tanya

The first step, in my opinion, is to return to post 1, and check whether or not, in your opinion, the OP was confused at that point in time. Certainly, your reaction, at least initially, as stated very clearly in a couple of your posts, was to view the focus of the thread (incorrectly in my opinion) as an effort to expand, or elaborate on Joan Taylor's assumption, that the Therapeutae situated in the suburbs of Alexandria, at the time of Philo, were a Jewish sect.

I sought to engage you, and thus far, you have refused to address the issues raised, (I don't comprehend why), on the text of Philo--VC, which demonstrates, at least to my satisfaction, that Joan errs--i.e. that particular colony, at least, was surely not Jewish, contrary to her conclusion.

To my way of thinking, this contention, (that Joan is incorrect) is supportive of Pete's OP--the Therapeutae in the suburbs of Alexandria, and elsewhere, represent Greek pagan ideas, particularly those of Aeskapulis/Hippocrates.

So, I think that if you regard the OP as currently "confused", it may be helpful, (or perhaps not) to review the handful of threads, in which you have submitted some thoughts, (as listed above, in my post 428). If you look at that half dozen or so, paragraphs, I think you will understand, without resorting to trichotillomania, the evolution of the thread, notwithstanding a certain individual's best efforts to derail our collective efforts.

To me the OP is not confused, we have had productive, helpful, thoughtful input from Robert, aa5874, Pete himself of course, Clive, and others, so it is a reasonable accomplishment.

The thread is imperfect, I agree with you. We have, all of us, fallen a bit off the ideal path described so clearly here:

I hope you will find time to criticize my response in post 395, which was composed, with this post 164, above, in mind.

stephan huller

Maybe for our next thread we could "raise the question" of whether they had the internet in antiquity

mountainman

It's actually in footnote 9.

From this source, according to Philo outside of "VC" the term therapeutae is to be largely applied to those who serve the god inside the Jewish temple in Jerusalem.


Philo appears to be attempting to apply the word therapeutae to the Jewish cultic service of Jewish deities (including Moses).

According to the Greek classical tradition the therapeutae were those who served the god inside the pagan temples all over the empire which were directly sponsored by the Roman Emperor and his State for all the centuries in which the saga of Christian origins is being investigated.

What would the Roman State have thought about the Jewish temple when they had hundreds of their own temples?

Did the pagans contemplate a special pleading to Philo as an authority on the therapeutae of any sort? NO.

Did the Jews contemplate a special pleading to Philo as an authority on the therapeutae of any sort? NO.

In fact do we have any evidence that the Jews referred to their cultic service using the term therapeutae outside of Philo? NO.


Did the Christians contemplate engineer a special pleading to Philo as an authority on the therapeutae of any sort?

YES.

Sheshbazzar

Moses and the Levities were never 'Therapeutae'.

The indiscriminate adoption and syncretism of pagan Greek religious terms always presents its issues.

stephan huller

Yes they "therapeutaed." They attended to the altar. They worshipped God. God therapeutaed too.

mountainman

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bazylek/5888606410/

According to this source it was buried for about 1350 years.

Sheshbazzar

Only if you are a Greek, or have been suckered into engaging in the practice of Hellenization.

mountainman

(1) Constantine c.324/325 destroyed the larger Asclepian temples and prohibited the use of all temples (there is supporting evidence for this), effectively disbanding the therapeutae of Asclepius (along with any services for all other pagan cults).

(2) The Pachomian monastic community preserved a book now entitled Asclepius 21-29. . (There is supporting evidence for this)


The inference I draw is that some of these disbanded therapeutae of Asclepius
may have been represented in the Pachomian community who preserved this book.


From Asclepius 21-29:

The evidence is clear that Constantine robbed the temples of its gold, silver and works/statues of precious stone.



We also have evidence to suggest that Constantine publically executed some of the Chief pagan Priests.



Another item of evidence from the NHC supporting this inference is from The Interpretation of Knowledge

The generation that manufactured the Nag Hammadi Codices was fleeing.

This generation was reproached and humiliated (by the so-called Christian soldiers).

This generation did not appear to believe the Conqueror's propaganda about Jesus.

Toto

Christian mobs went around destroying pagan temples to prove to the pagans that their gods were powerless.

So from this you conclude - what? That pagans became undercover Christian monks? That the Pachomian monastery was a front for fleeing pagans? Is there any evidence for this?

The Pachomian monastery is close to the Nag Hammadi library, but not so close that you can assume that they were connected.

The Nag Hammadi Library in English (or via: amazon.co.uk) By James McConkey Robinson, Richard Smith at p. 31, notes that part of the Pachomias library has been unearthed, and it is different from the Nag Hammadi.

If the orthodox monks of Pachomius' monastery read this [NSFW] it was probably part of their secret porn stash.

You keep recycling this quote. In fact, if I google it, I find it on just about every discussion board aimed at a skeptical look at religion. But I don't think you quite understand it. Fleeing does not refer to fleeing from Constantine, but from Christianity.

From here

Toto

I went back and reread it, and it is confused. The confusion persisted until enough material was produced to show that Philo used the term Therapeutae to refer to priests in the Jewish Temple, and that the term is generic. There was also a confusing side issue of whether the text was written by Philo, which turned out to lead nowhere. Once you realize this, the OP becomes rather pointless. There is just no reason to see Philo's Therapeutae as anything other than Jewish, and no reason that they would have any connection to pagan groups also known as therapeutae.

That's Dr. Joan E. Taylor. Is there a reason you do not give her the respect of using her surname?

The Therapeutae as described by Philo differ from rabbinic Jews. But they worship God (not a particular pagan God). Why describe them as anything other than Jewish, even if they are Hellenistic Jews? The description of their beliefs and practices does not match any description of pagan Therapeutae.

To be sure, the issue for most scholars has been whether Philo's Therapeutae were Jewish or proto-Christian. The idea that they were proto-Christian has been mostly rejected, and the idea that they might be pagan has not been seriously examined - because it makes no sense. Why would Philo the Jew write so much about a non-Jewish pagan sect?

Then please explain why? These Therapeutae have no connection to a pagan Temple or a pagan god, and do not engage in any healing other than the healing of the soul. They do not have a temple, they do not take in the sick or interpret their dreams. If they have any Hellenistic influences, it is because Judaism in this time and place incorporated Hellenistic influences. But they are monotheistic.

If you are going to claim that a peer reviewed scholar with no apparent bias is completely off base, you need to do more that just assert it. You have given a few clearly misinterpreted quotes taken out of context that make it difficult to discuss with you.