The books of the Apocrypha : $b their origin, teaching and contentsOesterley, W. O. E. (William Oscar Emil)
Religion
The books of the Apocrypha : $b their origin, teaching and contents
Oesterley, W. O. E. (William Oscar Emil)
Bible. Apocrypha -- Introductions
Scarcely anything is known with certainty about his life. He must
have been born about B.C. 20 or thereabouts, for he took part in an
embassy to Caligula in A.D. 40, when already somewhat advanced in
years; he refers to this in his work, _De Legatione ad Cajum_, §
28[84]; it is also mentioned by Josephus,[85] who speaks of Philo as
“a man eminent on all accounts, brother to Alexander the Alabarch,
and one not unskilful in philosophy.” This is practically all that is
known of him apart from what his works reveal of the man; but they do
not contain any biographical details.
Philo was a true Jew; he had an unbounded veneration for the Old
Testament Scriptures, and especially for Moses and the Pentateuch;
most of his works are concerned with this latter. Not only did he
look upon the Hebrew Scriptures as having been verbally inspired, but
he also believed this to have been the case with them in their Greek
form. His veneration for the Jewish Scriptures, on the one hand,
and his love for the philosophy of the Greeks on the other, led him
to the conviction that both contained and witnessed to one and the
same truth. He believed that the Greek philosophers had used the Old
Testament writings, and these he explained on the allegorical system
with such freedom that he was able to extract from them any meaning
he desired; by this means his own philosophical system became a
combination of Greek philosophy and Jewish theology.[86]
Regarding the philosophy of Philo, his conception of God forms
naturally the starting-point. Here he holds, on the one hand, that
so absolute is the perfection of God, so transcendent is the divine
majesty, and therefore so far removed from all that human thought is
capable of, that God is simply inconceivable; man can really know
no more than that God is; he cannot know _what_ God is. But, on the
other hand, since He is perfectly good and all-powerful, since He is
the Creator and Upholder of the world, the Final Cause of all that is
or ever can be, it follows that there must be a ceaseless activity
on His part; the world of His creation must occupy His thought and
action. These twofold conceptions of God—the thought of His being
outside of and above the world, immeasurably superior to it, and
the thought that He is active in the world—are clearly incompatible
one with the other. The way in which Philo sought to get over the
obvious contradiction here involved, was by assuming the existence of
intermediate beings. His teaching on this subject was not new, but
it had never before been so thoroughly and systematically treated.
These intermediate beings Philo called “powers” (_dunameis_); they
are properties of God, and yet His servants fulfilling His will
in the world. All these powers are comprehended in one, namely,
the “Logos,” or Word of God; the “Logos” is also spoken of as the
wisdom and reason of God, and the means whereby the world was
created.[87] But both in respect of the “powers” just mentioned, and
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account