29 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Ehrman 2005"/><ref name="Brakke 2010">{{cite book |last=Brakke |first=David |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3EQ1XwHg0o0C&pg=PA18 |title=The Gnostics: Myth, Ritual, and Diversity in Early Christianity |publisher=[[Harvard University Press]] |year=2010 |isbn=9780674066038 |location=[[Cambridge, Massachusetts]] |pages=18–51 |jstor=j.ctvjnrvhh.6 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240929180950/https://books.google.pl/books?id=3EQ1XwHg0o0C&pg=PA18&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false |archive-date=2024-09-29 |url-status=live |s2cid=169308502}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Layton |first=Bentley |author-link=Bentley Layton |title=Doctrinal Diversity: Varieties of Early Christianity |publisher=Garland Publishing, Inc |year=1999 |isbn=0-8153-3071-5 |editor-last=Ferguson |editor-first=Everett |editor-link=Everett Ferguson |series=Recent Studies in Early Christianity: A Collection of Scholarly Essays |location=[[New York City|New York]] and [[London]] |pages=106–123 |chapter=Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GC4vwTXJSaMC&pg=PA106 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240929181055/https://books.google.pl/books?id=GC4vwTXJSaMC&pg=PA106&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false |archive-date=2024-09-29 |url-status=live}}</ref> Gnosticism presents a distinction between the [[Monad (Gnosticism)|highest, unknowable God]], and the [[Demiurge#Gnosticism|Demiurge]], "creator" of the material universe.<ref name="May 2008"/><ref name="Ehrman 2005"/><ref name="Brakke 2010"/><ref name="Kvam 1999">{{cite book |title=Eve and Adam: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Readings on Genesis and Gender |publisher=[[Indiana University Press]] |year=1999 |isbn=9780253212719 |editor1-last=Kvam |editor1-first=Kristen E. |location=[[Bloomington, Indiana]] |pages=108–155 |chapter=Early Christian Interpretations (50–450 CE) |doi=10.2307/j.ctt2050vqm.8 |jstor=j.ctt2050vqm.8 |editor2-last=Schearing |editor2-first=Linda S. |editor3-last=Ziegler |editor3-first=Valarie H. |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Ux3bSDa2rHkC&pg=PA108 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240929181208/https://books.google.pl/books?id=Ux3bSDa2rHkC&pg=PA108&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false |archive-date=2024-09-29 |url-status=live}}</ref> Gnostics considered the most [[Essential property|essential]] part of the process of [[salvation]] to be this personal knowledge, in contrast to faith as an outlook in their [[Perspective (cognitive)|worldview]] along with faith in the [[Great Church|ecclesiastical authority]].<ref name="May 2008"/><ref name="Ehrman 2005"/><ref name="Brakke 2010"/><ref name="Kvam 1999"/>

In Gnosticism, the [[Serpent (Bible)|biblical serpent]] in the [[Garden of Eden]] was praised and thanked for bringing knowledge (''[[gnosis]]'') to Adam and Eve and thereby freeing them from the [[Dystheism|malevolent]] Demiurge's control.<ref name="Kvam 1999" /> Gnostic Christian doctrines rely on a [[dualistic cosmology]] that implies the eternal conflict between good and evil, and a conception of the serpent as the [[Salvation|liberating savior]] and bestower of knowledge to humankind opposed to the Demiurge or [[creator god]], identified with the Yahweh from the Hebrew Bible.<ref name="Kvam 1999" /><ref name="Ehrman 2005">{{cite book |last=Ehrman |first=Bart D. |author-link=Bart D. Ehrman |title=Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-19-518249-1 |location=[[Oxford]] |pages=113–134 |chapter=Christians "In The Know": The Worlds of Early Christian Gnosticism |doi=10.1017/s0009640700110273 |lccn=2003053097 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=URdACxKubDIC&pg=PA113 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240929180837/https://books.google.pl/books?id=URdACxKubDIC&pg=PA113&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false |archive-date=2024-09-29 |url-status=live |orig-year=2003 |s2cid=152458823}}</ref> Some Gnostic Christians (such as [[Marcionites]]) considered the Hebrew God of the Old Testament as the evil, [[false god]] and creator of the material universe, and the [[Monad (Gnosticism)|Unknown God]] of the [[Gospel]], the father of [[Jesus Christ]] and creator of the spiritual world, as the true, good God.<ref name="Kvam 1999"/><ref name="Ehrman 2005"/> In the [[Archontics|Archontic]], [[Sethianism|Sethian]], and [[Ophites|Ophite]] systems, Yaldabaoth is regarded as the malevolent Demiurge and false god of the Old Testament who generated the material universe and keeps the souls trapped in physical bodies, imprisoned in the world full of pain and suffering that he [[Creationism|created]].<ref name="Litwa 2016"/><ref name="Fischer-Mueller 1990"/><ref name="Arendzen4"/>

However, not all Gnostics regarded the creator of the material universe as inherently evil or malevolent.<ref name="EB1911">{{cite EB1911|wstitle=Valentinus and the Valentinians|author=Bousset, Wilhelm|author-link=Wilhelm Bousset|volume=27|pages=852-857|short=x}}</ref><ref name="Logan 2002">{{cite book |author-last=Logan |author-first=Alastair H. B. |title=The Early Christian World |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2002 |isbn=9781032199344 |editor-last=Esler |editor-first=Philip F. |edition=1st |series=Routledge Worlds |location=[[New York City|New York]] and [[London]] |pages=923–925 |chapter=Part IX: Internal Challenges – Gnosticism |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6fyCAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA923 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240929181514/https://books.google.com/books?id=6fyCAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA923&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false |archive-date=2024-09-29 |url-status=live |orig-date=2000}}</ref> For instance, [[Valentinianism|Valentinians]] believed that the Demiurge is merely an ignorant and incompetent creator, trying to fashion the world as well as he can, but lacking the proper power to maintain its goodness.<ref name="EB1911"/><ref name="Logan 2002"/> They were regarded as [[Heresy in Christianity|heretics]] by the [[Proto-orthodox Christianity|proto-orthodox]] [[Early Church Fathers]].<ref name="Kvam 1999"/><ref name="Ehrman 2005"/><ref name="Brakke 2010" />

Yaldabaoth is mentioned mainly in the Archontic, Sethian, and Ophite [[List of Gnostic texts|writings of Gnostic literature]],<ref name="Arendzen4"/> most of which have been discovered in the [[Nag Hammadi library]].<ref name="Litwa 2016"/><ref name="Fischer-Mueller 1990"/> In the [[Apocryphon of John]], "Yaldabaoth" is the first of three names of the domineering [[Archon (Gnosticism)|archon]], along with Saklas and [[Samael]]. In ''[[Pistis Sophia]]'' he has lost his claim to rulership and, in the depths of Chaos, together with 49 demons, tortures sacrilegious souls in a scorching hot torrent of pitch. Here he is a lion-faced archon, half flame, half darkness. Yaldabaoth appears as a rebellious [[angel]] both in the [[New Testament apocrypha|apocryphal]] [[Gospel of Judas]] and the Gnostic work ''[[Hypostasis of the Archons]]''. In some of these Gnostic texts, Yaldabaoth is further identified with the [[Ancient Roman religion|Ancient Roman god]] [[Saturn (mythology)|Saturnus]].<ref name="Arendzen4"/>

==Cosmogony and creation myths==
Yaldabaoth is the son of [[Sophia (Gnosticism)|Sophia]], the personification of wisdom according to Gnosticism, with whom he contends. By creatively becoming matter in goodness and simplicity, Sophia created the imperfect Yaldabaoth, who has no knowledge of the other aeons. From his mother he received the powers of light, but he used them for evil. Sophia rules the Ogdoas, the Demiurge rules the Hebdomas. Yaldabaoth created six more archons and other fellows.<ref>{{Catholic Encyclopedia |wstitle=Gnosticism |volume=6 |first=John Peter |last=Arendzen}}</ref> The angels he created rebelled against Yaldabaoth. To keep the angels in subjection, Yaldabaoth generated the material universe.

In the act of creation, however, Yaldabaoth emptied himself of his supreme power. When Yaldabaoth breathed the [[soul]] into the first man, [[Adam]], Sophia instilled in him the [[divine spark]] of the spirit. After matter, Yaldabaoth produced the serpent spirit (Ophiomorphos), which is the origin of all evil. The light being Sophia caused the [[fall of man]] through the serpent. By eating the [[forbidden fruit]], Adam and [[Eve]] became wise and rejected Yaldabaoth. Eventually, Yaldabaoth expelled them from the ethereal region, the [[Paradise]], as punishment.

Yaldabaoth continuously attempted to deprive human beings of the gift of the spark of light which he had unwittingly lost to them, or to keep them in bondage. As punishments, he tried to make humanity acknowledge him as God.<ref name="Fischer-Mueller 1990"/> Because of their lack of worship, he caused [[Genesis flood narrative|the Flood]] upon the human race, from which a feminine power such as Sophia or Pronoia<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Secret Book of John (Apocryphon of John) |url=http://gnosis.org/naghamm/apocjn-davies.html |access-date=2022-10-18 |website=gnosis.org}}</ref> (Providence) rescued [[Noah]].<ref name="Fischer-Mueller 1990"/> Yaldabaoth made a [[Abrahamic covenant|covenant with Abraham]], in which he was obligated to serve him along with his descendants. The [[Bible prophecy|Biblical prophets]] were to proclaim Yaldabaoth's glory, but at the same time, through Sophia's influence, they reminded people of their higher origin and prepared for the coming of [[Christ]]. At Sophia's instigation, Yaldabaoth arranged for the generation of [[Jesus]] through the [[Virgin Mary]]. For his proclamation, he used [[John the Baptist]]. At the moment of the [[Baptism of Jesus|baptism]] organized by Yaldabaoth, Sophia took on the body of Jesus and through it taught people that their destiny was the Kingdom of Light (the spiritual world), not the Kingdom of Darkness (the material universe). Only after his baptism did Jesus receive divine power and could perform miracles. But since Jesus destroyed his kingdom instead of promoting it, Yaldabaoth [[Crucifixion of Jesus|had him crucified]]. Before his martyrdom, Christ escaped from the bodily shell and returned to the spiritual world.

==See also==
{{Portal|Religion}}
{{div col|colwidth=20em}}
* [[Ancient Canaanite religion]]
* [[Ancient Semitic religion]]
* [[Atenism]]
* [[Baháʼí Faith and the unity of religion]]
* [[Chinese dragon]]
* ''[[Dhimmi]]''
* [[Dystheism]]
* [[Ethical monotheism]]
* [[Evil God challenge]]
* [[False prophet]]
* [[God in Abrahamic religions]]
* [[Maltheism]]
* [[Moralistic therapeutic deism]]
* [[Níðhöggr]]
* [[Outline of theology]]
* [[Prince of Darkness (Manichaeism)]]
* [[Problem of evil]]
* [[Problem of Hell]]
* [[Religion in pre-Islamic Arabia]]
* [[Serpents in the Bible]]
* [[Theodicy]]
* [[Trickster god]]
* ''[[Urmonotheismus]]'' (primitive monotheism)
* [[Violence in the Bible]]
* [[Violence in the Quran]]
{{div col end}}

== Notes ==
{{Notes}}

==References==
<references />

==Further reading==
{{refbegin}}
* {{cite book |first=Matthew |last=Black |chapter=An Aramaic Etymology for Jaldabaoth? |editor1-first=Alastair H. |editor1-last=Logan |editor2-first=Alexander J. M. |editor2-last=Wedderburn |title=The New Testament and Gnosis |orig-year=1983 |year=2015 |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |isbn=978-1-4742-3043-8 |pages=69–72}}
* {{cite book |first=Karen L. |last=King |title=The Secret Revelation of John |publisher=Harvard University Press |year=2006 |isbn=0-674-01903-2 |pages=89–105}}
* {{cite book |first=Attilio |last=Mastrocinque |title=From Jewish Magic to Gnosticism |series=Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum |volume=24 |publisher=Mohr Siebeck |place=Tübingen |year=2005 |isbn=3-16-148555-6}}
{{refend}}

==External links==
* {{Commons category inline}}

[[Category:Chaos gods]]
[[Category:Creator gods]]
[[Category:Demons in Gnosticism]]
[[Category:Early Christianity and Gnosticism]]
[[Category:Evil gods]]
[[Category:Gnostic cosmology]]
[[Category:Gnostic deities]]
[[Category:Lion gods]]
[[Category:Names of God in Gnosticism]]
[[Category:Sethianism]]
[[Category:Snake gods]]
[[Category:Trickster gods]]
[[Category:Yahweh]]