I never really did expect to come over a suggestion like this, but in an article, posted on the web this is exactly what is argued: in "Mark the Cryptic Gospel:The Origin of Christianity, the author (Audrey Fletcher) tries to argue that Philo was the man behind the Gospel of Mark! "The key to the cryptic Gospel of "Mark" is the author. To whom then among the influential Jews of Alexandria in the first century AD could be attributed the composition of "Mark", and what was his purpose? The only possible candidate is Philo of Alexandria."
I am not sure if the author is serious! You may read the article for yourself; I will comment on it when the weekend is over!
Saturday, January 31, 2004
RPBS February update
My Resource Pages for Biblical Studies have been updated today. I try to have a monthly update of the pages; that is checking links, removing dead links, and adding new. The Philo page is updated along the way as I come over interesting links to be added.
Thursday, January 29, 2004
Jewish apologetics..
Reading Kåre's posting, I am reminded of one of the more recent, and in my view one of the most informative recent discussions of Jewish apologetics to be found in the article by John Barcley, 'Apologetics in the Jewish Diaspora', John R. Bartlett (ed.)., Jews in the hellenistic and Roman Cities (Routledge Press, London; 2002), pp. 129-148.
(In fact, you can access this book on Ebrary, if your institution subscribes to this facility).
Barclay considers several various works and points of view, especially focusing on 'apologetics', 'proselytism' and 'mission' as three phenomenon to differentiate. His article is full of insight, and a good introduction to a study of Philo as an apologete. His conclusion runs thus (p.148) "to employ the label ‘missionary preaching’ may skew the discussion
by importing a Christian framework of thought. Jews clearly learned how to
communicate their culture to non-Jews, and their apologetics, oral and
literary, could effect a range of possible results. If we decline to demarcate
proselytism as a separate phenomenon, we may attribute to the success of
Jewish apologetics the full range of positive responses to Judaism – from
toleration, interest and partial imitation through to full proselytism. While
we cannot quantify the results, the cumulative evidence suggests that apologetics
was of critical importance in ensuring the survival and flourishing of
Judaism throughout the Graeco-Roman Diaspora."
(In fact, you can access this book on Ebrary, if your institution subscribes to this facility).
Barclay considers several various works and points of view, especially focusing on 'apologetics', 'proselytism' and 'mission' as three phenomenon to differentiate. His article is full of insight, and a good introduction to a study of Philo as an apologete. His conclusion runs thus (p.148)
by importing a Christian framework of thought. Jews clearly learned how to
communicate their culture to non-Jews, and their apologetics, oral and
literary, could effect a range of possible results. If we decline to demarcate
proselytism as a separate phenomenon, we may attribute to the success of
Jewish apologetics the full range of positive responses to Judaism – from
toleration, interest and partial imitation through to full proselytism. While
we cannot quantify the results, the cumulative evidence suggests that apologetics
was of critical importance in ensuring the survival and flourishing of
Judaism throughout the Graeco-Roman Diaspora."
More on megasites...
David Meadows, in his blog called Rogueclassicism, has voiced some comments on the megasite-discussion, especially from the perspective of a classicists. His comments on the eforts to provide a comparable site in classics clearly demonstrate, IMHO, that the isssue of funding (read: money), is important. However, he also has some other points of view that are interesting, but somewhat besides what I originally intended by my concept megasite. I am somewhat reluctant to his optimism about how a blog can be used; they are still in an early stage of development. But I am loking forward to Goodacre's comments.
Wednesday, January 28, 2004
Philo as an apologete
Torrey has asked me to say some words on the symposium on Philo held at the University of Aarhus in Denmark www.aarhusuniversitet.dk on Philo as apologete/apologist (December 5, 2003). The faculty of theology is running a larger project on ancient apologetics called "Jews, Christians as Pagens in Antiquity; Criticism and Apologetics", and the Philo-seminar was one of several in this larger project (cf. homepage). The language of the conference was "Nordic" (Norwegian, Danish or Swedish) and the papers will also be published in these languages (but hopefully with an English summary). Its coordinator is dr. Anders-Christian Lund Jacobsen (cf. www.teo.au.dk).
The scheduled program was:
1. Henrik Tronier: Filon – ikke apologet (Philo - not an apologist)
2. Anders Klostergaard Petersen: Filon som apologet. De migratione Abrahami (Philo as an apologist. Migr.)
3.Henrik Pontoppidan Thyssen: Filons bedømmelse af græske filosoffer (Philo's evaluation of Greek philosophers)
4. Per Bilde: Filon som politisk apologet (Philo as a political apologist)
5. Kåre Fuglseth: Filons forhold til templet i Jerusalem i et apologetisk perspektiv (Philo's relationship to the temple in an apologetic perspective)
Tronier and Bilde could not attend the conference, but their attributions may be published. In stead, Anders Klostergaard Petersen presented chapter 8 in Borgen' s book "Philo of Alexandria. An exegete for his time", as an introduction to a general discussion on the overall subject for the conference.
My own contribution dealt with some of the temple sayings in Philo, and one of my main attempts was to see if and how Peder Borgen's hermeneutical key to Philo (the both-and solution in relation to the Jewish traditions) functioned in relation to the temple relationship, cf. Borgen, ibid., p. 156f.
If there were a point at which we may guess that this key would not function, it would certainly be his temple relationship, since he severely rejects the temple institution in several passages. My own conclusion is that particularly due to the observations of highest sociological value, i.e. the temple tax payment, that Philo accepts, he cannot be looked upon as one rejecting the temple, although his theological argument may some time point in that direction.
Torrey also asks about my dissertation on the Gospel of John, a report to which I shall return to later.
The scheduled program was:
1. Henrik Tronier: Filon – ikke apologet (Philo - not an apologist)
2. Anders Klostergaard Petersen: Filon som apologet. De migratione Abrahami (Philo as an apologist. Migr.)
3.Henrik Pontoppidan Thyssen: Filons bedømmelse af græske filosoffer (Philo's evaluation of Greek philosophers)
4. Per Bilde: Filon som politisk apologet (Philo as a political apologist)
5. Kåre Fuglseth: Filons forhold til templet i Jerusalem i et apologetisk perspektiv (Philo's relationship to the temple in an apologetic perspective)
Tronier and Bilde could not attend the conference, but their attributions may be published. In stead, Anders Klostergaard Petersen presented chapter 8 in Borgen' s book "Philo of Alexandria. An exegete for his time", as an introduction to a general discussion on the overall subject for the conference.
My own contribution dealt with some of the temple sayings in Philo, and one of my main attempts was to see if and how Peder Borgen's hermeneutical key to Philo (the both-and solution in relation to the Jewish traditions) functioned in relation to the temple relationship, cf. Borgen, ibid., p. 156f.
If there were a point at which we may guess that this key would not function, it would certainly be his temple relationship, since he severely rejects the temple institution in several passages. My own conclusion is that particularly due to the observations of highest sociological value, i.e. the temple tax payment, that Philo accepts, he cannot be looked upon as one rejecting the temple, although his theological argument may some time point in that direction.
Torrey also asks about my dissertation on the Gospel of John, a report to which I shall return to later.
Monday, January 26, 2004
Another comment on megasites
Stephen Carlson is joining the debate on the need for megasites. You can read his comments on his blog called Hypotyposeis.
Congratulations to a friend
Norway is a rather small country, its population is only ca. 4.5 mill. Hence there should not be many philonic scholars here either. But perhaps there are more than expected. When Ellen Birnbaum visited Kåre Fuglseth and me in Volda in 1998, she was jokingly suggesting that Volda then probably had the highest population-rate of Philo-scholars in the world (3 out of 6000) :-).... ,and we are not the only ones...
A major person in Norwegian research on Philo - for several decades - has been professor emeritus, Peder Borgen, PhD & dr.theol.
Today he can celebrate his 76th birthday! Happily, he is still active in reading and writing on Philo, John and Paul.
Both my companion here, Kåre Fuglseth, and I had him as an advisor during our time as research fellows at Department of Religion, University of Trondheim (or Norwegian University of Science and Technology, as it is called now). He has been the worthy receiver of two Festschriften. I for my part was able to contribute to his Festchrift published at his 60th birthday, and was one of the editors of the Festschrift published at his 75 birthday: Neotestamentica et Philonica.
Both Festschriften contained bibliographies of prof. Borgen publications. Three items have, however, been published after the last Festschrift was issued:
"The Gospel of John and Philo of Alexandria," in James H. Charlesworth, Light in a
Spotless Mirror. Reflections on Wisdom Traditions in Judaism and Early
Christianity (Faith and Scholarship Colloquies Series; Harrisburg: Trinity Press
International. A Continuum Imprint, 2003), pp. 77-91.
This article in a way synthesizes his major works and views on the Gospel of John and Philo. In the introductory parts of the article he describes his own interests in this field thus:
"My own work has focused ... on John and Philo as exegetes of the Old Testament. In their use of traditions and in their expositions, both John and Philo characterize the people of God, although with different results. Philo saw them as the Jewish people of the synagogue and criticizes some who were in danger of passing the community border. John is situated within a group that had been separated from the synagogal community and that understood itself in continuity and discontinuity with its Jewish heritage."
In the main body of the article, Borgen comments on the following issues: Dodds comparison of John and Philo; Use of Scripture; Exegetical exchange; Conflicts and punishments; Discontinuity and continuity (Dangers at the boundary; Birth from above; The temple; Ascent and descent; Agent "He who is sent";Wisdom; the Law and manna; Moses;). All these topics have been dealt with in a thorough way in several of Borgens work. Hence this article repersents a nice overview.
"Philo of Alexandria as Exegete," in Alan J. Hauser & Duane F. Watson, A History of
Biblical Interpretation, Vol. 1: The Ancient Period (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003)
114-143.
This article is a description of the various works and exegetical and hermeneutical methods of Philo. A list of the main headlines will give an impression of its focus: Hermeneutical Presuppositions in Philo's expository writings (pp. 118-122); Aspects of Philo's exegesis (pp. 122-125); Philo as an exegete in context (p. 125-126); Some exegetical approaches and forms (pp. 126-136).
In addition he had a longer book review in 2002:
in The Journal of Theological Studies, New Series Vol. 53
Part 1 (2002) 165-173 av "CHRISTIAN NOACK, Gottesbewusstsein. Exegetische Studien zur Soteriologie und Mystik bei Philo von Alexandria. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 116.) Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000. ISBN 3 16 147239 X. Paper DM 98. Pp. xiii+300
Congratulations on your 76 birthday, Peder!
A major person in Norwegian research on Philo - for several decades - has been professor emeritus, Peder Borgen, PhD & dr.theol.
Today he can celebrate his 76th birthday! Happily, he is still active in reading and writing on Philo, John and Paul.
Both my companion here, Kåre Fuglseth, and I had him as an advisor during our time as research fellows at Department of Religion, University of Trondheim (or Norwegian University of Science and Technology, as it is called now). He has been the worthy receiver of two Festschriften. I for my part was able to contribute to his Festchrift published at his 60th birthday, and was one of the editors of the Festschrift published at his 75 birthday: Neotestamentica et Philonica.
Both Festschriften contained bibliographies of prof. Borgen publications. Three items have, however, been published after the last Festschrift was issued:
"The Gospel of John and Philo of Alexandria," in James H. Charlesworth, Light in a
Spotless Mirror. Reflections on Wisdom Traditions in Judaism and Early
Christianity (Faith and Scholarship Colloquies Series; Harrisburg: Trinity Press
International. A Continuum Imprint, 2003), pp. 77-91.
This article in a way synthesizes his major works and views on the Gospel of John and Philo. In the introductory parts of the article he describes his own interests in this field thus:
"My own work has focused ... on John and Philo as exegetes of the Old Testament. In their use of traditions and in their expositions, both John and Philo characterize the people of God, although with different results. Philo saw them as the Jewish people of the synagogue and criticizes some who were in danger of passing the community border. John is situated within a group that had been separated from the synagogal community and that understood itself in continuity and discontinuity with its Jewish heritage."
In the main body of the article, Borgen comments on the following issues: Dodds comparison of John and Philo; Use of Scripture; Exegetical exchange; Conflicts and punishments; Discontinuity and continuity (Dangers at the boundary; Birth from above; The temple; Ascent and descent; Agent "He who is sent";Wisdom; the Law and manna; Moses;). All these topics have been dealt with in a thorough way in several of Borgens work. Hence this article repersents a nice overview.
"Philo of Alexandria as Exegete," in Alan J. Hauser & Duane F. Watson, A History of
Biblical Interpretation, Vol. 1: The Ancient Period (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003)
114-143.
This article is a description of the various works and exegetical and hermeneutical methods of Philo. A list of the main headlines will give an impression of its focus: Hermeneutical Presuppositions in Philo's expository writings (pp. 118-122); Aspects of Philo's exegesis (pp. 122-125); Philo as an exegete in context (p. 125-126); Some exegetical approaches and forms (pp. 126-136).
In addition he had a longer book review in 2002:
in The Journal of Theological Studies, New Series Vol. 53
Part 1 (2002) 165-173 av "CHRISTIAN NOACK, Gottesbewusstsein. Exegetische Studien zur Soteriologie und Mystik bei Philo von Alexandria. (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 116.) Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000. ISBN 3 16 147239 X. Paper DM 98. Pp. xiii+300
Congratulations on your 76 birthday, Peder!
Sunday, January 25, 2004
More on Megasites?
Mark Goodacre has a new posting on this topic, obviously triggered by an email from Wieland Willker. (To read the former postings on this topic, go here.)
Wilker seem to suggest something that is as close as possible to what I tried to voice, though I did not associate it with NTGateway as he does:
"I think this cannot be done by one individual alone. I would therefore suggest that we should gather certain individuals for small sections. Every individual is responsible for one section under the head of the NT-Gateway."
My original thought was very similar; a megasite, updated by several editors. Goodacre is not completely opposed to the idea, but I can understand his reservations concerning NTGateway:I have wondered about something like this before and it might provide a useful way of getting the balance right between an evolutionary approach and some degree of prescription or organisation. However, at this stage, at least as far as the NT Gateway is concerned, I am a bit concerned about the idea because (a) it might take as much organisation and maintenance as the doing the site myself; (b) it would -- as Wieland mentions -- mean organising access authorization for the editors; (c) there is the risk of patchiness across the site, with some editors doing their sections well and others less well; and (d) I am not sure that the NT Gateway would be the right forum to do this -- there are other megasites and I don't particularly want to land myself with a kind of imperialistic role! But on the other hand I don't want to pour cold water on this; I am intrigued by the suggestion and there may be something in it. Let me think a little more. His final comments are that something like this is already evolving, and in a way he is right. He, as well as I, are already linking to other 'megasites' in our various sections. E.g., though I try to have a section on Johannnine literature on my RPBS, I also link to Felix Just's pages that are far more comprehensive. But I am not as afraid as he is of the possible patchiness of a megasite. If it was run by a general editor, having strict guidelines on how to edit and post on the site, this could be handled. In addition, if run on a proper program, the problem of access by several persons should be no great problem. We have such kinds of programs already in our online study programs. My point is: such a mega site will have to be huge; it will need proper software (which may may not yet have, but comparable software might be tuned to this specific purpose), it will involve several editors,- and it will be expensive. Hence sponsors and organisational backing will, IMHO, be necessarry.
It is interesting to see other people commenting on these issues; I don't think any suggestions discussed so far should be pressed or rushed towards a hasty realization, but they are worth thinking about. I presume, after all, that all of us who publish on the internet, probably would like to make that material most accessible to most people...
Wilker seem to suggest something that is as close as possible to what I tried to voice, though I did not associate it with NTGateway as he does:
"I think this cannot be done by one individual alone. I would therefore suggest that we should gather certain individuals for small sections. Every individual is responsible for one section under the head of the NT-Gateway."
My original thought was very similar; a megasite, updated by several editors. Goodacre is not completely opposed to the idea, but I can understand his reservations concerning NTGateway:
It is interesting to see other people commenting on these issues; I don't think any suggestions discussed so far should be pressed or rushed towards a hasty realization, but they are worth thinking about. I presume, after all, that all of us who publish on the internet, probably would like to make that material most accessible to most people...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
